6 ms·

Wild that people have accepted a 5000ms delay between starting their car and seeing behind them. I suppose I'm more sensitive to downtime than most - I recentl

• chii 3y ago
  probably because it started off as a 1000ms delay, which they begrudgingly accepted. Then it started to slow to 1100ms....
• cwalv 3y ago
  Up until a couple years ago my car didn't even have a camera. We just looked out the window, which is still an option.
  • Sharlin 3y ago
    A large majority of cars in traffic don’t have a back camera. Either because they’re old or because they’re cheap (I don’t think a back camera is usually a standard feature at least where I’m from…)
    • kalleboo 3y ago
      In the US a backup camera is now required by law
      • Someone 3y ago
        For new cars, I guess. In the EU, it’s similar. https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/12224-Vehicle-safety-technical-rules-test-procedures-for-advanced-safety-features_en https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-sa...: All new vehicles sold from May 2022 must be fitted with advanced safety features, including: - monitors that detect when a driver has become drowsy or distracted - emergency stop signal to help prevent rear-end collisions - rear-view camera or parking sensors - alcohol interlock system to prevent drunk driving. These systems will help reduce serious accidents on Europe’s roads.
        • jusssi 3y ago
          It seems that the only part that got implemented out of that draft was drowsiness/inattention detection. At least that's what I read from the document in "Commission adoption" section of that page.
        • L3viathan 3y ago
          > alcohol interlock system to prevent drunk driving. Wait, what? _All_ new vehicles need to have this? Or do they just need to be constructed such that one can be installed easily?
          • oblio 3y ago
            Looks like EU law, so considering the wording, probably every new car. Also, see: https://road-safety.transport.ec.europa.eu/statistics-and-analysis/statistics-and-analysis-archive/esafety/alcohol-interlocks_en https://road-safety.transport.ec.europa.eu/statistics-and-an... Edit: The actual text: > Article 6 of Regulation (EU) 2019/2144 of the European Parliament and of the Council requires motor vehicles of categories M and N to be equipped with certain advanced vehicle systems, including driver drowsiness and attention warning systems. It lays down in its Annex II basic requirements for the type-approval of motor vehicles with regard to the driver drowsiness and attention warning systems.
          • martin8412 3y ago
            The car must be built to allow for the installation of a breathalyser, i.e. some standardised interface. Doesn't really affect you unless you're ordered by a court to use one.
  • plorkyeran 3y ago
    It is a much worse option than it used to be. Visibility out of the rear windows from the driver's seat has gotten worse over the years.
    • usr1106 3y ago
      So industrial design with poor usability gets complemented by bad electronic devices. Progress?
      • harry8 3y ago
        what are they getting for the poor visibility tradeoff compensated by electronics? I have no idea. If it's safety, then yes, that would be progress.
        • SideburnsOfDoom 3y ago
          Safety, and aerodynamics (i.e. energy efficiency). Dismissing it as "design with poor usability" is very facile. It's trade-offs between different goals, all the way down.
          • kortilla 3y ago
            Or it’s just cheaper to build
            • SideburnsOfDoom 3y ago
              Cost is yet another trade-off. Those pillars that hold the roof up are safer if they're sturdy, but sturdy means wider and that obstructs the driver's field of vision a bit, and weighs more. "strong and slender" is possible, but it costs more. It all inter-relates. (strong, narrow, cheap), pick any 2. There does come a point where you start to appreciate what Polestar is doing on one of next years models (the Polestar 4): give up on the idea and change direction; no rear window at all, just a camera.
  • Kiro 3y ago
    I rather have no car at all than go back to that.
    • usr1106 3y ago
      That would be better for the planet anyway. Disclaimer: Not a joke. I've never owned a car.
      • Kiro 3y ago
        I agree and in modern countries with proper transportation there is no reason to own a car.
        • oblio 3y ago
          Well, there is a reason, but you won't like it. Convenience :-)
        • Delk 3y ago
          If you have e.g. outdoors activities in sparsely populated areas as a hobby, having a car gives you a lot more freedom than being dependent on public transport. Buses may work if you're only going to locations that are popular enough but that may limit your options. Of course you could also rent but that could become expensive or cumbersome if you do it often enough. Also, if you live in a sparsely populated area, public transport with good coverage often isn't really economically (or ecologically) feasible, even in countries that have good public transport in cities. A bicycle might be an option if distances aren't too great but relying on it exclusively probably takes more than an average person is willing to take on. Weather conditions could be poor, you might regularly need to transport groceries for an entire family, etc. All of that is entirely doable within a few miles in a bikeable city but it's potentially a lot less so if distances are greater. I've never owned a car, I bicycle some thousands of kilometres per year (probably more than I drive most years), and I wish people didn't automatically consider owning a car a necessity even when it actually isn't. But I can definitely see reasons for owning one.
  • bbojan 3y ago
    You don't see small kids right behind your car this way. I believe this was the main reason why rear-view cameras were made mandatory on new cars.
    • Shorel 3y ago
      Also, because the cars now are gigantic, compared with old cars. Even the Mini Cooper is huge now.
      • kevin_thibedeau 3y ago
        I wouldn't be surprised if the Mini Cooper is now a light truck. Everything is larger because manufacturers are gaming the footprint regulations to get by with worse emissions and DOT isn't serious about revamping CAFE to stop that behavior.
• hnlmorg 3y ago
  It’s probably less than 5 seconds in perceived terms. Eg the car gets power before the engine turns over, and you then need to select reverse after the engine is running. And you’d need to check your blind spots before checking the camera too. So by the time the driver is ready to check the camera, it might feel like a much smaller delay or even no delay at all. The delay that I notice the most is the time it takes to connect to my phone via Bluetooth (usually so I can play music from it). I’m often already pulling out of my parking space before it connects.
  • maccard 3y ago
    > Eg the car gets power before the engine turns over, and you then need to select reverse after the engine is running. I can change gears in well under a second when moving. My car requires the clutch to be depressed when the car starts, meaning that I can actually ahve the car started in reverse in under a second. Waiting another 4 seconds is crazy.
    • bmicraft 3y ago
      It could very well begin booting the second the car is unlocked
    • hnlmorg 3y ago
      You’re not going to change gears before turning your engine on though. Which is my point. And if you’re reversing within 3 seconds of turning your engine on then you’re either driving recklessly or on an open and safe space where you don’t even need your cameras. To be clear, I’m not suggesting that a 4 second boot time for an embedded device is great. But I do think your claim that waiting 4 seconds “is crazy” is rather hyperbolic.
      • maccard 3y ago
        > You’re not going to change gears before turning your engine on though. Which is my point. If I've parked my car, I have to have my foot on the clutch to turn it back on agian. My foot is already on the clutch, and I can very easily (and often do) put my car in gear _immediately_. > then you’re either driving recklessly or on an open and safe space where you don’t even need your cameras. Or I've looked in my mirror and put my seatbelt on before I turned the engine on. This is the equivalent of "you're holding it wrong".
• lukevp 3y ago
  What was unsuccessful? I did this in a 2012 Miata with a pioneer head unit (capacitor on the Acc line so it discharges while cranking, which keeps the head unit from turning off). Has a fused line directly to the battery for power. It’s not a huge capacitor either… like a 1500 uF or so? Just tried a couple diff cap values until it had around 5 secs of charge to hold the line open. It also makes it so the music doesn’t cut off immediately when the car is turned off as well… it gives it a few seconds to shut down. Feels more premium.
  • jakear 3y ago
    Well if I knew for sure why it didn't work I'd fix it ;) I think it works better now than before, but it's hard to be sure because I neglected to measure the downtime before/after the modifications. Essentially I had a cap/diode to keep the acc line high during startup for the head unit, but it would still cut off due to the power supply voltage dropping to ~10-11V on the engine turning over (4.8L V8). So then I added a cap/diode to the power supply line, and it works "better...ish...maybe..." now: there are some times when it will stay on across startup, but not always. Perhaps with a larger cap on the PS line (I'm using ~2500uF), but it seemed to be discharging much faster than I'd expect, as if the diode wasn't doing it's thing and the line was effectively just at the system's general "+12V". I wondered if there was perhaps some way the power was escaping the diode/cap isolation and making it back into the main system, but I didn't have a good way to test or fix that (I previously diagnosed a similar issue to a bad diode, but this one seemed to measure fine). And besides all that, the amp is on a separate line in the way back of the car that I didn't bother to tear into because the head unit turns off in the critical stage anyways. So the head unit does stay on for a couple seconds after I turn if off completely, but since the amp is off it doesn't matter.
• wmil 3y ago
  You're supposed to let your car idle for 30 seconds after startup to let the engine lubricate. It's more important in cold climates. So delayed startups aren't some new issue.
  • dekhn 3y ago
    Probably not necessary in modern cars, whose electronically controlled engines have many internal details not obvious to typical drivers. If you believe your idea is true, can you tell me what I can expect to see if I don't do this? IE, I've never done this and I have cars that last 10+ years without any engine trouble.
• ilyt 3y ago
  I mean, I back into the parking spot instead of out of it most of the time so it wouldn't bother me. Also my usual sequence is "start the engine, set up on phone (music, GPS), leave", so it would've booted before I need it.