Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mercedes gets approval for turquoise automated driving lights

jalopnik.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 197 posts

Re: Mercedes gets approval for turquoise automated driving lights

#151

Post by Stratoscope »

BHSPitMonkey wrote: post #115
1123581321 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have an Odyssey (the best minivan), I take it? I think that's the only one that can properly lane center. Other vans just have lane exit prevention. There are some differences between Honda's and Tesla's implementations that Tesla owners appreciate.

I'm not the GP, but newer Hyundais seem to do a good job at this as well. And by extension this probably applies to Kias too.

Yes, Kia, Hyundai, and Genesis all share a lot of common tech.

This is especially true for their EVs built on the E-GMP platform [1]. You'd never guess it by looking at them, but the Hyundai IONIQ 5, Kia EV6, and Genesis GV60 are all built on that same platform, with different bodies and interiors, along with some different suspension tuning.

The driving assistance features do vary with the trim level. In the EV6, the Wind trim has a more basic system, the Wind with Technology Package has more, and the GT-Line gives you the works.

I think the high-performance GT has the same assistance features as the GT-Line, but the GT-Line has a nicer and more comfortable interior than the GT.

My AWD EV6 GT-Line with the optional fake vegan suede seats (instead of the standard fake vegan leather) is by far the best car I've ever had.

(These trim level names are for the US models; they vary a bit in other markets.)

The only complaint about its driver assistance is that it can be a bit twitchy compared with how smoothly I can drive manually when I'm paying 100% attention. But it is great to have in case I get distracted for a moment!

[1] https://www.hyundai.com/worldwide/en/brand-journal/ioniq/e-g...

Re: Mercedes gets approval for turquoise automated driving lights

#152

Post by x86x87 »

toast0 wrote: post #128
vic-traill wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> some indication that a vehicle is driving autonomously is useful information to everyone around them I'm genuinely curious - what are you thinking when you say this? I don't know what I'd do with that information. It shouldn't make me drive differently - e.g. not be aggressive to see if I can invoke reaction(s) in the autonomous system, and I should already be driving w/ due care.

I've driven near Waymo vehicles, which are distinctive. Their behavior is quite a bit from the norm, and I'll make more room for them if they signal a lane change, because they wait for an engraved invitation before coming over. And if behind one, I know they won't use the shoulder to get to an offramp, so I'll need to be more patient, if we're both heading to the same exit on a congested freeway. Etc. Being able to…

Make it mandatory to have a "student machine driver" sticker on them.

Re: Mercedes gets approval for turquoise automated driving lights

#153

Post by TrickyRick »

zoklet-enjoyer wrote: post #133
coolspot wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can also add red blinkers and everyone will think you’re firetruck.

No. That doesn't make sense. Turquoise lights are the new standard to identify self driving cars. That means in the near future there will be more models with self driving capabilities than the average person will be able to keep track of. If I put turquoise lights on my newer Subaru, it isn't unreasonable to think that other drivers will think that I have a self driving car. I can't imagine there will ever be a Suba…

How about "If you put blue lights everyone will think it's an unmarked police car" then? The argument works the other way around too, if you put turquoise lights on a 1999 Subaru nobody will think it's self driving.

Re: Mercedes gets approval for turquoise automated driving lights

#154

Post by hunter2_ »

trimbo wrote: post #116
vic-traill wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> some indication that a vehicle is driving autonomously is useful information to everyone around them I'm genuinely curious - what are you thinking when you say this? I don't know what I'd do with that information. It shouldn't make me drive differently - e.g. not be aggressive to see if I can invoke reaction(s) in the autonomous system, and I should already be driving w/ due care.

> I'm genuinely curious - what are you thinking when you say this? As a pedestrian, I always try to make eye contact with drivers before crossing in front of them. It would be nice to know that the car is doing the driving.

It would be nice if autonomous cars could emit a "yielding to pedestrian" light. I suppose it could be an addressable strip around the whole vehicle where only the section closest to the ped actually illuminates, so the ped can know that the car sees them specifically. The equivalent of eye contact with a wave. Otherwise, the ped will be caught in a game of chicken wondering if the apparent yield is for them or for something else that will finish sooner (like a stop sign with no interfering vehicular traffic).

Re: Mercedes gets approval for turquoise automated driving lights

#155

Post by JoshuaRogers »

idopmstuff wrote: post #130
zemvpferreira wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's smoke and mirrors to call it anything close (or a path to) Full Self Driving. If Tesla called their tech Pretty Decent Autosteer no one would accuse them of lying. But they don't. And I suspect that's why you're getting downvoted as well.

You're moving the goalposts substantially from the original claim, which was "Tesla's tech is all smoke and mirrors for years now." It is certainly misleading to call it Full Self Driving - no argument there at all. It's also wrong to call all of Tesla's tech for the last however many years fakery.

That’s a fair point. Maybe a more true statement would have been that any perception of Tesla having a technical advantage over other manufacturers towards Level 5 autonomous vehicles is just smoke and mirrors.

Re: Mercedes gets approval for turquoise automated driving lights

#156

Post by joseph4521 »

data-ottawa wrote: post #108

As mentioned in the previous thread, I'm not pleased with this colour. For red-green colourblind people (both types), this colour is at the neutral point where both available cones are saturated and the brain can't differentiate it from white light. In their study paper they used a much more blue turquoise, decided it was confusing, and then moved it to a more green version (thus saturating the non-blue cone for dich…

I’ve always had an excellent vision both near and far, except for one flaw that I can’t distinguish some shades between green and blue. All the turquoise colors give me a strange feeling of not knowing if it’s green and blue. When I was younger I used to ask if it was green or blue and would only be satisfied once someone told me which one it is. Over the years, I’ve learned to recognize the feeling and attach turquoise to it, but it’s still slightly annoying for my brain. I know it’s selfish of me, but I hope that driving won’t require the ability to distinguish turquoise well… I never thought that this minor impairment could one day be a problem.

Re: Mercedes gets approval for turquoise automated driving lights

#157

Post by 48r9ridjjd »

lopis wrote: post #131
pas wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what would be a better alternative color? to me the placement seems substantially different from the reversing light (which is usually more toward the middle of the back) of course these pictures probably don't tell much about how it will actually look like in traffic, but some kind of pattern seems to be the way to go (that's recognizable from 2-3 cars afar in a traffic jam, for example if folks are curious WTF that…

The alternative is a light in a predictable position or with a standard shape. I really hate that EVs are trying to be all modern about light systems redesigns. Specially in the US, car manufacturers are being very creative with their new designs in ways that are not even legal in Europe. I hope international standards for human-friendly lights can be agreed upon soon.

The point of the light is primarily for specific people like law enforcement to be able to identify that the vehicle has self-driving mode engaged so that they don't pull the operator over erroneously. Is it actually an issue if Joe Colorblind can't tell that the person he's passing has automated driving enabled?

Re: Mercedes gets approval for turquoise automated driving lights

#158

Post by nerdponx »

delecti wrote: post #148
brewdad wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which locations are those?

California and Nevada. From the first sentence of the article: > Mercedes-Benz is the first automaker to gain approval to sell a Level 3 automated driving system in the United States; the first customer-owned S-Class and EQS sedans in California and Nevada equipped with the Drive Pilot system hit dealer lots this month.

Does level 3 not legally require an attentive operator in those jurisdictions?

Re: Mercedes gets approval for turquoise automated driving lights

#159

Post by delecti »

nerdponx wrote: post #158
delecti wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

California and Nevada. From the first sentence of the article: > Mercedes-Benz is the first automaker to gain approval to sell a Level 3 automated driving system in the United States; the first customer-owned S-Class and EQS sedans in California and Nevada equipped with the Drive Pilot system hit dealer lots this month.

Does level 3 not legally require an attentive operator in those jurisdictions?

Correct, and that is also answered very early in the article.

Re: Mercedes gets approval for turquoise automated driving lights

#160

Post by zoklet-enjoyer »

TrickyRick wrote: post #153
zoklet-enjoyer wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. That doesn't make sense. Turquoise lights are the new standard to identify self driving cars. That means in the near future there will be more models with self driving capabilities than the average person will be able to keep track of. If I put turquoise lights on my newer Subaru, it isn't unreasonable to think that other drivers will think that I have a self driving car. I can't imagine there will ever be a Suba…

How about "If you put blue lights everyone will think it's an unmarked police car" then? The argument works the other way around too, if you put turquoise lights on a 1999 Subaru nobody will think it's self driving.

Where did I mention anything about a 24 year old vehicle?
Post reply on HN