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

Škoda DuoBell: A bicycle bell that penetrates noise-cancelling headphones

skoda-storyboard.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 618 posts

Re: Škoda DuoBell: A bicycle bell that penetrates noise-cancelling headphones

#131

Post by soco »

nslsm wrote: post #97
staindk wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People shouldn't really be walking around in public with ANC on. It's not safe. Not a simple problem to solve except maybe to inform people better upon buying/setting up ANC-enabled devices.

The sense of entitlement of cyclists knows no bounds. If cars are liable for running over cyclists then cyclists must be liable for running over pedestrians. I used to live in a city where I would walk everywhere but I had the constant fear of cyclists running over me because they would drive all over the pavements without any regard for pedestrians. Imagine walking and having to look around all the time. I find it a…

And when you must walk with your small dog on a section of road where suddenly high speed e-cyclists zoom past you, now that's constant terror. At times you really get killer ideas.

Re: Škoda DuoBell: A bicycle bell that penetrates noise-cancelling headphones

#132

Post by Tade0 »

ahmedfromtunis wrote: post #48

I think it's time for some sort of a safety standard for a sound frequency to be reserved exclusively for alarm/alert use and that ANC systems have to let through. It goes without saying, use of said frequency should be prohibited for other purposes, especially marketing.

Regular alarm sounds already do that, because above 1kHz or so it's the cushioning in the device that does the majority of the cancelling. There's a dip in effectiveness before that because to cancel noise effectively it's best to have a latency lower than a quarter of the wave's period.

Also ANC works best on wide-spectrum sounds, so any kind of siren or the cries of a child will go through, as the spectrum is a series of narrow peaks.

Re: Škoda DuoBell: A bicycle bell that penetrates noise-cancelling headphones

#133

Post by ndsipa_pomu »

0x3f wrote: post #116

Do horns and bells really prevent accidents? In order for e.g. a horn to work you need enough time that the driver processes the situation and decides the horn will communicate something AND enough time for the pedestrian or whatever to process that and react to it. Generally it's a lot easier just to press the brake, and more importantly be travelling at a speed and in a manner where the brake is sufficient. Structu…

I concur. Even the best bell in the world may be utterly useless if the pedestrian happens to be deaf. Also, bicycle bells tend to polarise pedestrians - some people think that bells are rude and insisting that peds get out of the way and other people think it's dangerous and rude to not use a bell every time you overtake.

My solution is to still have a tiny bell on my road bike, but instead of using it, call out something like "can I get past, please?" or if an immediate response is required (e.g. ped blindly stepping into the road ahead of me) then yelling "Oi!" can really surprise them and make them notice you. I'm also a fan of using "Beep, beep" if a ped is on cycle infrastructure (active travel infrastructure is probably a better term) and I want to pretend that I'm an impatient driver.

I think the human voice is far superior to a bell as you can tailor the message for the situation and you don't have to move a hand away from the brakes to do so. (Using your voice is also a very good idea when approaching a horse and rider - horses know about humans and don't get freaked out if you call ahead "Morning!" or something cheery and appropriate).

Re: Škoda DuoBell: A bicycle bell that penetrates noise-cancelling headphones

#135

Post by jeroenhd »

croemer wrote: post #10

Video version which has more detail than the text: https://youtu.be/zDaVPfpQvPI?is=sSyjXf07r9cg9r4Y Bit cringe marketing though.

I find the "Heard five seconds earlier, the difference between a serious collision and stepping aside" take hilarious. As if there is no other way to prevent a collision in five seconds other than the pedestrian getting out of the way.

As much as I get the urge to plow through pedestrians on bike paths (and stay proudly in the way of bikes on pedestrian paths), in real life, normal people don't do that kind of thing. Bikes have brakes for a reason.

Re: Škoda DuoBell: A bicycle bell that penetrates noise-cancelling headphones

#136

Post by ndsipa_pomu »

eigenspace wrote: post #126
0x3f wrote: post #116

Do horns and bells really prevent accidents? In order for e.g. a horn to work you need enough time that the driver processes the situation and decides the horn will communicate something AND enough time for the pedestrian or whatever to process that and react to it. Generally it's a lot easier just to press the brake, and more importantly be travelling at a speed and in a manner where the brake is sufficient. Structu…

A horn or bell is mostly for telling other people "hey I'm here, stay out of my way and dont suddenly cross into my path" My opinion as a cyclist is that I should basically only be using my bell on pedestrians when the pedestrians are wandering onto the bike lane. If im cycling through a shared space, I find it extremely rude to ring the bell, because it feels like I'm telling people to get out of my way, but they ha…

> With cars, I will sometimes proactively ring my bell at them if I think they're not sufficiently aware enough of me though.

There's only a few types of car that will be "aware" of cyclists and I don't think ringing a bell will help their algorithms. Getting the attention of a driver, meanwhile, is difficult with a bell as often they'll be in a semi-soundproof cage with loud music on. (Also deaf drivers are a thing).

I've never really considered using a bell for motorised traffic. I did once buy a loud air-horn, but it was so loud and abrasive that I never used it as it seemed really rude.

Re: Škoda DuoBell: A bicycle bell that penetrates noise-cancelling headphones

#137

Post by tpm »

paganel wrote: post #57
bdavbdav wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the roads near my office (central London), which are seldom used by cars, several pedestrians at a time very often walk down the road or diagonally cross the road head in phone. You can get very close and the still don’t notice (the slower you are, the quieter you become so even less likely to hear you). I’m not sure arguing against a bell is helpful - people need to look on any road, especially with the advent of…

Sure is helpful, because it goes like this: pedestrians first -> then cyclists -> then motorists. You may notice that in this worldview (one which I find very hard to argue against) cyclists should give priority to pedestrians, no questions asked. I don't care about fancy bells or whatever, no-one takes those into consideration even when we (us, pedestrians, that is) can hear them because, and I repeat, cyclists are…

You may not care about fancy bells but you will care about loud honking close to your ears in my very recent experience from the streets of Shanghai. You don't have absolute priority just because you are a pedestrian.

> Why can't the cyclists slow down when they see that there's a human obstacle in front of them?

Because if the space is limited and they actually want to get somewhere, they just don't have time for that? And slowing down often means stopping and causing a traffic jam.

Note that I mostly agree with what you wrote (and I give priority to pedestrians when I'm riding my bike) but there are different situations that have to be taken into account.

Re: Škoda DuoBell: A bicycle bell that penetrates noise-cancelling headphones

#138

Post by eru »

9dev wrote: post #115
ai_slop_hater wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then it's a stupid law. But from the image that other commenter gave, it does look like Germany has space that is clearly intended for cyclists, and I have no issue with that. I have issue with instances when people cycle on sidewalks intended for pedestrians.

It's not always as clearly demarcated as on that picture; sometimes there's just a sign. I would also argue that a reasonably broad way for pedestrians and bicyclists can be shared without any issue, if both parties pay some modicum of attention to their surroundings and treat each other with mutual respect: Pedestrians by keeping to the right side of the path, and cyclists by slowing down when overtaking and ringing…

Also: kids under a certain age are generally required to cycle on the footpath. They need bells, too.

Re: Škoda DuoBell: A bicycle bell that penetrates noise-cancelling headphones

#139

Post by lxgr »

0x3f wrote: post #116

Do horns and bells really prevent accidents? In order for e.g. a horn to work you need enough time that the driver processes the situation and decides the horn will communicate something AND enough time for the pedestrian or whatever to process that and react to it. Generally it's a lot easier just to press the brake, and more importantly be travelling at a speed and in a manner where the brake is sufficient. Structu…

> Do horns and bells really prevent accidents?

They absolutely do, for indirect reasons:

> Generally it's a lot easier just to press the brake

Maybe easier, but it hardly seems fair, nor realistic.

With a bit of experience, you can tell when pedestrians are likely to stumble onto the bike lane without looking. Then you have two choices: Significantly reduce your speed, or ring your bell first and only reduce speed if they still haven't noticed the oncoming bike.

If you only reduce speed, you'll be traveling at a very low average speed, and time is money (especially for bike delivery workers, but I also hate having to sharply decelerate for people glued to their screen or otherwise completely unaware of their surroundings even if I'm not in a rush), so you can take a guess as to whether "just reducing your speed" is practicable.

Re: Škoda DuoBell: A bicycle bell that penetrates noise-cancelling headphones

#140

Post by _diyar »

madsohm wrote: post #130

This bell would be illegal in Denmark, where our laws clearly state that you are only allowed one signal giving device and that any signal giving devices attached to vehicles (including bikes) can only produce one constant sound. How this would be enforced is a different topic.

Really? I would have guessed you could argue that it qualifies as „one signal giving device“ since it is one single piece of equipment (ie the horn in a car also has many parts, but it‘s presumably fine) and also that it „only produces one constant sound“, where that sound is composed of different frequencies (again, car horns probably don‘t have a pure tone in Denmark either, right?).
Post reply on HN