4 ms·
China has already mandated an end to retractable outside door handles and electrical inside door handles. That takes effect January 1, 2027. There were two majo
by Animats 5mo ago
China has already mandated an end to retractable outside door handles and electrical inside door handles. That takes effect January 1, 2027.
There were two major incidents where people could not get out and could not be rescued.
The powered charger port door would make sense if there were robot chargers that used it. Tesla demoed that, but people disliked the snake robot approach. Technically, a snake robot is ideal for that, but too many people fear snakes and tentacles.
Rear view cameras are better than rear view mirrors. The field of view is better.
- panxyh 5mo agoRear view cameras might be better than mirrors in terms of field of view. This doesn't make them objectively better. Disadvantages are well argumented in the article. They are an useful accessory but shouldn't replace real vision.
- aaomidi 5mo agoReal vision is fucked when you can’t actually see what’s behind your car. Cameras will prevent a lot of unnecessary property damage, and more importantly, fully mitigate risk of killing humans/animals that are behind the car and outside the field of view.
- panxyh 5mo agoYes, their purpose and usefulness is obvious. As a supplement. Mirrors should be left as they are.
- bityard 5mo agoLots of cars don't combine the rear-view mirror and backup camera into the same thing. (And shouldn't.)
- skywhopper 5mo agoNo one is arguing cameras shouldn’t exist. In fact, back up cameras are mandatory in the US. But replacing mirrors and windows with cameras is bad, actually.
- afh1 5mo agoWhy not both? My Honda has mirrors and a rear view camera. I always check both before backing up. The camera is viewed on a small (for today's standards) LCD screen (with physical buttons, no touchscreen) that also serves as the radio.
- panxyh 5mo agoThe discussion isn't as much about a common backing camera (which also falls under 'useful accessory' I mentioned), but about cameras replacing mirrors.
- cmrdporcupine 5mo agoRear view cameras are a) 2d not 3d like a physical mirror, so judging depth is inferior on them b) a nightmare for most of us in the second half of our lives who lose the ability to quickly adjust focal length between near and far (not a problem with a real mirror) c) yet another potential failure point and d) a dumbass idea in the parts of the world that salt their roads The various cameras on my polestar2 are routinely getting caked in salt and dirt in the winter 30 seconds after I start driving down the road. I fail to understand why I'd want this for a critical system like rear or side view mirrors. I drove in a Polestar4 with its rear view camera only view the other day. Did not like. Would not want as my only option. I did drive in a Bolt that had dual mode and that was fine.
- kefabean 5mo agoAnd e) although more relevant for wing mirrors, you can also move your head around to change/increase the field of view if needed. Try doing that with a camera + screen.
- soco 5mo agoI never needed to clean the reversing camera lens so far, in over a decade. It doesn't matter if it's a rear view or reversing, either would get the same amount of mud right? So probably some makers are just better at choosing a placement for the optics.
- BeetleB 5mo ago> Rear view cameras are better than rear view mirrors. The field of view is better. Rear view cameras are useless when mud/rain get on them. Mirrors continue to work just fine. Try living in Seattle.
- formerly_proven 5mo agoThere are some good designs which prevent them from getting dirty. For example, Mercedes and VW put them in the rear badge and they're only exposed when needed.
- barrkel 5mo agoRear view mirrors are needed all the time. We're not talking about reversing cameras here.
- deleted 5mo ago[deleted]
- formerly_proven 5mo agoWhich one is meant seems to be a major point of confusion in the thread.
- croes 5mo ago> Rear view cameras are better than rear view mirrors. The field of view is better. Oh yes, we are
- barrkel 5mo agoRear view cameras are not a replacement for rear view mirrors, is my point. You use the two for different things. A rear view camera trying to replace a mirror would need a cleaning and wiping solution, something that we use rear window wipers for with analogue mirrors.
- BeetleB 5mo ago
- jjav 5mo ago> Rear view cameras are better than rear view mirrors. The field of view is better. As long as they work, yes. This is part of the trend to make everything more fragile with lots of failure conditions. There are many electrical parts + software needed to make that camera+screen work, any of which might break eventually. A mirror is just a mirror, failure modes are few and unlikely. Even if it cracks it still works.
- Animats 5mo ago> A mirror is just a mirror, failure modes are few and unlikely. Even if it cracks it still works. Are your side mirrors adjusted properly? Do you know the SAE standard on how to adjust your side mirrors? [1] (The actual paper is paywalled.) [1] https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a15131074/how-to-adjust-your-mirrors-to-avoid-blind-spots/ https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a15131074/how-to-adjus...
- beAbU 5mo agoYou realize that mirrors can also have a wider fov by making them concave, right?
- wlonkly 5mo ago-vex
- croes 5mo ago> Rear view cameras are better than rear view mirrors. The field of view is better. But you lose the natural depth perception and need to focus differently