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

Mercedes-Benz pre-safe sound

mercedesbenzofnatick.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 263 posts

Re: Mercedes-Benz pre-safe sound

#181

Post by VBprogrammer »

gambiting wrote: post #177
VBprogrammer wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People with double arm amputations can also drive but if you or I decided to go out and drive with our feet it would be stupid.

The difference is that they obviously use cars that are modified and certified for use with foot controls(at least here in EU they are, I wouldn't be surprised if US didn't require any certification whatsoever). You also get a restriction on your licence saying that you can only drive such vehicles. A deaf person doesn't have any restrictions - my point is that there is no functional or legal difference between a dea…

The law doesn't have to require something to make it not a good idea.

My point was, I'm not deaf, but I'm fairly sure that on average deaf people are much better adapted to life with limited hearing than you or I would be when wearing ear buds. It doesn't logically follow that because a deaf person is allowed to drive we should be able to artificially reduce our hearing ability while driving.

Re: Mercedes-Benz pre-safe sound

#182

Post by moby_click »

taylorlapeyre wrote: post #4

I lost most of my hearing in my left ear in a head-on collision with a drunk driver. No other injuries. The audiologist said that my eardrum was in the kind of state you usually only see in battlefields from exposure to large explosions. People are always surprised when I tell them this was my only injury, and as a result I've always wondered how common this type of injury is with vehicle collisions. This is the firs…

I've had both front airbags deployed in a compact car with closed windows. Impaired hearing on the right ear (left-hand drive car) was the only damage I took.

Re: Mercedes-Benz pre-safe sound

#183

Post by dvdbloc »

bluetomcat wrote: post #180
kemitchell wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about the difference in long-term cost of ownership, serviceability, and overall reliability? It's certainly one kind of car person that wants the latest and greatest nearly all the time. Some like to patronize particular auto makers, like fashionistas patronize fashion houses. It's quite another, equally valid kind of car person to take used examples of far simpler, utterly reliable cars and add suspension, brak…

> How about the difference in long-term cost of ownership, serviceability, and overall reliability? Long-term owner of a 2004 Mercedes W211 E320 CDI in Europe, with 420k kilometers on the clock. The inline 6-cylinder engine and the 5-speed auto transmission still work buttery smooth and the car pulls like a train without ever smoking. No interventions have ever been done to the engine and trans, apart from changing c…

Just wanted to share that I am a proud owner of a 2005 W211 E320 as well, gas however. 235k miles on the clock and it still starts up with the same 2 cranks and woosh as it did new and pulls on the highway just fine. Definitely a quality vehicle that has not only held up but hardly degraded since new.

Re: Mercedes-Benz pre-safe sound

#185

Post by Sharlin »

Cerium wrote: post #52
coke12 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was a pretty good HN comment thread about it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16723099 From the linked thread: """ 5. The stupid toilet bowl lid only fell about 8 inches. How could it damage my hearing so badly? I looked up the speed of sound in ceramic, divided by the length of the toilet bowl lid (and divided by 2 since the fundamental vibration is a half wavelength). This predicts 3.5 kHz. 6. This frequ…

Be careful dropping glass bottles into recycling bins too; they pose nearly the same problem - they don't usually shatter and the sound escapes the bin upwards towards you.

Yeah, and it’s even worse if the bin happens to be in an enclosed space!

Re: Mercedes-Benz pre-safe sound

#186

Post by DagAgren »

GhostVII wrote: post #115
adamsea wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Less combat would lessen combat injuries even more.

And lessening car crashes would help with injuries far more than pre-safe sound. Unfortunately both are innevitable.

American combat injuries are anything but inevitable.

Re: Mercedes-Benz pre-safe sound

#187

Post by [deleted] »

hbosch wrote: post #135

I just want to say that this is exactly the type of thoughtfulness, design, engineering and research that justifies the price difference in something like a Mercedes and something like a Honda. There are so many small triumphs like this in class-leading, high-end vehicle manufacturers that go unnoticed and unsung and allow people with 2019 Accords to say things like "why would I pay $45,000 for that when I get better…

[deleted]

Re: Mercedes-Benz pre-safe sound

#188

Post by raverbashing »

chongli wrote: post #33
ChickeNES wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was a blogpost I read a few years back written by someone who damaged their hearing after dropping a porcelain toilet lid. They actually ran some back-of-the-envelope calculations to estimate the decibel level, I recall it being shockingly high.

Porcelain toilet lids and the metal plates on weightlifting machines are among the most dangerous common objects when it comes to hearing damage. I've heard of cases where the plates on the machine were stuck together with grease and the user had selected a much lighter weight than usual. A number of plates below the linchpin were all the way up by the bonds of the grease before slipping and falling back down. The me…

There's usually some dampening at the bottom of the pile of weights, but yeah it can be loud depending on how heavy and how fast it is dropped.

Re: Mercedes-Benz pre-safe sound

#190

Post by reitzensteinm »

coke12 wrote: post #31
ChickeNES wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was a blogpost I read a few years back written by someone who damaged their hearing after dropping a porcelain toilet lid. They actually ran some back-of-the-envelope calculations to estimate the decibel level, I recall it being shockingly high.

There was a pretty good HN comment thread about it: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16723099 From the linked thread: """ 5. The stupid toilet bowl lid only fell about 8 inches. How could it damage my hearing so badly? I looked up the speed of sound in ceramic, divided by the length of the toilet bowl lid (and divided by 2 since the fundamental vibration is a half wavelength). This predicts 3.5 kHz. 6. This frequ…

I wonder if screaming when you realize you're dropping it would provide some protection.
Post reply on HN