5 ms·

> how do you back-up safely without a screen to show you what’s behind you? Always-on silicon dioxide transparent amorphous solid with a sublayer of vacuumed d

> how do you back-up safely without a screen to show you what’s behind you? Always-on silicon dioxide transparent amorphous solid with a sublayer of vacuumed deposited silver: a mirror.

chrisseaton 5y ago
You have deadly blind-spots when you rely on mirrors.
- dafoex 5y ago
  Then use your eyes and neck joint to check your blind spots? You'd fail a UK driving test if you relied entirely on your mirror (or camera, for that matter) when reversing.
  - ryanlol 5y ago
    How do you do that in a perfectly legal street car like a lamborghini aventador?
  - chrisseaton 5y ago
    Unless you have a three-metre articulated neck you are not going to be able to get your head out the car and round the back to see right behind your own car while driving it - I can't believe people aren't aware they have blind spots there? That's how small children get run over. Why do you think they made backup cameras mandatory? Why do you think they believe they save lives?
    - dafoex 5y ago
      Who made them mandatory? When and where? You have other blind spots, too, and manufacturers know that relying on a camera makes drivers neglect their other blind spots - Skoda cars even pop up a toast notification saying "Look around, is it safe to move?" to try and discourage lazy drivers thinking the computer is a replacement for a brain. But all this feels like a moot point, anyway. I understood the main argument to be advocating the use of physical controls, not the removal of safety sensors and cameras.
      - chrisseaton 5y ago
        > Who made them mandatory? US, Canada, EU (I think they allow an alternative 'detection system'), possibly others.
      - nzmsv 5y ago
        I'll be another voice so that it's not just Chris :) Backover accidents are real. Cameras help a lot. Arguments about "but they are not in all cars" forget that seatbelts, airbags, and ABS were also once in that category. If you are worried about drivers not being hardcore enough and relying too much on cameras: do you know how to use a choke? What about a crank start? An unsynchronized gearbox?
        totalZero 5y ago
        Your last line reminds me of Dom Toretto. "Granny shifting, not double clutching like you should..."
        nzmsv 5y ago
        Yup. I have never driven a car where you have to double-clutch but I know they exist. Most people probably don't even know this and yet are still good drivers. They get out of driving what they want to get out of it. Not everyone has to drive a vintage car to be called a driver. (And yes, I know, also trucks)
    - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
      I hope you spend a very, very, long time wearing a next brace as the result of reversing into traffic. It would be fitting. Cameras have blind spots too. They're just different ones.
- javajosh 5y ago
  It's funny, but I wasn't reading authors very closely in this sub-thread, and my general impression was a lot of mirror hate and fear. But then I noticed that it's ALL coming from you, Chris. TBH I have never heard anyone, not once, talk about mirrors being dangerous or about this even being an issue. Yet to hear you say it our children's blood is running in the street. Who are you, and why are you pushing this so hard?
  - chrisseaton 5y ago
    > TBH I have never heard anyone, not once, talk about mirrors being dangerous or about this even being an issue. Then you're under-informed. They introduced laws about requiring backup cameras in multiple countries - I obviously didn't legislate them myself! https://www.fatherly.com/health-science/car-backup-camera-law-mandatory https://www.fatherly.com/health-science/car-backup-camera-la... > 210 fatalities and 15,000 injuries are caused every year by backover crashes No mirror is showing you where you need to see to avoid these fatal accidents. People saying they want cars without screens are like people arguing for cars without seatbelts because they find them uncomfortable.
    - javajosh 5y ago
      >Then you're under-informed. Always an excellent (if mis-spelled) rejoinder, if the burden of proof is on you, and you are failing to meet it. >They literally introduced laws You've claimed this 5 or 6 times in this sub-thread, and yet I've not seen a single reference or link. Here, you link to "fatherly.com", which I will not visit. Link to something reputable, ideally the law itself, or major news coverage of the law. >210 fatalities and 15,000 injuries I know a case is weak when they start quoting absolute numbers at me on national issues. The order-of-magnitude of people in the US is 10^8. 200 dead is close to the noise floor on unlikely death. Literally 1-in-a-million. It's like the number of people that die from snake bites and shark attacks and lightning strikes. >No mirror is showing you where you need to see to avoid these fatal accidents. Here's where you get to the actual danger of what you are saying. Because screens do not come without considerable cost, not just in terms of hardware, but in terms of distraction. Do you think the number of fatalities caused directly or indirectly by screen-use-while-driving will exceed 200? (I would bet it's at 20k right now). BTW I will carve out an exception - it's probably a good idea to have a dedicated backup screen, as with a 3rd party dashcam you can install yourself. However this is a very different beast than the center console infotainment center that, for that brief moment it becomes vital safety equipment, becomes a massive, constant, deadly liability to the safety of everyone within eyeshot.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  Take your exaggeration and shove it. It's not hard to keep track of what is entering and exiting your blind spots so everything is accounted for. This is how every trucker does it.
  - chrisseaton 5y ago
    Yet still 210 fatalities and 15,000 injuries are caused every year by backover crashes. We can fix most of those with backup cameras and screens. But people here want to remove those screens.
    - touisteur 5y ago
      Leaving aside the extremists, most people here seem to want to remove mostly touchscreens that replaced electro-mechanical under-the-wheel commands. I actually agree with those 'takes'. Completely removing any screen seems some kind of butlerian djihad. Leave the screen, doesn't have to be huge, or to be seen by anyone else than the driver, put it somewhere useful for safety. And make it not flashy, not attention grabbing when driving.

> how do you back-up safely without a screen to show you what’s behind you? Always-on silicon dioxide transparent amorphous solid with a sublayer of vacuumed deposited silver: a mirror.

chrisseaton 5y ago

You have deadly blind-spots when you rely on mirrors.

dafoex 5y ago
Then use your eyes and neck joint to check your blind spots? You'd fail a UK driving test if you relied entirely on your mirror (or camera, for that matter) when reversing.
- ryanlol 5y ago
  How do you do that in a perfectly legal street car like a lamborghini aventador?
- chrisseaton 5y ago
  Unless you have a three-metre articulated neck you are not going to be able to get your head out the car and round the back to see right behind your own car while driving it - I can't believe people aren't aware they have blind spots there? That's how small children get run over. Why do you think they made backup cameras mandatory? Why do you think they believe they save lives?
  - dafoex 5y ago
    Who made them mandatory? When and where? You have other blind spots, too, and manufacturers know that relying on a camera makes drivers neglect their other blind spots - Skoda cars even pop up a toast notification saying "Look around, is it safe to move?" to try and discourage lazy drivers thinking the computer is a replacement for a brain. But all this feels like a moot point, anyway. I understood the main argument to be advocating the use of physical controls, not the removal of safety sensors and cameras.
    - chrisseaton 5y ago
      > Who made them mandatory? US, Canada, EU (I think they allow an alternative 'detection system'), possibly others.
    - nzmsv 5y ago
      I'll be another voice so that it's not just Chris :) Backover accidents are real. Cameras help a lot. Arguments about "but they are not in all cars" forget that seatbelts, airbags, and ABS were also once in that category. If you are worried about drivers not being hardcore enough and relying too much on cameras: do you know how to use a choke? What about a crank start? An unsynchronized gearbox?
      - totalZero 5y ago
        Your last line reminds me of Dom Toretto. "Granny shifting, not double clutching like you should..."
        nzmsv 5y ago
        Yup. I have never driven a car where you have to double-clutch but I know they exist. Most people probably don't even know this and yet are still good drivers. They get out of driving what they want to get out of it. Not everyone has to drive a vintage car to be called a driver. (And yes, I know, also trucks)
  - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
    I hope you spend a very, very, long time wearing a next brace as the result of reversing into traffic. It would be fitting. Cameras have blind spots too. They're just different ones.
javajosh 5y ago
It's funny, but I wasn't reading authors very closely in this sub-thread, and my general impression was a lot of mirror hate and fear. But then I noticed that it's ALL coming from you, Chris. TBH I have never heard anyone, not once, talk about mirrors being dangerous or about this even being an issue. Yet to hear you say it our children's blood is running in the street. Who are you, and why are you pushing this so hard?
- chrisseaton 5y ago
  > TBH I have never heard anyone, not once, talk about mirrors being dangerous or about this even being an issue. Then you're under-informed. They introduced laws about requiring backup cameras in multiple countries - I obviously didn't legislate them myself! https://www.fatherly.com/health-science/car-backup-camera-law-mandatory https://www.fatherly.com/health-science/car-backup-camera-la... > 210 fatalities and 15,000 injuries are caused every year by backover crashes No mirror is showing you where you need to see to avoid these fatal accidents. People saying they want cars without screens are like people arguing for cars without seatbelts because they find them uncomfortable.
  - javajosh 5y ago
    >Then you're under-informed. Always an excellent (if mis-spelled) rejoinder, if the burden of proof is on you, and you are failing to meet it. >They literally introduced laws You've claimed this 5 or 6 times in this sub-thread, and yet I've not seen a single reference or link. Here, you link to "fatherly.com", which I will not visit. Link to something reputable, ideally the law itself, or major news coverage of the law. >210 fatalities and 15,000 injuries I know a case is weak when they start quoting absolute numbers at me on national issues. The order-of-magnitude of people in the US is 10^8. 200 dead is close to the noise floor on unlikely death. Literally 1-in-a-million. It's like the number of people that die from snake bites and shark attacks and lightning strikes. >No mirror is showing you where you need to see to avoid these fatal accidents. Here's where you get to the actual danger of what you are saying. Because screens do not come without considerable cost, not just in terms of hardware, but in terms of distraction. Do you think the number of fatalities caused directly or indirectly by screen-use-while-driving will exceed 200? (I would bet it's at 20k right now). BTW I will carve out an exception - it's probably a good idea to have a dedicated backup screen, as with a 3rd party dashcam you can install yourself. However this is a very different beast than the center console infotainment center that, for that brief moment it becomes vital safety equipment, becomes a massive, constant, deadly liability to the safety of everyone within eyeshot.
throwaway0a5e 5y ago
Take your exaggeration and shove it. It's not hard to keep track of what is entering and exiting your blind spots so everything is accounted for. This is how every trucker does it.
- chrisseaton 5y ago
  Yet still 210 fatalities and 15,000 injuries are caused every year by backover crashes. We can fix most of those with backup cameras and screens. But people here want to remove those screens.
  - touisteur 5y ago
    Leaving aside the extremists, most people here seem to want to remove mostly touchscreens that replaced electro-mechanical under-the-wheel commands. I actually agree with those 'takes'. Completely removing any screen seems some kind of butlerian djihad. Leave the screen, doesn't have to be huge, or to be seen by anyone else than the driver, put it somewhere useful for safety. And make it not flashy, not attention grabbing when driving.