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

Show HN: Elevators

john.fun

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 426 posts

Re: Show HN: Elevators

#391

Post by ASalazarMX »

dguest wrote: post #305
Wowfunhappy wrote: post #203

All I want to know is why the heck I can't un-press a button I pressed by accident. This should be very simple. Press once to turn the button on, press again to turn it off. Or I guess you could do long-press to turn off or something if you're worried about confusing people, but I really don't think that should be necessary. We know how toggles work. The button lights up when it's on.

They had this in Korea when I was there a decade ago! It works fine, but people's reaction on hearing this is always interesting, ranging from: - enthusiasm: that's awesome everyone should do that - skepticism: that seems like a terrible idea, people will un-press your floor and chaos will follow - denial: you didn't see that - cultural / racist: that would never work in it must just be because Koreans are

> people will un-press your floor and chaos will follow

I can see some engineers deciding that the button press needs 2FA or TOTP so only you can unpress it. Bonus points if you need to buy their brand's smartwatch to use it.

Re: Show HN: Elevators

#392

Post by richk449 »

sambellll wrote: post #367
richk449 wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is almost certainly because of the way the simulation was performed: It turns out these fancy kiosks are in general worse for wait times compared to the traditional good ol' up and down buttons. There are certainly edge cases when the kiosks can win out (extremely tall buildings with 8+ cars per elevator bank) but for the majority of cases, simple up down buttons reign supreme. This counterintuitive result is all…

> Seems like the real reason it performed worse in this simulation is that when they implemented destination dispatch, they assigned an elevator at time of request, and had no system for reviewing and updated that assignment. I don't think it's possible to have destination dispatch AND update assignment together, in the real world. - If the user clicks floor 26 and you tell them to wait at elevator G, you can't reall…

Interesting. I didn't realize that destination dispatch told the user what elevator to take at the time of request. (I've never used it.)

Why not have active display above each elevator that says what floors it is going to when it opens?

Re: Show HN: Elevators

#393

Post by cowsandmilk »

Neywiny wrote: post #368
theodorejb wrote: post #353

The worst situation I've encountered is after a large conference when everyone is leaving the hotel at once. An elevator quickly fills up on the way down, but then wastes time stopping at every subsequent floor with a call, even though no one else can fit inside. At each floor the elevator stops, the doors open, the waiting people see it's already packed, the doors close, and this repeats on the next 15 floors before…

It would have to be done by weight. If you had a button to not allow stopping for others, people would abuse it. If it was a camera, security issue. Presumably if somebody is moving a piano or something else heavy it'll be fine

> If it was a camera, security issue

What security issue? Many hotel elevators already have cameras.

Re: Show HN: Elevators

#394

Post by ImPostingOnHN »

oliv__ wrote: post #389
ImPostingOnHN wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The perception angle is: customers are less unhappy waiting the required 20 minutes for luggage to show up, if they're doing something else during that time. In this example, the passengers are still waiting while moving (the wait for luggage is 20 minutes either way), they just don't perceive that portion of the waiting as intolerable. Bringing it home to elevators, the situation is pretty much the same, only in rev…

Sure, but the perception is in accord with reality and in my opinion unchanging since the actual time waiting for luggage has been effectively reduced. The only difference is the reality has been falsified

[dead]

Re: Show HN: Elevators

#395

Post by perpetuallunch »

matkoniecz wrote: post #289
perpetuallunch wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, the building / owners corp / code / city could simply ban short stay accommodation where it was never attended. I would not want to be in that building if an evacuation alarm sounded.

> I would not want to be in that building if an evacuation alarm sounded. why short term/long term stay would matter here?

Because short term stays put more load on the building systems, like the lifts, than perhaps the building was designed for.

Regular tenants don’t come and go at anywhere near the rate short stay guests do.

Re: Show HN: Elevators

#396

Post by Neywiny »

cowsandmilk wrote: post #393
Neywiny wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would have to be done by weight. If you had a button to not allow stopping for others, people would abuse it. If it was a camera, security issue. Presumably if somebody is moving a piano or something else heavy it'll be fine

> If it was a camera, security issue What security issue? Many hotel elevators already have cameras.

Because there would need to be some automated service and you best believe it'll be flock 2.0

Re: Show HN: Elevators

#398

Post by etskinner »

Neywiny wrote: post #396
cowsandmilk wrote: post #393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If it was a camera, security issue What security issue? Many hotel elevators already have cameras.

Because there would need to be some automated service and you best believe it'll be flock 2.0

This could easily be done locally with no network

Re: Show HN: Elevators

#399

Post by Neywiny »

etskinner wrote: post #398
Neywiny wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because there would need to be some automated service and you best believe it'll be flock 2.0

This could easily be done locally with no network

I mean this in the nicest way possible. Do you see all these cloud photo/video leaks like from robot vacuums or whatever and think they don't know it can be done locally?

Re: Show HN: Elevators

#400

Post by perpetuallunch »

CGamesPlay wrote: post #302
perpetuallunch wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, the building / owners corp / code / city could simply ban short stay accommodation where it was never attended. I would not want to be in that building if an evacuation alarm sounded.

> I would not want to be in that building if an evacuation alarm sounded. You shouldn't be taking the elevator if you heard an evacuation alarm, but to be sure, you don't want to be an any 60-story building when you hear that alarm.

Yes, I realise this.

But if the lifts aren’t coping with the foot traffic during normal operation, I’d also not want to have to use stairs.

Post reply on HN