Slashdot Mirror


Electric Cars May Be Made Noisier By Law

msgtomatt writes "The Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act would require electric cars and hybrids to make noise, and would fund the Department of Transportation to create a set of rules for automakers, who would be allowed some leeway in how they carry out the guidelines." Downloadable and do-it-yourself car-tones are the future: my own snoring could keep deer and toddlers off the road.

620 comments

  1. The sound I want by haystor · · Score: 5, Funny

    I want a recording of an eight year old making car revving noises.

    --
    t
    1. Re:The sound I want by dwarfsoft · · Score: 3, Funny

      Cue the Crazy Frog making vroom-vroom/ding-a-ding-ding noises... Like we need to hear that again. I'd be more likely to step out in front of such cars so I wouldn't ever have to hear that again.

      --
      Cheers, Chris
    2. Re:The sound I want by SilverHatHacker · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'd go for a vuvuzela on mine.

      --
      Funny may not give karma, but +5 Informative never made anyone snort coffee out their nose.
    3. Re:The sound I want by varmittang · · Score: 0
      --
      -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
      12345
      -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
    4. Re:The sound I want by oldspewey · · Score: 2

      I'll be rolling with the Wilhelm Scream

      --
      If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
    5. Re:The sound I want by sjames · · Score: 3, Interesting

      How about George Jetson's bubble car sound?

    6. Re:The sound I want by teh+dave · · Score: 2

      I'll have a lightsabre sound, thanks. And when I turn the steering wheel, the pitch changes.

    7. Re:The sound I want by PunkFloyd · · Score: 5, Funny

      Just put a few playing cards in the spokes. Problem solved.

    8. Re:The sound I want by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      I want one that makes the Pacman wakka-wakka dot-munching noise as it goes up the road!

      (Would be even better if you could eat a power pill and make the traffic cops turn blue and run away...)

    9. Re:The sound I want by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      The sound of two coconuts banging together.

    10. Re:The sound I want by Kitkoan · · Score: 1

      Either a lawn mower sound or a 747.

      --
      Attention... all grammer nazi"s! Is they're anything; wrong with: my post,
    11. Re:The sound I want by Sulphur · · Score: 1

      I'd go for a vuvuzela on mine.

      Considering the sound proof quality of most cars, how would they hear it?

      Wouldn't it be distracting to blow while driving?

    12. Re:The sound I want by 517714 · · Score: 1

      I would prefer the sound of one hand clapping. Failing that, the sound of the Jetson's "car".

      --
      The US government have made it clear that we have no inalienable rights; any we do not defend vigorously will be taken.
    13. Re:The sound I want by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You win, sir. Well played.

    14. Re:The sound I want by pushing-robot · · Score: 1

      I'd go with the Flintstones sound effects; the xylophone tiptoe noise for < 10km/h, the running noise for acceleration, and the braking noise for, well, braking.

      If you have no idea what I'm talking about, you can hear examples of all three in the first 60 seconds of this clip. And please get off my lawn.

      --
      How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
    15. Re:The sound I want by gmuslera · · Score: 2

      I would like a reverse doppler sound, when coming close sound like going away and viceversa. Probably will be something that must be activated when i want to surprise someone.else whatever sound i would make will have its own doppler.

    16. Re:The sound I want by rampage30 · · Score: 1, Funny

      HA! That would be great. Seriously though, I actually hopped in the Lexus SUV Hybrid a few weeks back and sat their pushing the start button over and over wondering if the battery in the car was dead. Finally (3 or 4 minutes later) it hit me, that the care was actually on.

      --
      -Smilton Urban Leasing
    17. Re:The sound I want by SmoothTom · · Score: 2

      My first choice would be maniacal laughter, second would be the sound of a steam locomotive...

      --
      Tomas

    18. Re:The sound I want by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8Q9oAPrvZo

      If my car has to be loud, I want 140+ dB of ear bleeding terror.

    19. Re:The sound I want by laejoh · · Score: 1

      I want mine to sound like the "feeper" on a VT-52!

    20. Re:The sound I want by beav007 · · Score: 1

      Can I make the noise for my electric car with a large-bore v8 engine?

    21. Re:The sound I want by bazorg · · Score: 1

      For my car it will definitely be the "mahna mahna" song.
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xhuyv-2GhNI

    22. Re:The sound I want by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      As long as it isn't Crazy Frog.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    23. Re:The sound I want by kdemetter · · Score: 4, Funny

      I never understand all the fuss with the "what's the sound of one hand clapping" : i tried it , it makes exactly the same sound as 2 hands clapping , just less loud .

    24. Re:The sound I want by Metabolife · · Score: 1

      I call amplified tires on pavement.

    25. Re:The sound I want by peragrin · · Score: 1

      Um the lights on the dash weren't a big enough clue that the car wasn't running?

      Even my 4 cylinder gas engine is quiet enough that with the door closed I can't hear the engine running at idle. I can barely feel the vibrations from it. the only way to know if the engine is running is to look at the dash and see what is lit up.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
    26. Re:The sound I want by ilsaloving · · Score: 3, Funny

      Because you really wanted to be known as "Tomas the (Psychotic) Tank Engine"?

    27. Re:The sound I want by confused+one · · Score: 1

      After you drive by with the big block pick_your_favorite_engine with open pipes, they might not be able to hear any of the rest of traffic and walk right into the middle of an interstate highway without knowing it. Ever been to a tractor pull? Without hearing protection?

    28. Re:The sound I want by dotfile · · Score: 1

      I'd be looking for a horse and buggy sound clip for my wife's Fusion hybrid.

    29. Re:The sound I want by NekSnappa · · Score: 1

      From the Dark Tower series by Stephen King.
      "Blaine the Train is insane!"

      --
      I want to shoot the messenger!
    30. Re:The sound I want by operagost · · Score: 1

      That would be awesome, but I'd love something like K.I.T.T.'s half-turbocharger, half-turbojet whine.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    31. Re:The sound I want by KingVidalia · · Score: 1

      I would like a reverse doppler sound, when coming close sound like going away and viceversa. Probably will be something that must be activated when i want to surprise someone.else whatever sound i would make will have its own doppler.

      Wouldn't the actual doppler effect cancel out your reverse doppler? Then it would just sound like a car revving a motor, standing still. Man that's confusing.

    32. Re:The sound I want by srobert · · Score: 1

      Well that would be beyond counterproductive. My bet is you'll run over the first blind person who gets anywhere near your car when its moving.

    33. Re:The sound I want by jarlsberg71 · · Score: 1

      If it were reversed, and "going away" was cued to some stationary object or person, then it should sound constant as the approaching doppler and retreating doppler noises would be modified into a constant waveform

      --
      E8B8B
    34. Re:The sound I want by natehoy · · Score: 1

      That does raise an interesting point. Will everyone be choosing their own car noises in the future?

      Great, so now you pick a "cartone" that's the same as my cell's ringtone and I walk out in front of you because I'm distracted by what I think is my phone ringing when it's actually your electric car trying to let me know I'm about to become road paste.

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    35. Re:The sound I want by Ossifer · · Score: 1

      My lawnmower is electric and surprisingly quiet. Maybe I'll be forced to add artificial noise to this as well? Or maybe blow some artificial smoke for the hearing impaired?

    36. Re:The sound I want by Hobart · · Score: 1

      The original recording by Daniel Malmedahl that became the "Crazy Frog" ringtone would be best. :-)

      Vroooooooooooooommmmmmm a ding ding ding ding....

      --
      o/~ Join us now and share the software ...
    37. Re:The sound I want by box4831 · · Score: 1

      Unless the emitted redshift from the speaker was twice that of the blueshift of the car going toward the stationary person, possibly?

      (replace redshift and blueshift with the audio equivalent, I can't be too bothered to look it up)

      --
      Miller Lite tastes like water that's somehow managed to rot.
    38. Re:The sound I want by Nadaka · · Score: 1

      I think it would be very distracting to blow while driving. Its bad enough being blown while driving.

    39. Re:The sound I want by Xoltri · · Score: 1

      This is what I would use for sure.

      --
      -Xoltri
    40. Re:The sound I want by morethanapapercert · · Score: 1

      And as a bonus, if you pick the right frequency of sound to start with, not only would pedestrians not be able to tell if you are approaching or departing, but they wouldn't have a clue which direction you're really in. Kind of like a mosquito in a dark room.

      --
      I need a wheelchair van for my son. Help me get the word out. https://www.gofundme.com/wheelchair-van-for-jj
    41. Re:The sound I want by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      How about George Jetson's bubble car sound?

      See, right here you have the kernel of the solution.

      As soon as somebody tells the car companies that if they put a speaker into the cars that they can get into the "Run Tone" business, charging $5 for a Jetsons, KITT, Lightsaber, generic-futuristic-car-whoosh etc. sound and pocketing half of that with very little incremental cost, they'll jump on the idea of adding the safety feature.

      Heck, GM might even be first in line with their OnStar always-tracking-you technology ready to deploy the downloads. Tell 'em it'll get them out of bankruptcy for real too, for good measure.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    42. Re:The sound I want by somersault · · Score: 1

      Mount it backwards, outside, with a funnel on the mouthpiece. Problem solved.

      Though hopefully you were just trolling rather than being dumb enough to think he was going to blow it himself.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    43. Re:The sound I want by somersault · · Score: 1

      How about a Tron lightcycle? :)

      --
      which is totally what she said
    44. Re:The sound I want by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      can not decide between the ice-cream truck jingle or the noise of car tyres.

    45. Re:The sound I want by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See the other discussion about philosophy. It is a bullshit question. Full stop. Google define:koan. Buddhist thought questions with no answer were a good way to empty your mind and meditate. They believe a bunch of other BS too.

    46. Re:The sound I want by treeves · · Score: 2

      In case your not joking, you should know that brass instruments (and unfortunately the vuvuzela falls in the same category even though it is not brass but plastic) do not produce sound by simply having wind go through them. Only flutes and whistles do that. Vuvuzelas, like trumpets, trombones, and French horns (that's the one I play) rely on the vibration of the players lips for sound production. Just blowing through them will make a slight whooshing sound appropriate for many /. comments, but no definite pitch.

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    47. Re:The sound I want by somersault · · Score: 1

      Ah, I thought it was more like those party whistles you get that just make an extremely loud and annoying sound when you blow hard enough.

      I generally dislike brass instruments, outside of a full ochestra anyway. I much prefer the vibrations of a nice reed.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    48. Re:The sound I want by 400_guru · · Score: 1

      If my Prius has to make noise at low speeds I'm going to go for a Top Fuel Dragster at idle - the sound of several gallons a minute burning without even moving. :-)

      --
      There are two rules to success in life: 1) Don't tell everyone all that you know.
    49. Re:The sound I want by Phoghat · · Score: 1

      I want the sound of a n F-18 in flight. Just think of the possibility of downloadable car sounds for $0.99 each! Ka-Ching!

      --
      Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
    50. Re:The sound I want by Phoghat · · Score: 1

      And his boy Elroy?

      --
      Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
    51. Re:The sound I want by Phoghat · · Score: 1

      So you want it to say riddles?

      --
      Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
    52. Re:The sound I want by Gerlan · · Score: 1

      I'd want my car to "Wee! Wee! Wee!" everywhere I go. hehe.. that commercial never gets old.

  2. Yeah i was thinking about that. by unity100 · · Score: 1

    they generally dont make any audible noise at all from close distance. that would be rather dangerous on roads for pedestrians.

    1. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Congratulations on realizing that. You were only 5 years behind the rest of the world.

    2. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by skids · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Really, to be consistent, it should apply to all cars, not just electrics. Even with the motor running, a coasting car can be hard to hear.

    3. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Even better: how about 'It should apply to all OBJECTS'. Every single object, mobile or immobile should emit a different tone constantly.

      That's why futuristic cities are built out of glass: the whole mass is one great big set of chimes.

    4. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      I don't know about you, but electric cars aren't everywhere. I don't recall ever having seen a fully electric car on the road yet, the closest being a gas-electric Prius.

    5. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by BKX · · Score: 2

      I saw an all electric vehicle once. It was crazy. I was replacing the water pump on my 1996 Geo Prism in a restaurant parking lot that was next door to a hooker hotel (literally, a hotel frequented mostly by hookers). When I looked up, there were ten SWAT guys jumping out of a black APC-looking thing. Fully armored, the works. I never even heard it pull up and I was only 20 feet away. I was talking to one of the cops after the SWAT truck left (the crime scene still had to be taken care of, and the criminals carted off in regular cop cars), and she said that it was all-electric and just wonderful for serving no-knock search warrants on drug dealers. They never get the chance to flush. So I guess the noiselessness might actually be an advantage in some circumstances.

    6. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Really, huh? Last time I checked they still taught "FIRST look left, THEN look right, THEN cross the streets" to our kids, did they forgo that in your country?

      I honestly don't get it. How is it safer for pedestrians if cars make noises? First, are there not traffic lights in your country? At least where it counts, i.e. where there's actually a chance to meet a car on the road? Are there no pedestrian crossing areas on your roads? Along with pedestrian traffic lights telling you when it's safe to walk? Are drivers in your country so reckless that they ignore those traffic lights that LOOKING ain't enough to cross the road safely, you have to listen?

      And most of all, are there still teenagers in your country that remove those iPod earphones from time to time from their ears?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    7. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Great idea, and to be able to sleep within city limits all you have to do is get your eardrums punctured.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    8. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by edb · · Score: 2

      Even better: how about 'It should apply to all OBJECTS'. Every single object, mobile or immobile should emit a different tone constantly.

      They already do. Every object in the universe already emits its own vibrations. Your sensory apparatus just needs to be tuned correctly to detect it. The extremely narrow range of oscillating frequencies detectable by the auditory sense of earth humans is only a tiny slice.

      On Optheria they have a musical instrument (inadequately called an "organ") that plays to many senses, not just hearing. Some would say it plays directly to the soul and bypasses the senses entirely. That's another story altogether.

      Wimpy Earthling: if you can't detect objects because you can't sense the vibrations they already radiate,
            GET A HEARING (or whatever) AID!

      Or use your other sense organs. Whatever. Or maybe, just maybe, DON'T WALK DOWN THE F**KING MIDDLE OF THE ROAD WITHOUT LOOKING BEHIND YOU. Sheesh!

      --
      In theory, practice and theory are the same. In practice, they rarely are.
    9. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by icebike · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I disagree.

      No cars should make noise. Its an arms race.

      Instead of taking the advent of electric vehicles as an opportunity to quiet our cities, requiring them to make more noise seems counter productive.

      Make them all quiet enough and you will be able to hear the tire noise.

      Cover that noise with a louder noise and pretty soon all you know is its noisy and you can't hear the cars because they disappear into the noise.

      Ok, Won't somebody please think of the Blind!!??
      Yeah. Why not equip the blind with the sensors that they need to detect large/fast moving objects instead of equipping all large moving objects with noise makers to be drowner out by other noise makers.

      Relying on everything that might hurt you to carry a warning is just counter-productive and costly. Hear nothing, step off the curb and get hit by a bike messenger, or a car with a defective noise maker.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    10. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by whoever57 · · Score: 2

      How is it safer for pedestrians if cars make noises?

      You don't have blind people in your country? People always look left and right properly and are never alerted by the sound of a car?

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    11. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by icebike · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Almost ALL of the demand for noise makers on cars comes from the blind lobby.

      In a quieter world, the blind would hear the tire noise just fine.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    12. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Duradin · · Score: 1

      You don't have to be hearing in the right direction. You do have to be looking in the right direction.

    13. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by perryizgr8 · · Score: 1

      i've seen a handful around the city. but they all were less 'car' than 'two enclosed seats and a steering wheel'.

      --
      Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
    14. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I've noticed this funny trend in California (particularly, the part of California that I live in). It's especially odd after moving here from somewhere that this just seems so ridiculous.

      Pedestrians assume they have the right of way (legally, they do), and so just walk out into the middle of the street, regardless of any kind of signal that they should or shouldn't at that particular point. If they get hit, then it's the car's fault, and to them, it doesn't seem to matter if they even gave the car a fighting chance at braking to stop from hitting them. Seriously, I've been out walking the town with a group of friends who just ran across a 55mph, 6 lane road with a crosswalk maybe 50 feet away that they could have gone to and waited on the traffic light to give them the ok to go, and they justify it by saying that they have the right of way and the cars have to stop anyway. I also have to slam on my breaks to keep from hitting similar idiots semi-regularly. Where I live before moving here, pedestrians would get cussed out for crossing on the crosswalk a little early or a little late. It's fucking backwards, but it's the way of life out here. And some of these people consider the cars they don't hear to be a huge inconvenience to them--forget that they're an even bigger inconvenience to the driver of those cars.

      The other poster got the whole blind people part as well...

    15. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by unity100 · · Score: 1

      if they have the right of way legally, it means that THEY LEGALLY HAVE THE RIGHT OF WAY.

      its not too hard to understand. however, you talk as if they do not have the right of way, in your opinion. its, your opinion.

    16. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they generally dont make any audible noise at all from close distance. that would be rather dangerous on roads for pedestrians.

      No it isn't.

      What's the difference between not hearing any cars on a busy road and hearing one massive wall of sound on a busy road? Nothing, aside from the fact that on a noisy road You can't hear the sound of the horn from the guy about to run over you.

      - Cars have horns
      - Every child has been told "Don't play in the Street" and "Look both ways before you cross".

      This is a complete waste of our time and money. I was actually looking forward to not putting up with massive waves of sound in the not-too-distant future. Guess what- on a quiet road you can hear the TIRES ON THE PAVEMENT just fine.

    17. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by dargaud · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Instead of taking the advent of electric vehicles as an opportunity to quiet our cities, requiring them to make more noise seems counter productive.

      Yeah, that's ridiculous. Why don't we make electric cars stink as well so that the deaf can keep on hating them too ? And while we are at it force all cars owners to have a buggy whip.

      --
      Non-Linux Penguins ?
    18. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Neil+Boekend · · Score: 2

      The blind should be equipped with radar/sonar based sensing equipment.
      For the rest: If you don't look both ways evolution is at work.

      --
      Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
    19. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by guruevi · · Score: 1

      This is the US:

      "FIRST look left, THEN look right, THEN cross the streets" to our kids, did they forgo that in your country?
      Yes they did, the parents of the children of this generation are generally irresponsible (being raised by baby boomers) and can't even take care of the basic needs of their own kids. They won't learn it in schools either as the slowest kid in the class won't know what Left or Right is so the rest of the class won't be able to move on.

      First, are there not traffic lights in your country?
      Hardly. There are a lot of 4-way stops. The problem is that lights need electricity and electricity would need to be ran to the remotest parts. Since we can't even get broadband in those areas (which is simpler with fiber requiring no power for miles) I doubt we can get the infrastructure for electric lights/car recharging stations. Solar panels are a big no-no here since it doesn't use coal or oil.

      At least where it counts, i.e. where there's actually a chance to meet a car on the road?
      This is the US, everybody has at least 2 cars (especially out in the country) but nobody knows how to keep them up or drive them. I've seen an accident once on a crossroads where the only surroundings were 4 big empty fields. It might be hard however to meet a pedestrian on the road. I live in a city and there are hardly any people walking here compared to Europe's cities.

      Are there no pedestrian crossing areas on your roads?
      No. And if there are, people ignore them. Or they simply don't work. There are some pedestrian crossings where it takes a full 2 minutes for the pedestrians to be able to walk (the white light) so everybody just ignores them.

      Are drivers in your country so reckless that they ignore those traffic lights that LOOKING ain't enough to cross the road safely, you have to listen?
      Yes. And even if you see a pedestrian you might not be able to stop in time since there is absolutely no requirement for your brakes (or anything but your emissions sensors) to actually work to pass inspection. All the brake system is inspected for is if whether the brake pads are not worn down to the thread and even then they'll tell you you should probably change them soon and pass you. And even if you have a working car the freaking things are so heavy they require a 200m stopping distance.

      And most of all, are there still teenagers in your country that remove those iPod earphones from time to time from their ears?
      Are there in your country? I've seen the same trend worldwide.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    20. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by andreicio · · Score: 1

      Not really. There's a difference from "right of way" meaning pedestrians can legally cross the street wherever they choose, versus "right of way" meaning if a car hits a pedestrian the car is always in the wrong. I've had this rule in my country, and it didn't mean the pedestrian can cross anywhere, it just meant you had to be careful when you drive.

    21. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      How about an electric shock field for 20m around the vehicles? lol

    22. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by rtb61 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This is actually an old story. Originally marketing and PR firms noted that cars produce distinctive engine noise that promote the label and with electric cars this would be gone, hence they worked on the idea of electric cars making marketing driving noise and seeking excuses to force it on customers.

      This bit of legislative douchery is the means by which they can enforce it. They admit that above 20km per hour tyre noise is sufficient to alert pedestrians and below 20km per hour, well excuse me but if you hit a pedestrian below 20 km per hour your not paying attention. Even at low speeds rolling resistance http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolling_resistance is a measure of tyre flex, hence abrasion and noise.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    23. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by worx101 · · Score: 2

      Just because you have the right of way doesn't mean you should take it. Common sense and consideration for other people should at least play some part.

    24. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by pckl300 · · Score: 1

      Last time I checked they still taught "FIRST look left, THEN look right, THEN cross the streets" to our kids, did they forgo that in your country?

      I thought it was "Stop, look, and listen"

      --
      In the beginning, there was null.
    25. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by pckl300 · · Score: 1

      At low speeds, I don't think the tires make enough noise to be heard all the time, especially on smooth/new pavement.

      --
      In the beginning, there was null.
    26. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by sdnoob · · Score: 1

      the sound and smell of a 30 year old semi tractor with the pedal-to-the-metal ought to put the fear-of-everything into some schmuck (blind or not) waiting to cross the street. too bad a little hybrid hatchback can't duplicate the rumbling ground effect, too.

    27. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The logical progression is that the idiots who want this law will hail it a great success and soon cycles, horses and ultimately pedestrians will have to wear noise generators too. Maybe just play the ipods through loudspeakers?

      Either it will become a challenge to become the noisiest car on the street or five electrics will be drowned out by one motoycycle anyway.

    28. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      We had the "green cross code: Stop, look, listen, think.

    29. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Maybe you could use RF instead. No annoyance for humans but easily detectable with a simple receiver.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    30. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was taught to look one way, then the other, and again the first way before even stepping into the road.

    31. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Dan541 · · Score: 2

      Natural Selection at work. Quiet cars are a good thing.

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    32. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by alfredos · · Score: 1

      It happened to me, actually, on a street that basically only serves to reach a dozen houses, has too small a pedestrian zone and therefore it's much more comfortable to walk in the middle. I turned back to see a Prius two meters from me, unheard until that moment.

      So yeah, I see their point (marketing crap aside), but still, I don't think we need noise imposed by law. Just letting people getting used to it should be enough, as it was when cars first appeared on the street, for example.

    33. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by xaxa · · Score: 2

      I know people have no problem hearing the tyre noise from my bicycle as I approach, they often turn round, see that there's plenty of space for a bicycle to pass them, and continue.

      However, they can't hear it if there's noise from other cars' engines. But if there's that much background noise, I don't see how adding to it helps a blind person.

    34. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by xaxa · · Score: 1

      Last time I saw my blind friend he had a new white cane, with a sonar system built in to the top. It told him if there was an object ahead, and roughly what level it was (i.e. if it was something to trip over, walk into, or bang his head on).

    35. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Dan541 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I drive a diesel around the city all day every day. Pedestrians walk out in front of vehicles no matter now much noise they make.

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    36. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by leuk_he · · Score: 2

      Well first: i drive a prius.

      Only place where the silence of the car was a problem was driving at a camping site at very low speeds. Setting the airco fan to max fixes that enough.

      If they actually asked blind people they would know that bikes are a bigger problem for them. How about downloadable tunes for your bi-cycle?

    37. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by xaxa · · Score: 1

      You can see them in some European cities, probably the larger or more congested ones. Generally they're the tiny cars that take up half a parking space, or else delivery vans trying to make a company look "green".

      (A few cities have trolleybuses, which have overhead power lines, but there's clearly not been any effort to make the motors quiet on them. And they have professional drivers anyway.)

    38. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Odd. Ya know, I live in the middle of a fairly large town and I'd say it would be a huge CONVENIENCE if the cars were less noisy, not more.

      I'd say all proponents of this law should move next to an interstate and be interviewed a year from now whether they changed their mind.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    39. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by TheLink · · Score: 1

      if they have the right of way legally, it means that THEY LEGALLY HAVE THE RIGHT OF WAY.

      Yeah and they have the option to be dead right too.

      The laws of physics are not changed by "right of way" laws.

      --
    40. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      It sounds like you should fix your people before you ponder whether to fix your cars.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    41. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by vbraga · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I used to work in a neighborhood with a college (I don't remember if it was a college or a high school, right now) with a large number of blind people.

      Street crossing had a different kind of texture in the walkway. The traffic lights would make noises like "cross", "stop". While it was possible to cross it made a distinctive tone, changing it's pitch as time goes.

      It worked. Way better than blind people jaywalking and relying on car noises.

      --
      English is not my first language. Corrections and suggestions are welcome.
    42. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't imagine most drug dealers flush every time they hear an SUV or a truck pull up outside, sounds like a pretty poor business model.

    43. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by delinear · · Score: 2

      I wondered whether the cars could emit a sound that's not in the generally audible spectrum, but could be picked up by a hearing device. That way everyone (including the blind) can enjoy the benefit of a quieter city life, but crossing the road wouldn't be a risk, just pop in the hearing aid. Even better, using directional sound technology you could have a different sound depending on whether the car is approaching or moving away from your position, and maybe even a range of sounds to indicate speed - actually an enhacement to the existing noise that gives it some semantic meaning to the blind that helps them to determine, "okay, I hear a car but it's pretty far off and going slow or heading in the opposite direction, it's safe to cross now".

    44. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Noughmad · · Score: 1

      Every single object, mobile or immobile should emit a different tone constantly.

      In other words, Star Trek.

      --
      PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
    45. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by delinear · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I recently visited Italy and there, even where you are crossing in a specially designated area where pedestrians do have the right of way, the cars won't stop to let you cross unless you walk out in front of them. Coming from a country with a reasonably sensible approach to pedestrian crossings (if you're waiting it's your right of way and traffic almost always stops to let you cross here) the first few days were pretty terrifying, but literally everyone does it - when you see 80 year old grandmothers step out into traffic doing 40MPH you feel pretty silly for not wanting to do it, but the self preservation instinct is pretty hard to overrule. The first couple of days our only way of crossing a busy street was to find a local who was about to cross, wait for them to step out and quickly follow in their wake - we got a little braver after that but it still felt insane (and even crossing at pedestrian crossings that had traffic lights was touch and go - we met a tour guide who said, in the north of Italy, traffic lights are generally obeyed, in Rome they're more of a suggestion, and in the south they're purely decorative).

    46. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Rob+Kaper · · Score: 2

      Even with the motor running, a coasting car can be hard to hear.

      Making noise is the shittiest of workarounds and by no means a fix.

      Our local approach, now that's a solution: we build infrastructure for different types of traffic while minimizing yet clearly marking level crossings. There are virtually no busy roads without sidewalks within city limits where I live, most even have parallel bicycle lanes as well. I can safely frollick across town with earplugs in playing loud music: other than the designated crossings I simply don't share infrastructure with bikes or cars. And therefore am not at risk of running into them or vice versa in the first place.

    47. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by delinear · · Score: 1

      If cars could be made to make a sound that's off the audible scale for humans, the blind could pick this up with a special hearing device - cheaper and easier than radar/sonar, although they'd have to be pretty reliable as you wouldn't have an easy way of checking it was working without having a listening device of your own. This sounds like a reasonably cheap and effective way to please everyone, the blind and those who want some peace and quiet.

    48. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AMEN. I wonder what they'll want to do for deaf pedestrians now... put flashers on all cars?

    49. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by unity100 · · Score: 1

      italians are famous for their lack of respect for rules.

    50. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by JambisJubilee · · Score: 1

      And there's something really disingenuous about this stance from the blind. I know blind people that can tell by the sound of footsteps the specific person who's approaching them (on the street!). Can they really not hear the sound of tires on the road?

    51. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      I am thinking of it more in terms of rural roads. May be cars should have a sound button the driver could press on those roads to scare off deers.

      As for urban areas: yes, adding mandatory sound that cannot be turned off is absurd.

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    52. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by houghi · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Police and people driving Ambulances are talking about increasing the noise levels of their sirens because many people do not hear them. The reason is better sound insulation in cars.

      So on one hand manufacturers will be trying to reduce the sound inside, while the government will ask them to increase the sound outside so it can be heard inside.

      And this is just because of sound insulation. I am not talking about people walking around with iPads or having the music too loud.

      So I would suggest that there should be LESS sound coming from cars. That would mean less sound insulation. If all is quiet, special things will be picket up better.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    53. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A-Fucking-Men!

      Reducing noise pollution is one of the better benefits of these overpriced EVs, now the government wants to fuck that all up?

      Sorry, being blind is a handicap, not an excuse. And kids ignore noises all the time, especially when it's a parent telling them to do something or more often, NOT to do something...

    54. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apparently you haven't been almost run over by an electric car in a parking lot yet. I have. You can't hear them at all, and with all the random ways people drive about parking lots it's easy to miss them if they're coming up direclty behind you since they're so small too. Combine that with the fact that the drivers expect you to just automatically know that they are there (and get out of the way), it's a serious problem.

    55. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 3, Interesting

      +1 Harrison Bergeron.

      Really though, precisely how loud is NY City without auto noise? It might just be a rustle of footsteps, but fairly quiet and peaceful.

      Maybe it would stop crime because you can hear someone holler when a purse gets snatched.

      --
      My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
    56. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Fallen+Andy · · Score: 1

      Dead Wrong! Those of us who live in noisy (busy) cities react as much by noise as visuals... (almost got road-pizza(ed) a couple of years ago by a "silent" Toyota Prius on the road below Lycabettus Hill here in Athens Greece :-| ) Andy

    57. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      my 2002 cavalier idles at 630 rpm, you would never hear it coming. I've already got thousands of points.

    58. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by compro01 · · Score: 1

      I used to work in a neighborhood with a college (I don't remember if it was a college or a high school, right now) with a large number of blind people.

      Street crossing had a different kind of texture in the walkway. The traffic lights would make noises like "cross", "stop". While it was possible to cross it made a distinctive tone, changing it's pitch as time goes.

      It worked.

      Yes, because when the cross light/sound goes on, a forcefield pops up across the road, preventing some idiot yattering on their phone from going through the intersection and mowing down pedestrians.

      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    59. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by ToreTS · · Score: 1

      Knowing that you legally had the right of way isn't much of a consolation when you're sitting in a wheelchair.

    60. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by pipatron · · Score: 1

      If you're blind, you should probably not jump out in the street without first finding a safe place to do it. Car noise or not. Most bikes travel fast enough for a very unpleasant meeting.

      --
      c++; /* this makes c bigger but returns the old value */
    61. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Skater · · Score: 2

      Really, to be consistent, it should apply to all cars, not just electrics. Even with the motor running, a coasting car can be hard to hear.

      Totally disagree. When I was in grad school, the busses at the school had a diesel engine in the rear, making them pretty much impossible to hear approaching until it would be too late. Why are electric cars different? What makes blind people able to deal with busses like that but not electric cars?

    62. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Abstrackt · · Score: 1

      ... all you have to do is get your eardrums punctured.

      I can lend you this Justin Bieber CD I found in a paper bag on my doorstep.

      --
      They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance. - Terry Pratchett
    63. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Thing+1 · · Score: 1

      Wanna bet they'll continue to be allowed to drive silent vehicles, and we won't be able to?

      --
      I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
    64. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Thing+1 · · Score: 1

      Either it would be the brown noise, or it would piss off dogs...

      --
      I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
    65. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tyre? km? Are you a space alien?

    66. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Jeppe+Salvesen · · Score: 1

      Yknow, a hat (or similar) with a built-in GPS and a short-range radar might in fact be a killer app(liance) for the blind. Maybe for the earplug-zombies too. It's just a matter of detecting the walking pace of the hat-wearer by the GPS lock, and then fetching the buildings from google maps. With that information, detecting anything massive enough to be dangerous and getting dangerously close would be a cakewalk.

      Anyhow, you make an excellent point regarding losing an opportunity to quiet our cities. Maybe the cars can have a built-in mic that detects when to start making noise? It's simple enough: If there is noise in the area, the car needs to make some noise as well to be heard. (Up to a certain level, of course, we'd rather not have our cars engage in shouting matches)

      --

      Stop the brainwash

    67. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by vbraga · · Score: 2

      You can solve this mostly with a rising bollard when the light is red.

      Of course, no system is 100% idiot proof. If someone "mows down pedestrians" then they should be sued and suffer the consequences of this, util people learn that they should be attentive to the road while driving.

      --
      English is not my first language. Corrections and suggestions are welcome.
    68. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by bdparsley · · Score: 1

      May be cars should have a sound button the driver could press on those roads to scare off deers.

      And maybe they can put it on the steering wheel, right where the horn button usually goes. Although the deer around my place dont even move for that.

    69. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by drfireman · · Score: 1

      It's not an arms race. Once the cars are loud enough to hear on a quiet street, nobody needs them to get any louder. The problem is that everyone on the planet has grown up in an environment in which relative quiet means no car is coming. It doesn't matter one bit if the car sounds are drowned out. Nobody steps out into the street without looking just because it's really noisy and they can't tell if a car's coming or not. People used to do that, but they're all dead now.

      Tire noise is not always audible, certainly not above a light wind if the street is dry. Everyone who lives in the suburbs and goes for a walk occasionally knows this. Electric cars can make useful noises without being anywhere near as noisy as gas-powered cars.

      The issue here is not requiring everything that might hurt you to carry a warning. The issue is whether or not it's okay to have things that have carried warnings for the entire lifetime of everyone now living to suddenly stop doing so. It's not.

      Bicycle riders can indeed hurt you, but (a) they tend to be less fatal than cars when they strike pedestrians; (b) bicyclists are aware of the fact that they're inaudible (in fact, many have bells or horns); and (c) nobody on this planet has grown up in an environment in which bicycles always make loud noises. Should we be worried about defective noise makers on cars? Probably not if they're as rare as defective steering, defective drivers, etc.

    70. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by drfireman · · Score: 1

      The issue here isn't protecting people who act unreasonably, it's protecting people who act reasonably.

    71. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by drfireman · · Score: 1

      It's nonsense to say that tire noise is sufficient. Tire noise is quieter than engine noise, so if you rely entirely on tire noise, there will be circumstances (wind, distant lawnmower noises, etc.) in which the tire noise is not audible and engine noise would be. The bottom line is that making cars quieter violates reasonable expectations. Everyone who's grown up with cars knows how to tell the difference between a car coming, no car coming, and can't-tell. If you put a lot of cars out there that are much quieter than the quietest cars previously on the road, then people will inevitably sometimes think there's no car coming when in fact they can't tell.

      Also, it sounds like you've never had a pedestrian jump out in front of you from behind a parked car. It's easy to show that you can be driving 20km/hr and have no chance whatsoever of avoiding a pedestrian if they happen to run out just at the wrong time. Some of those pedestrians were going to get hit no matter what, but some of them might have heard engine noise.

    72. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Carewolf · · Score: 0

      If you were reasonable you would spend a quarter of a second to look up before crossing the street. No the entire point is to protect the irresponsible by providing them were the sensory input the refuse to acquire for themselves.

    73. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by operagost · · Score: 1

      We don't want to go all reductio ad absurdum here, do we? If we wanted to be really safe, we would set a speed limit of 5 MPH, require sirens and flashing lights on all vehicles, and require 360 degree wraparound rubber bumpers.
      Drivers are expected to be competent and aware. If they aren't, that's what we need to fix

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    74. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by operagost · · Score: 1

      I doubt it. In all the states I've lived in, pedestrians have the right of way IN A CROSSWALK. Obviously, if they're jaywalking it doesn't give you the right to commit manslaughter, but the survivors should be ticketed.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    75. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And while we are at it force all cars owners to have a buggy whip.

      What? They don't? I have a nice set in my bed room. Never know when they may come in handy in getting the, uh, last few drops out of it.

    76. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      "And maybe they can put it on the steering wheel" funny, but shallow. Horn is useful AFTER you saw a deer, not BEFORE deer became aware of the rapidly approaching 600 pound hammer.

      "Although the deer around my place dont even move for that."

      I always thought that the animals that die on the road and the animals that can correlate sound of the car with imminent death have different genes. What I am suggesting is that we should avoid dipping into the gene pool of the second kind.

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    77. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by ginbot462 · · Score: 1

      ... all you have to do is get your eardrums punctured.

      I can lend you this Justin Bieber CD I found in a paper bag on my doorstep.

      I assume that bag was on fire.

      --
      Atlas Shrugged : Thematic Story :: Battlefield Earth : Organized Religion
    78. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "As for urban areas: yes, adding mandatory sound that cannot be turned off is absurd."

      Sure...in urban areas, the thumping bass of rap blaring out is quite enough noise for anyone's car. Home windows rattle as it is when those bastards cruise on by...

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    79. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by ubercam · · Score: 1

      Really, huh? Last time I checked they still taught "FIRST look left, THEN look right, THEN cross the streets" to our kids, did they forgo that in your country?

      Unforunately that's not a universal rule. If people did that where I live, there wouldn't be many left to tell the tale. I've almost stepped out in front of a car before I got used to looking "the wrong way" first. BTW, I'm Canadian and I live in the UK. My wife has done the exact opposite in Canada and Germany. Luckily I was there to stop her and vice versa. "The left side's the right side and the right side's the wrong side" is the saying I think.

      The change in traffic handedness really screws people up. It doesn't take me long to get used to it while driving or as a passenger, but if I think about it for too long it really does my head in.

    80. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "Sorry, being blind is a handicap, not an excuse. "

      So, where were you with this argument when we were discussing possible legislation regarding website design requirements and the blind?

      I for one completely agree with you...

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    81. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "Dead Wrong! Those of us who live in noisy (busy) cities react as much by noise as visuals... (almost got road-pizza(ed) a couple of years ago by a "silent" Toyota Prius on the road below Lycabettus Hill here in Athens Greece :-| ) Andy"

      That's why I like my aftermarket pipes on my bike and my cars...

      I don't sneak up on anyone.

      That and I get better performance numbers.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    82. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by dwillden · · Score: 1

      I guess the blind are thus by your definition, unreasonable and irresponsible?

      The blind community is a big part of the group pushing for this.

      --
      I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
    83. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by dunsel · · Score: 1

      If I'm forced to make my electric vehicle loud I will do two things:
      1) Play some ANNOYING sound VERY LOUD
      2) Add a message which reads "Don't like what you hear? Repeal the ‘Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act of 2010’."

      I bike or walk whenever I can, I detest the vehicle noise my city is drowning in.

    84. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by drfireman · · Score: 1

      Everyone is irresponsible occasionally, and it's far from irrational to be irresponsible in this case. For the entirety of my life, I've never been surprised by a gas-powered car sneaking up on me, because they're noisy.

      You're also making a very bizarre and patently false assumption that pedestrians always know when to look. Perhaps you're only familiar with urban living? When I take my dog or my child for a walk, I need to know whenever a car is coming up behind me -- not just when I'm crossing a street, or at well-defined checkpoints, but on a continual basis. It's just not reasonable to tell me that I should continually swivel my head around every time I take a walk. Right now, when I hear a car coming up behind me, I turn around, decide if the driver is a threat, and take appropriate action. Fortunately, the most erratic drivers in my neighborhood don't drive electric cars yet. But that will change.

    85. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by dwillden · · Score: 1

      As long as the drivers obey the crosswalk laws. Cause nobody ever turns at intersections, or runs red lights. The those who can see, can see the car that's about to hit them. What do the deaf do?

      Where I live, every spring and fall we have multiple car versus pedestrian accidents in the mornings and evenings, when light conditions are marginal. Both parties almost always say they never saw the other. Most of these seem to occur in well marked cross walks. Silent cars just increase the danger to all pedestrians.

      --
      I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
    86. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by dwillden · · Score: 1

      What about drivers making legal right or left turns?

      Simply blocking the roads doesn't work. Making the offending vehicles slightly noisier makes far more sense than installing, maintaining and repairing expensive and complex hydraulic systems buried in the middle of busy roads, and then dealing with the lawsuits for the accidents caused by the bollards rising.

      --
      I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
    87. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by skids · · Score: 1

      "Totally disagree."

      How? You just agreed with me. If they are going to do this, they should be consistent, and not just pick on EVs and hybrids.

      I live in a rural area. I like it quiet. I'm not looking forward to the extra noise. However, if done correctly, cars could sense the external noise level and their own tire noise and only "rev" when needed, so maybe it would not be that horrible.

    88. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by psm321 · · Score: 1

      I'm confused... you like having your cars make low rumbling sounds that driver people crazy (in other posts), but don't like blaring bass? Is there a difference or is it more a case of it's ok when you do it? (For the record, I hate both kinds of low noise)

    89. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      I wonder if they do that in Texas as well...

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    90. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really, huh? Last time I checked they still taught "FIRST look left, THEN look right, THEN cross the streets" to our kids, did they forgo that in your country?

      I honestly don't get it. How is it safer for pedestrians if cars make noises? First, are there not traffic lights in your country? At least where it counts, i.e. where there's actually a chance to meet a car on the road? Are there no pedestrian crossing areas on your roads? Along with pedestrian traffic lights telling you when it's safe to walk? Are drivers in your country so reckless that they ignore those traffic lights that LOOKING ain't enough to cross the road safely, you have to listen?

      And most of all, are there still teenagers in your country that remove those iPod earphones from time to time from their ears?

      Not all towns have traffic lights, let alone lights for pedestrians. Only larger towns have thoses.

      Small towns sometimes don't even bother to paint crosswalk areas on the roads.

    91. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Lanforod · · Score: 1
      What about the hard of hearing and deaf who wear hearing aids? Last thing I want is hearing these annoying sounds. Could program them not to pick up these particular range of sounds, I guess. Another reason not to have a law adding more noise to a noisy world. Benefit for the blind, but a hazard for the Deaf. Sure would be nice to have quiet cities! PS. There is a lot more hard of hearing and Deaf than there are blind.

      Sounds to me kind of like the equivalent of the extremely annoying backup warning on trucks. Sometimes useful, yes, but more often, just annoying as heck. Most truck drivers honk as a warning as they start to back up anyways.

      Driving license tests should start to be aware of the quiet electric vehicles, and train people to be more careful around their environment, especially when driving at low speeds in an area with bikes and pedestrians, such as a parking lot.

      Deer? you're worried about deer? They don't move even if a freight train is bearing down on them!

    92. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least their trains run on time!

    93. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by bdparsley · · Score: 1
      I live in a pretty rural area; and i've had a few encounters with my antlered neighbors.

      From the numbers that get hit by tractor trailers down to motorcycles, I think they're all deaf to start with and no amount of road noise would cut it down. http://www.skinnymoose.com/deerchart.pdf has some accident stats if anyone is interesting. I like the part at the bottom where you can see that the IRS is still more likely to get you than a deer.

    94. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by box4831 · · Score: 1

      I imagine at least someone looks outside if they hear a car stop. A quiet car = no one looks. Which gives the entry team a few extra valuable moments.

      --
      Miller Lite tastes like water that's somehow managed to rot.
    95. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by DanseDeMorte · · Score: 1

      BS. I saw this type of behavior in Down Town Wisconsin Dells this summer. People would just start randomly crossing the road willy nilly and expect all traffic to stop on a dime for them. Including the semi driving the 30mph speed limit. If a city wants peds to cross a road like on purpose they should just close that road to vehicle traffic. Period. Just because some stupid idea got passed as a law does not mean that it was a sane, rational and needed law that needed to be made.

      --
      Trouble rather the tiger than the sage for to you kingdoms and their armies are mighty, but to him they are but toys.
    96. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      "I think they're all deaf to start with and no amount of road noise would cut it down."

      What about all other type of roadkill: hares, squirrels, skunks? Are they all deaf too?

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    97. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      bike messenger

      Shaddap. Just SHUT UP. It's bad enough for us cycists, there are already asshats out there who if they had their way would have us ride bikes that weigh 100 pounds for all the lights and signals and shit they'd want us to put on them, and I'm sure there's at least one 75 IQ senator out there who thinks there should be SEATBELTS on bicycles, too. We don't need some asshole clueless legislator deciding that bicycles "are too quiet and pose a safety hazard, they need to carry noise-making devices". So Shut. The. Fuck. Up.

    98. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Left, right, and then left again is how I was taught. And yes, it's how my kids are taught as well.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    99. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by kheldan · · Score: 1

      Hear, hear. I swear the pedestrians are taking lessons in common sense from the squirrels*: act suicidal and expect everyone to stop for you just because you're a pedestrian, and you can sue the fuck out of them if they hit you regardless of whether or not you were jaywalking.



      *I ride a bicycle all the time. Squirrels are all insane and suicidal; they'll turn around and run across the road in front of you when they're on the side of the road rather than run in the safe direction. Every. Single. Time.

      --
      Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
    100. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe in California, but in Massachusetts the pedestrian only has a right of way in an unprotected crosswalk (one without signals), corner-to-corner at an unprotected intersection, or a protected crosswalk whose signals are indicating "Walk". Anything else is jaywalking and while you can't hit them or assault/threaten them with the car, they do not have the right of way.

    101. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      We are talking about noise, what do you think the deaf do?

      And btw. where are you going with this? Lazyness is not a handicap. Those that suffer from sensory handicaps always has to be careful, they never had this luxery.

    102. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by icebike · · Score: 1

      Only if you insist on walking right smack down the middle of the drive lane.

      You over state your case. People driving in parking lots expect idiots to pop out from between any two random cars, and drive accordingly.

      Those who don't give a care if they run over a pedestrian were often as not the very same ones that pushed their cart right down the middle of the drive lane talking on their cell phones.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    103. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's just not reasonable to tell me that I should continually swivel my head around every time I take a walk.

      WTF?? (and I am not refering to the new department of the CIA)

      No, you don't have to swivel your head all the time. Only when you make sudden and unexpected movements onto the road. So, stop doing that, and teach your dog to stop doing it too. Anyway, I don't know about you, but I slow down when passing people walking along the road, especially if they have kids or pets. I slow down enough that I can ALWAYS break. The funny thing is: It is not just out of politeness, it is the law..

    104. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Indeed; most modern cars are pretty damned quiet. Mine's eight years old and I'm glad the starter won't engage when the engine's running, because a lot of times I'll think it's off when it isn't.

      Plus, there are local noise ordinances (actually misnamed loud music ordinances) that would allow the sound of a machine gun from your cartone, but not Led Zeppelin.

    105. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "I'm confused... you like having your cars make low rumbling sounds that driver people crazy (in other posts), but don't like blaring bass? Is there a difference or is it more a case of it's ok when you do it? (For the record, I hate both kinds of low noise)"

      My car didn't shake windows and it wouldn't bother you in your home 2 blocks away from the street like the thumping bass does.

      I never had anyone make a disgusted face when I drove by...as opposed to seeing people all get that look on their face when one of those extremely loud thumping machines comes down the street.

      I've often wondered about these thumping cars..do they have nothing but subwoofers? Do they not care at all about midrange or treble...hearing a singer? I guess often, it is nothing but the beat.

      Shaking the street for a mile is obnoxious, a well tuned exhaust (not necessarily that loud) is often a thing of pleasure for people hear..at least that has been the reactions I've gotten over the years when I drive around the French Quarter, etc....

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    106. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Just in case I have second thoughts about letting my eardrums being punctured?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    107. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Having a right doesn't mean jack if you're 120 pounds of meat meeting 1200 pounds of steel.

      I can so see the priest stand over his grave and say "If it's any consolation, the right was on his side..."

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    108. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by jbengt · · Score: 1

      Yeah, such a well-thought out law: Let's encourage defenseless pedestrians to step out in front of random, possibly incompetent or distracted drivers without thought and force the one with the momentum of 3,000 pounds of steel to screech to a halt.

    109. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 1

      Ok, Won't somebody please think of the Blind!!??
      Yeah. Why not equip the blind with the sensors that they need to detect large/fast moving objects instead of equipping all large moving objects with noise makers to be drowner out by other noise makers.

      Like what? Bionic eyes?

      That's a contemptible statement and you ought to be ashamed of yourself.

      --
      Drill baby drill - on Mars
    110. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by icebike · · Score: 1

      Like what? Bionic eyes?

      That's a contemptible statement and you ought to be ashamed of yourself.

      Yes like Bionic Eyes:
      http://www.geog.ucsb.edu/pgs/papers/applied1.pdf

      Why not a sensing cane, like this:
      http://www.ieeehtn.org/htn/index.php/Electronic_Blind_Mobility_Aid

      Why do you think enabling technology is contemptible?

      Please post back when you have actually lived a day as a blind person you Luddite fool. In the mean time STFU before a blind person actually hears you dissing technology they have been waiting for their entire life.

       

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    111. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Dputiger · · Score: 1

      Because given economies of scale, it's a lot easier and cheaper to build an inexpensive noise box than it is to equip all blind people with medical sensors that must somehow be calibrated to the needs of each individual *and* be able to interpret and discard false positives with virtually zero margin of error. Sure, in a big open field with a car driving towards you, it's easy to imagine a device that could detect it and warn you. Now imagine a device that can sort through the sounds and movement of people, potential signal interference, and the sound and movement of *other* traffic not directly in the path of the blind person. Our hypothetical device would almost certainly communicate audibly, which means using it requires an earpiece (further reducing a blind person's hearing), a battery, and possibly a wireless solution like Bluetooth. It must be intelligent enough to give a blind person cogent warnings that said person can take immediate action on--if an electric vehicle is approaching a red-lighted intersection more quickly than it ought, the device needs *some* way to determine between a vehicle that's braking and will stop clear of the individual at the appropriate time and a vehicle that *isn't* braking and will probably run the red light. Finally, in order to provide useful, safe information, your contraption needs to interface with traffic lights. Even if such precautions weren't needed in the boondocks, you'd want the blind people who live in major cities to know that while they're sacrificing hearing, they'll still be better protected. OR... You give a car a noisemaker.

    112. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 1

      Oh so now you're suddenly all concerned about the plight of the blind? Your "Ok, Won't somebody please think of the Blind!!?? Yeah. Why not equip the blind with..." comment wasn't being sarcastic?

      Yeah, right!

      Asshole.

      --
      Drill baby drill - on Mars
    113. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by infinite9 · · Score: 1

      This is actually an old story. Originally marketing and PR firms noted that cars produce distinctive engine noise that promote the label and with electric cars this would be gone, hence they worked on the idea of electric cars making marketing driving noise and seeking excuses to force it on customers.

      ooooooohh, you're a genius! I'm replacing my car horn with a really loud "RENT THIS AD SPACE!" Then, someone could rent the space and replace it with "DRINK COCA-COLA!" I could charge buckets of money each month! Then I could have a lobbyist bribe members of congress to pass a law requiring everyone to have it as a safety feature (think of the children). Of course, we'd also need a device to make sure you're honking the horn enough. Or maybe charge per honk.

      I'm beginning to think maybe the Amish got it right.

      --
      Disconnect your television. Do your own research. Draw your own conclusions. They're probably lying. Don't be a sheep.
    114. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the entirety of my life, I've never been surprised by a gas-powered car sneaking up on me, because they're noisy.

      That's only really true when they're accelerating, and at speeds greater than 15 or 20mph it becomes moot anyway, because by the time you can hear the car and look around, you've already been run over. Not to mention many activities performed on roads are loud enough to drive our gas car noise already - bikes, roller skates, joggers with headphones on (also a bad idea, but they do it). This law would protect a very very narrow class of silent but deadly (to themselves) irresponsible walkers.

      When I take my dog or my child for a walk, I need to know whenever a car is coming up behind me

      Which side of the road are you on? A car coming up from behind you is on the opposite side of the street if you're walking legally. Unless you're flailing about in the middle of the road, there's nothing to worry about. If you do cross the street, you need to be looking where you're going.

      This is basic street safety, whether urban, suburban, or rural.

    115. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Dan541 · · Score: 1

      I guess the blind are thus by your definition, unreasonable and irresponsible?

      If they are trying to cross the road then, yes. Just as they would be if they attempted to drive a car, fly a plane ect.

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    116. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by DadLeopard · · Score: 1

      Make that noise ultrasonic so only the deer hear it! The Farmer with the the tractor and the Hay wagon is going to pull out in front of you no matter how much noise you are making!

    117. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shoot everyone that makes douchebag comments like yours - natural selection at work.

    118. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by vlueboy · · Score: 1

      Even better: how about 'It should apply to all OBJECTS'. Every single object, mobile or immobile should emit a different tone constantly.

      Great! I'd finally mastered LED light-pollution by learning to live and code while blindfolded.

      Now this!

    119. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by vlueboy · · Score: 1

      NYC's airspace was noticeably quieter because the FAA killed all air traffic immediately after September 11th, for about a week.

      It was the perfect way to prove by absence that we've gotten too used to daily traffic/news-copters and a the boom of two or three planes a day.

      There's also a far train whistling around 1 in the morning. After a while, you don't consciously notice these things for weeks, till you visit some other town.

    120. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by Skater · · Score: 1

      Sorry. You seemed to be in support of noisemakers. That's what I was disagreeing with.

    121. Re:Yeah i was thinking about that. by dwillden · · Score: 1

      Where am I going with this? Simple, the blind, when at a cross walk, listen for the chirping walk signal from the direction they are wishing to travel. That tells them it is legally safe to proceed, then then use their ears to listen for approaching vehicles to determine if it is really safe to do so. The legally safe does not mean it really is safe, just more likely to be, and they still rely on their hearing to determine if it is really safe.

      The Blind community is big part of the push for noise makers on these cars because when running entirely on batteries at low speeds they are totally silent, and thus a great risk to those who rely on their hearing.

      The deaf can use their eyes like the rest of us. The blind do not have that luxury, they have to rely on a less capable sense, one that is easily washed out by city noise, and silent cars do not help them one bit.

      --
      I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
  3. Your not fooling anyone. by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

    With the recorded sound of a blown 454.

    --
    John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
  4. MUST PROTECT THE STUPID! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    They're squishy and walk into traffic alot.

    1. Re:MUST PROTECT THE STUPID! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ...alot.

      You're welcome for the protection.

    2. Re:MUST PROTECT THE STUPID! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Blind people you fool. What about them, huh?

    3. Re:MUST PROTECT THE STUPID! by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Pedestrian crossing points with audible signals telling you when it's safe to go. Why, they don't have that in your country yet?

      Frankly, is it safe NOW for a blind person to "listen for traffic" and then cross a street? Be honest.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re:MUST PROTECT THE STUPID! by hawguy · · Score: 2

      Ignoring the visually impaired pedestrians (which another poster has already pointed out), a distracted pedestrian/bicyclist is not necessarily a stupid one, and probably doesn't deserve to be culled from the herd by silent electric cars.

      More than once I've been startled by a silent Prius pulling out from a parking space in front of me. A little noise might make walking through parking lots a bit safer.

    5. Re:MUST PROTECT THE STUPID! by EmperorOuk · · Score: 2

      Most accidents where the silence of the car is an issue apparently occur in parking lots and on driveways onto streets. It's not about crossing streets, it's about situations where cars move in places where pedestrians usually have priority. That does leave blind people in the lurch.

    6. Re:MUST PROTECT THE STUPID! by bzipitidoo · · Score: 1

      Maybe someday crossings will be obsolete. It will all be bridged.

      --
      Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
    7. Re:MUST PROTECT THE STUPID! by Skidborg · · Score: 2

      All you need is one overly noisy vehicle (I'm looking at you, motorcycles) and every other vehicle becomes effectively silent and deadly. So not only will electric vehicles have to be mandated to have a sound, how loud it is will have to be legislated as well.

      --
      Supporter of the +1 Over Dramatic mod option. In memory of apk.
    8. Re:MUST PROTECT THE STUPID! by dbIII · · Score: 1

      It's now a 40km/h zone in my street for that exact reason - drunks that run into the street to try to wave down taxis and go squish.

    9. Re:MUST PROTECT THE STUPID! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      pedestrians NEVER have priority!

      150pound pedestrian vs. 2000 pound vehicle.... they will NEVER win...

      As a pedestrian... i know i'm damm sure paying attention to the large moving objects speeding around... it's a high priority not to be smashed.

      Oh sure... the driver could be at fault... fat lot of good that does me when i'm dead..

    10. Re:MUST PROTECT THE STUPID! by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      pedestrians NEVER have priority!

      150pound pedestrian vs. 2000 pound vehicle.... they will NEVER win...

      As a pedestrian... i know i'm damm sure paying attention to the large moving objects speeding around... it's a high priority not to be smashed.

      Oh sure... the driver could be at fault... fat lot of good that does me when i'm dead..

      I think you misunderstand the meaning of priority. The idea is that in places where they do it is the responsibility of the less vulnerable to give way to the vulnerable users. That's why its generally safer to cross at a pedestrian crossing.

    11. Re:MUST PROTECT THE STUPID! by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Right when we all get flying cars.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    12. Re:MUST PROTECT THE STUPID! by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Funny

      Care to tell me what a blind person is doing alone in a parking lot? Looking for his car?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    13. Re:MUST PROTECT THE STUPID! by houghi · · Score: 2

      Walking from the bus stop to the store entrance.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    14. Re:MUST PROTECT THE STUPID! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://www.jordaner.com
      In outline, michael jordan shoes are current for little players. It is undeniable that are well designed for basketball players and the panel members would better clothes the sports shoes they bestow for. They can wear Jordan shoes when the play basketball and never fear about the luxurious shoes. Anyhow, it proved that air jordans are any people who discover The popularity of extensive Jordan shoes, it is unquestionable that it will be more common. Many Jordan shoes suppliers now present general Jordan shoes at blanket estimate will be good newscast for his devotion to garb Air Jordan 22 shoes when he can to absorb more people to buy.

      http://www.jordaner.com

    15. Re:MUST PROTECT THE STUPID! by characterZer0 · · Score: 1

      Maybe someday everybody driving 3000 pound vehicles in public places will be obsolete.

      --
      Go green: turn off your refrigerator.
    16. Re:MUST PROTECT THE STUPID! by pipatron · · Score: 1

      I think the issue here is that the blind people would like to be able to pay attention to the cars as well. I'm not sure that increasing the noise level for everyone after finally having cars that doesn't pollute our "soundscape" is the best idea to solve it.

      --
      c++; /* this makes c bigger but returns the old value */
    17. Re:MUST PROTECT THE STUPID! by kehren77 · · Score: 1

      Isn't that what the dog is for?

    18. Re:MUST PROTECT THE STUPID! by BJ_Covert_Action · · Score: 1

      Pedestrian crossing points with audible signals telling you when it's safe to go. Why, they don't have that in your country yet?

      I live in a relatively small college town in California. We just started implementing these at intersections when they get redone. A week and a half ago, while walking home from the bars, I saw one of my fellow drunks talking to the talking traffic signal pole.

    19. Re:MUST PROTECT THE STUPID! by shadowrat · · Score: 1

      possibly. blind people do RIDE in cars.

    20. Re:MUST PROTECT THE STUPID! by hawguy · · Score: 1

      You mean something like this?

      http://www.cent-21.com/laws/exhaust-us.htm

    21. Re:MUST PROTECT THE STUPID! by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 1

      And if you come to Las Vegas, you'd swear they were driving them too.

      --
      Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
    22. Re:MUST PROTECT THE STUPID! by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Then move the bus stop closer to the store entrance so he doesn't have to walk once through the parking lot. Something that should have happened in the first place, it's not like the whole deal is safe or convenient for ANYONE, or adding anything beneficial at all.

      Gee, what countries do you all live in? That's the standard here (there's a reason why I go shopping using public transport, I have to haul my stuff less far).

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    23. Re:MUST PROTECT THE STUPID! by Skidborg · · Score: 1

      Which would be fine and dandy if they bothered to enforce those laws with any kind of stringency. Also, technically speaking, an artificial engine noise that does not run through the muffler system would probably be exempt from those laws.

      --
      Supporter of the +1 Over Dramatic mod option. In memory of apk.
    24. Re:MUST PROTECT THE STUPID! by xenapan · · Score: 0

      Dead? Chances are if the electric motor is the only thing running, you would be hit at at best 15mph which is basically the issue here since we are talking about parking lot speeds. Not some idiot ignoring a red do not walk sign in the intersection because he can't hear a car coming and you in your EV at 35mph. This is a much bigger problem for the drivers than it is for pedestrians as they are the ones that will be hit paying for insurance/lawsuit etc. Not to mention the possibilities of perfectly healthy (not blind or deaf) scammers getting "hit" so they can drop lawsuits on people (if you have an EV you gotta have money!)

      For the record I want my car to have TIE fighter laser sounds (pew pew!) that or the legalese explaining why these sounds are coming from my car. "This engine noise brought to you by bill ___. Electric vehicles are now legally required to emit blah blah blah"

      --
      insert funny sig here
    25. Re:MUST PROTECT THE STUPID! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It constantly surprises me how the same people who argue for security in depth in the digital world are completely ignorant of applications in the digital world. If defense in depth is an important concept in the digital world, do you think it might just apply to the real world too?

      Also, it would be interesting (but likely impossible) to study how many near-misses don't occur because of auditory cues. It's easy to give anecdotal evidence that some near-misses were only misses because of auditory cues, and how in some cases auditory cues wouldn't help, but I wonder how often someone avoids a dangerous situation because of auditory cues, and probably doesn't even realize it.

    26. Re:MUST PROTECT THE STUPID! by infinite9 · · Score: 1

      Care to tell me what a blind person is doing alone in a parking lot? Looking for his car?

      Blind people drive all the time. You should know this. Ever seen the braille between the lanes? When blind people drive, they open the door and drag their fingers on the ground. Why else would they have braille on drive-up ATM machines?

      --
      Disconnect your television. Do your own research. Draw your own conclusions. They're probably lying. Don't be a sheep.
    27. Re:MUST PROTECT THE STUPID! by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Funnier than that is St John's Hospital here in Springfield. The elevator buttons in the parking garage are marked in Braille, but the elevator buttons in the hospital itself DON'T have braille.

    28. Re:MUST PROTECT THE STUPID! by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      So THAT's what the things between the lanes in the US are! And here I was, wondering if they are sponsored by the tyre industry to increase the wear.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  5. Just like ring tones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    all the cool noises would cost extra.

    then you'd have to root your car to get the noises you want

    Mine will say "boom chug a luga boom chug a luga boom"

  6. Perfect solution by Centurix · · Score: 1

    Get one of those tail-pipes that goes Woooo! Woooo!

    --
    Task Mangler
    1. Re:Perfect solution by oldspewey · · Score: 1

      The actual recorded sound or the Bubb Rubb version?

      --
      If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
    2. Re:Perfect solution by wooferhound · · Score: 1

      Why cant you just use the Horn ?

      --
      We are Dead Stars looking back Up at the Sky
    3. Re:Perfect solution by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      Because where I live honking is strictly forbidden except in absolute emergency situations to reduce noise pollution. Duh.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re:Perfect solution by hawguy · · Score: 1

      Why cant you just use the Horn ?

      Because you can't always predict when a pedestrian doesn't see you and is going to step out in front of you. If it was always possible to know when a pedestrian was going to do so, then you wouldn't need the horn, just apply the brakes.

    5. Re:Perfect solution by delinear · · Score: 1

      It is where I live too. That doesn't stop absolutely everyone using their horn to indicate that they're angry, or that they're waiting outside to pick someone up, or that they're leaving someone's house and think it's an appropriate way to say goodbye, or they've seen someone they know by the roadside or in another vehicle and think it's an appropriate way to say hello... If they use it already in all of those situations then I think "Hey, my car is about to plough into you at speed" seems like a genuine use.

  7. Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that is by kannibal_klown · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Obviously, the below statements do not take into consideration those that are visually impaired. But that final point (Road Noise) probably already handles most of that.

    I'm sorry, but I never trust my ears when deciding whether to cross the street. Even if I'm in a fairly quiet suburban road off away from the main streets and such, I always look. And you want to know what? I learned to do that at a really young age.

    If you're an adult, you should know better. I see adults cross the street without looking while on the phone and not even notice me beeping at them. And this was back when I drove a beat up car that sounded like a Boeing 747.

    As for kids, I'm sorry to say but a lot are either stupid or their parents are doing a really poor job raising them. I've seen the whole "chase the ball into traffic" scenario when they SEE the cars coming and assume that magic fairy dust will make the SUV go from 25-to-zero in less than 3 feet. Often times these kids are really old enough to know better: by the time your kid reaches 10+ years old you really should've educated them to not do that.

    Besides, lastly but not least... unless the car is accelerating the biggest noise is the road noise (pavement vs vulcanized rubber). Last I checked, electric cars don't solve this problem. If you're relying on Engine noise to determine if a car is coming, you're already fairly screwed.

  8. Chitty Chitty Bang Bang by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylNwSv6c7m0 What, were you expecting the ST NG Enterprise or something?

    --
    Life is not for the lazy.
    1. Re:Chitty Chitty Bang Bang by badkarmadayaccount · · Score: 1
      --
      I know tobacco is bad for you, so I smoke weed with crack.
  9. Parking lots by devleopard · · Score: 4, Interesting

    More than once I've had to side step quickly to avoid a Prius in a store parking lot - I'm used to audio cues of my environment, and they just weren't paying attention while backing out.

    Sound-makers on Prius and others is already being done in Japan

    --
    The best thing about a boolean is even if you are wrong, you are only off by a bit.
    1. Re:Parking lots by vgerclover · · Score: 1

      Exactly, you are used to the noise of the engine. You'll get used to oder cues.

    2. Re:Parking lots by Compaqt · · Score: 1

      >Exactly, you are used to the noise of the engine. You'll get used to oder cues.

      I'm trying to figure out if that was "other" or "odor" you were trying to say, and if the latter, awaiting our forthcoming "ring-smell" overlords with trepidation.

      --
      I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
    3. Re:Parking lots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      in this case, those include being hit by a car

    4. Re:Parking lots by Renraku · · Score: 1

      Parking lots are yield to pedestrians pretty much everywhere, if the signs say it or not. It's the driver's responsibility to yield to pedestrians since they SHOULD be driving pretty slowly anyway. Yet I see people doing 30+ in parking lots sometimes. I know if someone stepped out in front of them, the car wouldn't have time to react. Of course people should look both ways before crossing, but more and more people just wander around like lemmings because their cell phones are secured firmly to their skulls.

      --
      Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
    5. Re:Parking lots by CAIMLAS · · Score: 4, Insightful

      More than once I've had to side step quickly to avoid a Prius in a store parking lot - I'm used to audio cues of my environment, and they just weren't paying attention while backing out.

      I call bullshit on this.

      In a busy parking lot, someone backing up quickly is going to be mostly inaudible regardless of the vehicle involved - and either way, your ability to respond is roughly the same. (And with a Prius, at least you'd probably survive the impact.)

      I hardly see how it being a Prius makes any difference. I've seen people back up into others walking behind their vehicle - hop in, quickly turn the ignition and then quickly throw into reverse. There's no consideration for others; people go myopic.

      It's not going to do shit if you're in the vehicle, driving. You can sometimes not hear the large truck next to you due to road noise, never mind a Prius.

      The fact is, Prius drivers (apparently) have little to no respect for the others who share their environment. (This goes for SUV drivers, too, btw.) "Oh, we'll just zip out quickly because we can, and I looked in my rear view mirror about 10 seconds ago when i got in the vehicle" is demonstrative of their mentality.

      I've said it once and I'll say it again, because it still (mostly) applies: there's a reason we've only got one 'reverse' gear. GO SLOW. The same applies to the asinine regulations requiring reverse cameras in newly made vehicles (to the tune of another $200 to the purchaser).

      I wonder how much it'd cost to buy a vehicle if we could get one with "just the road safety features invented in the past 50 years, please". I would not be surprised if stripping all the extraneous stuff out (dangerous-to-children air bags, ass heaters, electric windows, thermostats, etc.) resulted in a $25k vehicle costing less than $20k, and a $45k one less than 35k (assuming it's not $45k simply due to said luxury items).

      Imagine what that would save the environment. (Here's an idea: "Imagine" what a city without automotive sounds would be like.)

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    6. Re:Parking lots by thepainguy · · Score: 1

      This happened to me just today. I heard the engine turn off and figured he was parked so I walked in front of him just as he started off (with a startlingly quiet whirring sound). And no, I didn't realize it was a Prius until it went past me.

    7. Re:Parking lots by PIC16F628 · · Score: 1

      Here in India, most cars have reversing horns. The moment you go into reverse gear, a musical bell starts (it has a far lower volume than a normal horn). Extremely effective. Especially if there are children behind the car that you cannot see in your rear view mirror.

    8. Re:Parking lots by Macman408 · · Score: 1

      I commute by bike, and I can always hear a Prius (or Highlander or Camry or Lexus hybrid). They have a distinctive high-pitched whine from the high voltage electronics that's hard to miss. Unless of course, you're in a noisy environment, in which case adding more noise to the mix is NOT the solution...

      In any case, of the people I've known to get hit by cars, and the accidents I have witnessed, exactly none would have been prevented with a little extra noise. Either the pedestrian was too distracted or thought that the driver knew to yield to them, and the driver didn't notice the pedestrian. If backing out is a particular problem, maybe backing cameras/sensors are the solution - but I've never known somebody to get seriously injured in a parking lot like that.

      As for blind people, it's certainly true that any car might be hard to hear when coasting. However, last I checked, it's the driver's responsibility to stop for the pedestrian. And most of the "bell the hybrid" proposals only apply under 10 or 15 mph, above which tire noise is more apparent - and below which, the potential of life-threatening injury is fairly low. My proposal: Let he who hits a pedestrian be punished - and let the rest of us have our quiet cars and quiet streets. I know that my car is quiet - so I'm always keeping an eye out for pedestrians in pedestrian-heavy areas like parking lots or airports. And even if the pedestrian hears me - or if my car sounds like (or is) a Harley and they still don't hear me - it's still my fault if I hit them. Adding a noisemaker to cars isn't going to solve any real problems.

    9. Re:Parking lots by CyberDragon777 · · Score: 1

      Fun fact:
      The Prius actually has a reverse warning beep to alert people.

      The problem:
      It is INSIDE the car! So the driver gets an annoying beep, while pedestrians don't hear a thing...

      --
      We both said a lot of things that you are going to regret.
    10. Re:Parking lots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      either full of horse shit or uninhabited

      also electric windows and thermostats are safety features when outside temp is under 269 K without them you wouldn't see much after 2 minutes or so
      of course not really necessary in Florida tho

    11. Re:Parking lots by Stele · · Score: 1

      The fact is, Prius drivers (apparently) have little to no respect for the others who share their environment.

      The Prius is probably so full of smug the driver can't see out the back that well.

    12. Re:Parking lots by blueg3 · · Score: 1

      Lots of people in my town back up in parking lots without looking, so I have a fair bit of experience here. In general, most cars are basically silent when they're backing up at low speeds.

    13. Re:Parking lots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It makes all of the difference. You can hear most vehicles running while idling and/or see some activity at the tailpipe...vibration or steam escaping.

      You can't see a small child standing behind your vehicle...period. Those backup cameras will be a real boon...especially in neighborhoods where children still play outside.

      Ass heaters, electric windows, and thermostats ...what are you on about?! Quit buying the top of the line model. Sheesh.

    14. Re:Parking lots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've said it once and I'll say it again, because it still (mostly) applies: there's a reason we've only got one 'reverse' gear. GO SLOW.

      The car I drive actually has 2 reverse gears. Does that mean I can go faster?

      Regarding the Prius ... I would say that I too have been walking in a parking lot and been surprised to see a Prius pulling out when there is no audible noise coming from the vehicle. It is surprising how much of our information is derived from sound, even if it is just background noise.

    15. Re:Parking lots by Have+Brain+Will+Rent · · Score: 1

      I get why you're bothered by this but I have to say pedestrians are at least as much at fault in these situations. I can't count the number of times I've been backing out of a spot, i.e. already in motion, and a pedestrian in the lot will just come up and walk behind my moving vehicle expecting me to stop (which I do). Then there are the ones who don't realize you aren't backing out to leave but are just straightening up in the spot - so first they head to go around the front of the car then when they see you shift direction they go to move around the back... geez I mean what the hell is so important in Home Depot/WalMart/Safeway that they can't stop for two frickin seconds? When I'm walking in a lot I make a point of stopping and letting drivers complete their manoeuvre before I move on.

      It's like the guys who stand with one foot (or both) off the curb waiting for the light to change and then start racing across when the cross traffic light goes red but before their light goes green... slow the frick down - there's nothing that important unless you're dying and getting to the hospital on foot! Consider me to have made similar complaints about drivers and cyclists.

      --
      The tyrant will always find a pretext for his tyranny - Aesop
    16. Re:Parking lots by Have+Brain+Will+Rent · · Score: 1

      The fact is, Prius drivers (apparently) have little to no respect for the others who share their environment.

      This is off-topic and just venting but one of the most dishonest guys I was ever forced to deal with drove a Prius (not that the make is relevant). He was was so proud of the fact that he was saving the planet for his kids... yeah they'll grow up into a greener world where nobody can trust anybody else. What a dick.

      --
      The tyrant will always find a pretext for his tyranny - Aesop
    17. Re:Parking lots by jonpublic · · Score: 1

      More than once I've had to side step quickly to avoid a Prius in a store parking lot - I'm used to audio cues of my environment, and they just weren't paying attention while backing out.

      I call bullshit on this.

      I call bullshit on you calling bullshit. You try walking around a hippy college town grocery store parking lot. Odds are you will have to roll to dodge a hybrid car or two. If the car is making noise, you get a bonus to your dodge. That bonus is the difference between taking no damage or 6d6 and having to make a health roll to stay out of the hospital.

  10. Arcade by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Every different colour of car should make a different 80's arcade style sound effect.

  11. Star Trek:TNG theme for me... by LaminatorX · · Score: 1

    ...cuz that's hoe I roll.

  12. Hell, NO! by Stormwatch · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So here we are on the verge of winning the war against noise pollution, and those motherfuckers WANT cars to be noisy?

    1. Re:Hell, NO! by Man+On+Pink+Corner · · Score: 1

      No kidding. I'm sure the law will end up requiring beepers that can be heard 2000 feet away, just like the ones that supposedly keep people from being accidentally backed over by garbage trucks.

    2. Re:Hell, NO! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or the seizure lights they force to be put on top of school busses, aimed to spread the epileptic episodes to anyone in any direction of the vehicle?

    3. Re:Hell, NO! by interkin3tic · · Score: 2, Funny

      So here we are on the verge of winning the war against noise pollution, and those motherfuckers WANT cars to be noisy?

      Unless electric cars don't have horns, or don't have car alarms, we're nowhere close.

      Speaking of, I would be in favor of legislation banning car alarms. A few cities have tossed around that idea before, but got shot down by the car alarm industry, if it were to gain traction at a national level, I'm guessing certain radio personalities and certain cable news networks would cast it as "Government bails out car thieves."

      I'd also favor regulating horns. I think fining people $5 every time they honk within city limits would be justified, but I'd settle for limiting cabbies to three honks a month.

    4. Re:Hell, NO! by EmperorOuk · · Score: 1
      From the study linked to from the article:

      A variety of crash factors were examined to determine the relative incidence rates of HEVs versus ICE vehicles in a range of crash scenarios. For one group of scenarios, those in which a vehicle is slowing or stopping, backing up, or entering or leaving a parking space, a statistically significant effect was found due to engine type. The HEV was two times more likely to be involved in a pedestrian crash in these situations than was an ICE vehicle.

      If you could half the amount of accidents hybrids get into in these situations by adding noise emitters, don't you think it would be worth it?

    5. Re:Hell, NO! by __aagmrb7289 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No. And really? What accidents? What factors are taken into consideration? Will people get used to cars that aren't so loud, and thus hear the tires and the sound of movement? Or does it even matter, since half the people are running around with their iPods blasting as loud as they can be? This article is B.S. - it doesn't address even half of the concerns, situations and problems. And it's a rehash that's being repeated every two or three months like someone has some sort scheduled gagging session. "Legislating car noise - news @ 11" x infinity

    6. Re:Hell, NO! by superdave80 · · Score: 1

      I think fining people $5 every time they honk within city limits would be justified

      So, you'd fine me for hitting my horn when someone is about to hit me/pull out in front of me/move into my lane and hit me/etc....? Do you know what the horn is there for?

    7. Re:Hell, NO! by interkin3tic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So, you'd fine me for hitting my horn when someone is about to hit me/pull out in front of me/move into my lane and hit me/etc....? Do you know what the horn is there for?

      I said it would be justified, yes. If there were a magical way to collect $5 every time someone honked without, say, requiring everyone to put a box in their car that reported the number of honks, or something like that, I would be for that. I can't think of a good way to do that without invading everyone's privacy with an inefficient system that would just be a waste of money.

      If you're honking to avoid a collision, $5 isn't going to be a concern. If you're honking because you're angry or because you're too lazy to get out of your car and knock on the door, yeah, $5 is a small price to pay for annoying everyone in earshot.

      Anyway, everyone knows that horns are there for those situations, but 90% of the time are used for non-emergency situations. I stopped short of suggesting they should be banned altogether.

    8. Re:Hell, NO! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      and those motherfuckers WANT cars to be noisy?

      More like they want to slow the adoption of hybrid/electrics until they are poised to make enough profit.

    9. Re:Hell, NO! by pckl300 · · Score: 1

      Ridiculous. I shouldn't have to pay $5 every time I need to ward off some idiot that's changing lanes without looking. Just today, I had to do that twice.

      --
      In the beginning, there was null.
    10. Re:Hell, NO! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Although impossible now, the best way to do it (in hindsight) is to make the horn cost money per honk (i.e. use something like those air-cans that will eventually wear out instead of whatever it is horns use now).

    11. Re:Hell, NO! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Speaking of, I would be in favor of legislation banning car alarms. A few cities have tossed around that idea before, but got shot down by the car alarm industry

      srsly? - car alarms still make noise rather than just texting their owner - why?

    12. Re:Hell, NO! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd say, allow car alarms, but make legislation enforcing that if one goes of at 3AM, the car owner has to be near the car within 60 seconds, or else the car gets toed away. If the owner isn't near his car within 60 seconds, the car alarm is pointless anyway.

    13. Re:Hell, NO! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      C'mon, you should know "loud pipes save lives".

      I say, for every motorcyclist that has been ticketed for noise pollution, this gives them a way to fight it in court.

    14. Re:Hell, NO! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In India (and probably other places), they are supposed to honk at every intersection and blind turn, to announce their impending arrival. Imagine how that sounds...

    15. Re:Hell, NO! by djmurdoch · · Score: 1

      If that was the only solution, maybe. Another suggestion would be to limit the maximum noise a vehicle could make. Then hybrids wouldn't stand out, and pedestrians would be able to hear them.

    16. Re:Hell, NO! by delinear · · Score: 1

      Because most car owners don't care that their alarms are annoying everyone nearby if it means they don't have to get off their arse and go investigate. Better to inconvenience the other 50 people in earshot. I heard that regulations in Denmark mean that car and house alarms can only sound for a maximum amount of time (30 seconds I think) before cutting out, and possibly only a certain number of times within a time limit. I've often been awake in bed at 3am listening to a neighbour's house alarm sounding continuously for a couple of hours because they're on holiday and can't shut it off and wondered what house prices are like in Denmark.

    17. Re:Hell, NO! by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      I wish I could charge my neighbors across the street from me for honking their horn. They have people stop by at 10pm or 11pm to pick someone up. You'd think at that hour of the night they'd walk up to the door or use a cell phone to call to say they're there. Nope. They honk. Loudly and repeatedly. And they'll keep honking until the person they're waiting for comes out. Extremely annoying.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    18. Re:Hell, NO! by Phoenixlol · · Score: 1

      Exactly. And I shouldn't have to pay $5 every time I see a friend on the sidewalk.

    19. Re:Hell, NO! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Totally. Why should I have to pay an extra $5 every time I see an attractive prostitute?

    20. Re:Hell, NO! by __aagmrb7289 · · Score: 3, Informative

      I know that normally, this being Slashdot, you can say "read the..." and know, with confidence, that you are scoring a well deserved point - even if you didn't bother to do so yourself. Sorry, bud, but let's look at that source article. Here are some choice quotes:

      "The purpose of the study is to compare the crash experience of two different types of vehicles; it is not to make national estimates of problem size. The small sample size used in this study remains as a limitation towards conducting further analysis. Incidence rates provided in this report should be interpreted with caution due to the small sample size. Future analysis using larger sample size would provide better estimate of the problem size."

      "This analysis was conducted on a total of 8,387 HEVs and 559,703 ICE vehicles that met the selection criteria. A total of 77 and 3,578 pedestrians were involved in crashes with HEVs and ICE vehicles, respectively. A total of 48 and 1,862 bicyclists were involved in crashes with HEVs and ICE vehicles, respectively."

      Okay, so some important questions that need to be answered, and are not (I mentioned some of these in my first post):

      1. How many people were hurt?
      2. Were people being distracted by something at the time of the accident?
      3. Are there any other external factors that were controlled for? (the list of controls are extremely poor, including things like location, and time of day, but not weather, ACTUAL lighting conditions, busy-ness of the location, time of week, etc.)

      Point is, the study authors recognize their study is crap - they suggest a good study be conducted based on their evidence - that's IT. There isn't anything here to base a stupid new policy on. This is why politicians are rightly made fun of. This is why reasonable people sneer at shit like this, and get pissed when it actually passes. "Think of the pedestrian" you say - well, I say "Think. Period."

    21. Re:Hell, NO! by BJ_Covert_Action · · Score: 1

      I think fining people $5 every time they honk within city limits would be justified, but I'd settle for limiting cabbies to three honks a month.

      Well that's fucking stupid. I ride a motorcycle. One of the fun things about riding a motorcycle is that just about every other motorist on the road likes to pretend you don't exist. So 90% of the time, and about 99% of the time in crowded places like cities, most of the motorcycling experience sums up to, "making sure other people know you exist so they don't run over you." Even in good weather, great visibility, and broad daylight, I have retards regularly change lanes into me without checking their blindspots to see I am there. I have folks fly up on my tail and, often, only avoiding rear-ending my bike by slamming on their brakes, and I can't count how many people make turns across unprotected intersections while I am crossing at a perpendicular.

      In all of these situations, I have to maneuver my bike around and act quick to keep from being someone's hood ornament. I accept that. I don't begrudge it. But I do use my horn whenever I can get my finger on the button. A quick and loud beep beep is usually enough to make most drivers aware that they are about to run me over. They can then hold off on their ill-checked maneuver until I get by them or whatever is necessary to clear the way. The point is, on a motorcycle, having a horn is a great thing. It is a wonderful thing. It has definitely contributed to saving my life once or twice. Charging me $5 for using my horn inside city limits would do little more than convince me that the government is, once again, butt-fucking retarded. The horn is a safety device, and, when used as such, is extremely effective. If you don't like yours, fine. But don't take mine away. Sometimes it helps to have a loud, instantaneous noise come from your vehicle to let other people know you are there.

    22. Re:Hell, NO! by blueg3 · · Score: 1

      If it's not worth spending $5 on, it probably wasn't important.

    23. Re:Hell, NO! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I fully support this, but if and only if:
      I can charge my $5 honk to the idiot in front of me that doesn't know the light is green because they're on the phone / eating dinner / painting their toenails.

    24. Re:Hell, NO! by falsified · · Score: 1

      Yes. Nobody will be able to figure out how to attach a small speaker to a car and make it beep when the car is below a certain speed. Damn you, big oil.

      --
      HI, MY NAME IS ISAAC.
    25. Re:Hell, NO! by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      Charging me $5 for using my horn inside city limits would do little more than convince me that the government is, once again, butt-fucking retarded.

      It would also likely convince you to only honk in situations where it's necessary. From the angry tone of your post, I have a hard time believing you honk only when there's imminent danger to you and not, say, you've already been cut off and you're just annoyed.

      For that, yeah, I think you should have to pay $5.

  13. Idiocracy by Mr_Blank · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As Green Car Reports notes, the legislation would allow for a common set of standards, rather than than a motley crew of approaches attempted by various automakers.

    Brilliant. Legislate away the possibilities for innovation before the new market has a chance to solve the problem. Is it only in America that "leaders" push science and math and the entrepreneurial spirit, and then quickly make it illegal to innovate lest anyone gets hurt? sheesh

    What this country needs is a good five cent nickel.

    1. Re:Idiocracy by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

      Something needs to be put in place in the meantime; either voluntarily or compulsory.

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    2. Re:Idiocracy by wizardforce · · Score: 1

      What innovation?

      --
      Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
    3. Re:Idiocracy by gman003 · · Score: 1

      Why do we even need nickels? The cheapest things you can find anymore are a quarter, and even a small can of soda is 75c. Ditch pennies, ditch nickels, maybe even ditch dimes, and we'd have a much better currency.

    4. Re:Idiocracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What problem?

      1. Drivers should watch out for other users of the road. Period.
      2. Other users of the road should not be idiots. IF you are blind, get a guide dog - that's what they are there for.

      So, what problem?

    5. Re:Idiocracy by LiENUS · · Score: 1

      how would you make change for a 75 cent item when someone pays with a dollar? If you're going to ditch nickels you have to ditch quarters too, 50 cent pieces would be the smallest you desire.

    6. Re:Idiocracy by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 1

      As Green Car Reports notes, the legislation would allow for a common set of standards, rather than than a motley crew of approaches attempted by various automakers.

      Brilliant. Legislate away the possibilities for innovation before the new market has a chance to solve the problem. Is it only in America that "leaders" push science and math and the entrepreneurial spirit, and then quickly make it illegal to innovate lest anyone gets hurt? sheesh

      What this country needs is a good five cent nickel.

      Quite right. A standard system for turn signals? Let the market sort it out! Ford can have a mechanical arrow flipping up from a slot, GM can have blinking lights, and Chrysler can have a colour-coded panel on the rear of the car with pink meaning I'm turning right, and blue meaning I'm turning left. Sure the public will figure it all out without this government dictatorship stuff!

      Same goes for license plates, brake lights, reversing lights, and all other things that require some sort of standardisation so that the people have a chance of knowing what's going on.

      Fucking government-phobic market fundamentalists on this site really get on my wick sometimes.

      --
      Drill baby drill - on Mars
    7. Re:Idiocracy by pablodiazgutierrez · · Score: 1

      You give them a quarter back.

    8. Re:Idiocracy by Mr_Blank · · Score: 1

          Fair points.

          I notice that there are massive differences between turn signals between cars. Leds & halogens. Stylish and garish. Round and boxy. High or low. Wide or slim.

          The government, we the people, will have to be careful to set the regulations such that innovation is not stifled.

          That is all.

    9. Re:Idiocracy by falsified · · Score: 1

      The problem is that #1 and #2 don't happen regularly, and it's easier to attach a $5 speaker to a car than to hope human nature transforms in response to electric cars becoming more available.

      --
      HI, MY NAME IS ISAAC.
    10. Re:Idiocracy by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 1

      Something needs to be put in place in the meantime; either voluntarily or compulsory.

      I believe what we need is that each car require a flagman preceeding the vehicle whilst it's travelling within the limits of the town.

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
    11. Re:Idiocracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll go further than that and get off at the depot. What this country needs is a 7 cent nickel. If that works out next year we can have an 8 cent nickle, and think how good that'll be! One nickel carefully used would last a family a lifetime! They could buy a 3 cent newspaper and get the same nickel back again as change!

  14. I think it's kind of silly by dx40sh · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This whole thing could be solved by:

    a] drivers watching for pedestrians, like they're supposed to be doing [but who actually follows the laws these days?].
    b] pedestrians checking for traffic before they walk into areas that might be occupied by cars; as it would actually be smart [this may be too much to ask].
    c] lawmakers passing laws that actually benefit a majority of people, not just a small minority.


    If this does go into effect, though, my car is totally going to have the TIE Fighter sound.

    1. Re:I think it's kind of silly by breakfastpirate · · Score: 1

      Aren't laws usually passed to protect the small minority? I mean, only a relatively small number of people are mugged at gunpoint every year. Do we really need a law for that?

    2. Re:I think it's kind of silly by noidentity · · Score: 1

      It's like defense-in-depth in the security field. You don't depend on just one mechanism. Here, (most) humans are equipped with useful omni-directional devices (ears), that can provide useful information in addition to the eyes. Most cars provide this already. On the other hand, intentionally making noise means it might be really obnoxious, or advertisements, or like phone ring tones, only constant. Maybe a few extra deaths is worth not having this constantly...

    3. Re:I think it's kind of silly by dx40sh · · Score: 1

      There's a difference, though. Being mugged is an active thing, not a passive trait like being blind. There are a number of things you can do to prevent being mugged [even if they're not foolproof]. There's not much you can do to prevent being blind.

    4. Re:I think it's kind of silly by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      Heck, they could even have it be a low power radio signal, so that anyone that actually wants to have the audio cue can have it in a device the size of a dime, and those of use that want reduced noise pollution can have the quite. I assume this is not on the table as this is the kind of legislation that has little to do with some people doing something stupid, and instead of accepting that it was their problem, they convince themselves that it is someone else's. All it takes is one kid to get hit by a car because his parent didn't teach him to look both ways before crossing the street. How many people do you expect tell the mother of a dead kid that it was her fault? Do you expect the mother to take responsibility? Of course not.

    5. Re:I think it's kind of silly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If people were perfect, we could do without a whole lot of things.

      This is a good thing, if only because it might save me or you from some inattentive asshole in a parking lot. Yeah, they'd be the one who was wrong, but you'd be the one who was dead.

    6. Re:I think it's kind of silly by jamesh · · Score: 2

      This whole thing could be solved by:

      a] drivers watching for pedestrians, like they're supposed to be doing [but who actually follows the laws these days?].
      b] pedestrians checking for traffic before they walk into areas that might be occupied by cars; as it would actually be smart [this may be too much to ask].
      c] lawmakers passing laws that actually benefit a majority of people, not just a small minority.

      It's a tricky one. Should we be making cars noisy just for the one or two blind people who might walk the streets? I can't really think of another way of doing it. You can say that drivers should watch for pedestrians but someone can walk out from behind a large vehicle in a car park giving you very little time to react so they really do need a few hints to know that something is coming.

      I know that blind people do make a very small minority, but this is the society we live in. If you don't like it go elsewhere.

      If this does go into effect, though, my car is totally going to have the TIE Fighter sound.

      That should be mandatory.

    7. Re:I think it's kind of silly by T+Murphy · · Score: 1

      While it most directly benefits blind people, there are plenty of "willfully blind" people out there who will also benefit from this- whether or not Darwin would approve.

    8. Re:I think it's kind of silly by RichiH · · Score: 1

      > c] lawmakers passing laws that actually benefit a majority of people, not just a small minority.

      While I am agreeing with most of what you said, and while I am pretty sure that requiring electric cars to make loud noises, let me just venture a guess:

      You are male, white, able-bodied, in your 20ies to 40ies, earn/have enough money for a comfortable living and you don't have much respect or regard for the need of others who are less fortunate than you.

    9. Re:I think it's kind of silly by Combatso · · Score: 1

      This whole thing could be solved by: a] drivers watching for pedestrians, like they're supposed to be doing [but who actually follows the laws these days?]. b] pedestrians checking for traffic before they walk into areas that might be occupied by cars; as it would actually be smart [this may be too much to ask]. c] lawmakers passing laws that actually benefit a majority of people, not just a small minority.

      We wouldn't need any laws if everyone fit some "perfect set of morals" we just make up.. A: Drivers suck, B: People suck, C: Government sucks

    10. Re:I think it's kind of silly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This whole thing could be solved by:

      a] drivers watching for pedestrians, like they're supposed to be doing [but who actually follows the laws these days?].

      b] pedestrians checking for traffic before they walk into areas that might be occupied by cars; as it would actually be smart [this may be too much to ask].

      c] lawmakers passing laws that actually benefit a majority of people, not just a small minority.

      1. Pedestrians are not a minority

      2. There is value in protecting the rights of minorities as well as majorities.

  15. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  16. Mine would play, 'Dixie" by fotoguzzi · · Score: 1

    A la the "General Lee."

    --
    Their they're doing there hair.
  17. ..so? by American+AC+in+Paris · · Score: 2, Informative
    ...you're required to have tail lights, turn signals, a horn, and a whole load of other otherwise unnecessary stuff on your car, all primarily for the safety of people other than yourself. This is how automotive safety works; you identify problems (cars running on electric power are hard to hear; pedestrians rely to varying degrees on the sound of a car for situational awareness, the blind moreso than others,) and you take reasonable steps to rectify the problems.

    Do people really have problems with this kind of thing?

    --

    Obliteracy: Words with explosions

    1. Re:..so? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Those things don't add to noise pollution, and they address *real* problems. Walking through a parking lot these days you'll notice that very few cars make any engine noise audible from more than a few feet away. I hear tire noise long before I hear engine noise. The fact that electric cars have no engine noise isn't really a significant change.

    2. Re:..so? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See Above.

    3. Re:..so? by Man+On+Pink+Corner · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Do people really have problems with this kind of thing?

      Yes. I don't feel any "safer" when I'm awakened by a dump truck backing up a quarter of a mile away. Do you?

      Consider the rapid growth of hybrid/electric cars' market share. If the same epsilon-minus bureaucrats responsible for backup beeper regulations have anything to do with this law, it will almost be worth moving out of the city to avoid the racket.

    4. Re:..so? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, when the pedestrian is using headphones to listen music @ volume 11... or yapping on a phone and at the same time 'out-of-this-world', walking like zombie...

    5. Re:..so? by mewsenews · · Score: 1

      but dude. our stealth cars.. we could totally drive around without anyone noticing us.. and the fucking government wants to put a card in our spokes like we're in 8th grade or something.. uhhh no thanks obama your not my president

    6. Re:..so? by blackraven14250 · · Score: 2

      Exactly. Tire roar is the biggest source of noise from any modern car, barring ones modded with the express purpose of making the engine louder.

    7. Re:..so? by wizardforce · · Score: 1

      Some people do. Unfortunately it's a case of taking a reasonable position "some laws are bad" and taking it to it's illogical extreme "all laws are bad."

      --
      Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
    8. Re:..so? by mini+me · · Score: 1

      Ha! My snowmobile has one of those backup beepers from the factory. The thing only weights like 500-600 lbs wet. and the view out the rear is completely unobstructed. If I actually managed to hit, let alone hurt, someone while backing up I have much bigger problems.

    9. Re:..so? by joocemann · · Score: 1

      I was looking forward to the reduced noise pollution..... and people using AWARENESS in life so as not to get hit by moving objects.

      But awareness is tightly tied to common sense ---- both are fading rapidly in the US... and we wonder why we 'need' a mommy government...

    10. Re:..so? by xs650 · · Score: 1

      Those pedestrians need glass belly buttons so they can see where they are going.

    11. Re:..so? by M4DP4RROT · · Score: 1
    12. Re:..so? by noidentity · · Score: 1

      I hadn't thought of the fact that they'll probably use this opportunity to have hybrids make even more noise than normal cars, especially when backing up, and then probably mandate them on regular cars eventually as well. Say bye to a quiet evening at your house; instead it'll be regular beeping as people back out of their driveways. How could they resist putting these on cars, if they're already putting an external sound system? No way they'll just stop with a soft, continuous sound whenever the car is running.

    13. Re:..so? by hb253 · · Score: 1

      Exactly. I appreciate the small anonymous island of sanity you have created in this sea of cluelessness.

      --
      Self awareness - try it!
    14. Re:..so? by yurtinus · · Score: 1

      You're blurring the line between genuinely useful safety equipment and devices that *may* be useful under exceedingly rare circumstances. How many accidents per year occur due to the car being too quiet? No, I don't take the claims of the accident victim as the truth here. I don't think many people would own up to it if they walked out in front of a car. Last batch of numbers I saw did not indicate conclusively a greater accident risk between like hybrid vehicles and non-hybrids (there was an article up here a month or three ago about this issue...). This falls under the same umbrella as mandating back-up cameras: A technological bandaid to make up for driver inattentiveness which will only serve make drivers more reliant on their technologies. If only we could convince people that it is socially acceptable to take public transit when you don't feel like actually driving your car...

      The first step to solving a problem is identifying the problem. We haven't shown that there is an actual problem, just talk about hypothetical problems. "This might help some people" is not an excuse for new legislation.

      --
      +1 Disagree
    15. Re:..so? by Have+Brain+Will+Rent · · Score: 1

      Ummm the tail lights, horn and turn signals on your car are there for your benefit too you know. Makes other people less likely to hit you.

      --
      The tyrant will always find a pretext for his tyranny - Aesop
    16. Re:..so? by falsified · · Score: 1

      Yeah, these blind motherfuckers are ruining it for Good Americans. Fuck them and their medical condition.

      --
      HI, MY NAME IS ISAAC.
    17. Re:..so? by joocemann · · Score: 1

      who are you agreeing with? apparently you built up a strawman in your head, misrepresented what I said, and then attacked it...

      *whoooosh*

    18. Re:..so? by falsified · · Score: 1

      Probably way late, but the car noises are being lobbied for by the American Federation for the Blind.

      --
      HI, MY NAME IS ISAAC.
    19. Re:..so? by joocemann · · Score: 1

      Probably way late, but the car noises are being lobbied for by the American Federation for the Blind.

      I understand that. And I wrote what I wrote anyway. It doesn't mean I regard the blind as 'motherfuckers', or lack empathy for their condition. It means I believe the blind, and others, are capable of exercising caution and awareness.

  18. Sound ideas? by Albinoman · · Score: 1

    Personally, I'm between the Jetsons car noise or a running horse.

  19. Different Story by countertrolling · · Score: 1
    --
    For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
  20. Sample rate by igreaterthanu · · Score: 1

    They better include an option to link the playback sample rate to to the accelerator pedal.

    --
    I dream of a nation where a man is not judged by his skin color but by an number assigned by a credit rating agency.
  21. They could do worse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Than this versatile groove (played quietly, and w/o vocals or string synth).

  22. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Paua+Fritter · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You didn't read the first sentence of his post? Are you blind?!

  23. Fart-mobile... by Ardx · · Score: 0

    Just saying....

    --
    Whoa there dude! Check your keyboard, somebody might have slipped you a Dvorak.
  24. Customizable sounds for a car sound good, but by Exatron · · Score: 1

    Custom cartones sound good now, but just wait until you have to pay the auto companies for making your electric ride sound like a Ferrari.

    --
    "I think so, Brain, but 'instant karma' always gets so lumpy." - Pinky
    "Decepticons FOREVER!!!" - Ravage
  25. Perfect sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It makes perfect sense. Everybody knows that most people are either blind or walk around with their eyes closed. It's just the way the world works.

    My problem is that gas cars aren't loud enough. I mean, what if somebody was blind AND hard of hearing, or walking around with their eyes closed while listening to death metal? Is it okay for them to die? Of course not. What we need is mandatory 200 decibel sirens on every car. That will keep our blind, hard of hearing children listening to deathmetal safe. Just think of the children.

  26. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I see adults cross the street without looking while on the phone and not even notice me beeping at them. And this was back when I drove a beat up car that sounded like a Boeing 747

    Amen to that brother.

    The thing that floors me is that people get hit by trains. TRAINS! We're talking like five-thousand plus tons of steel rumbling down a track, and people don't notice. How is this even possible? How self-absorbed do you have to be to notice a freaking TRAIN. I used to live not far from a freight line and the whole bloody ground shook when a train went by...

  27. How about a chainsaw noise? by Dogbertius · · Score: 1

    A chainsaw would likely scare just about anyone enough to grab their attention.

  28. Jim Carrey figured it out by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1
    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
  29. And who would've thought? by eroded · · Score: 2

    The "whistle's go whoooo" guy becomes an overnight entrepreneur. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nnzw_i4YmKk

  30. Is sound enough? by sking · · Score: 1

    How do hearing impaired people address this problem? How about something visual?

    But then again, the visually-impaired may become targets.

    --
    The AntiJoey
    1. Re:Is sound enough? by Pentium100 · · Score: 1

      Visual and audio are not mutually exclusive. You can have visual (for example, in my country you have to have your headlights on even during the day) and audio (engine noise - real or simulated) on the same car.

    2. Re:Is sound enough? by EmperorOuk · · Score: 0

      From my experience with deaf people they tend to compensate for their deafness by putting more effort into being alert to their surroundings.

    3. Re:Is sound enough? by imakemusic · · Score: 1

      You're right. Maybe they should start attaching lights to cars so that people can see them when it gets dark.

      --
      Brain surgery - it's not rocket science!
  31. Electronic transponder system by lhaeh · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It seems unnecessary to make things nosier for everyone when the number of people that need the noise is very small. Why not just have an electronic transponder system so that people can know where cars are relative to them. It would even work on vibration for those that are blind and deaf. It could give out more information, like speed and direction, and it it could work from further away if necessary.

    1. Re:Electronic transponder system by Pentium100 · · Score: 1

      When you hear a sound, you know where it is coming from with enough accuracy to know where the car is. The electronic detector would either have to have multiple directional antennas or it would just alert that a car is nearby. It would not be of much help near an intersection or between two parallel roads.

    2. Re:Electronic transponder system by EmperorOuk · · Score: 0

      It seems unnecessary to make things nosier for everyone when the number of people that need the noise is very small.

      What makes you say that? Apparently there are enough people who need the sound to be statistically significant. From the study linked in the article:

      A variety of crash factors were examined to determine the relative incidence rates of HEVs versus ICE vehicles in a range of crash scenarios. For one group of scenarios, those in which a vehicle is slowing or stopping, backing up, or entering or leaving a parking space, a statistically significant effect was found due to engine type. The HEV was two times more likely to be involved in a pedestrian crash in these situations than was an ICE vehicle.

    3. Re:Electronic transponder system by crispytwo · · Score: 1

      not true - Even sirens are difficult to identify where emergency vehicles are coming from
      -- sirens -- which is why they have multiple tones, etc. coming from it... and that doesn't work all that well... thus the lights, plus.

      Think of it this way - if you have 4 or more cars emitting tones say 440Hz at an intersection, you wouldn't have a clue if it was coming from the right, left on falling from the sky. You might know that it is getting oddly darker around you, but nothing more.

      wouldn't it be awesome with everyone driving around with a siren? OOh ya!

      Putting extra noise makers on a car is solving a problem that doesn't exist. This screams of over-thinking a non-problem, and smells of crap between the ears.

      I hate to see the day that laws are brought in like this, i.e. before one person is hit *because* he/she couldn't hear it.

      PS: My car will have cannon sounds coming from it, between periods of deathly silence.

    4. Re:Electronic transponder system by Pentium100 · · Score: 1

      Wel, a siren may be difficult to locate, especially if there are more than one siren of the same frequency, however, a complex sound, like the sound of an internal combustion engine can be located more easily, even when there is more than one car near you.

    5. Re:Electronic transponder system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better yet a KILL SWITCH for the BLIND to push!

      Since everyone in fucking government has gone completely fucking ape-shit.

    6. Re:Electronic transponder system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It seems unnecessary to make things nosier for everyone when the number of people that need the noise is very small. Why not just have an electronic transponder system so that people can know where cars are relative to them. It would even work on vibration for those that are blind and deaf. It could give out more information, like speed and direction, and it it could work from further away if necessary.

      Personal SONAR device. Cheap and effective.

      Even more effective when cars aren't artificially noisy.

    7. Re:Electronic transponder system by abigsmurf · · Score: 1

      Expense, hassle, trying to remember to keep them on you (or your kids).

      Most importantly though, the device just wouldn't work. Imagine if you're walking next to a busy road with one of these things.

  32. Ferrari from India by PatPending · · Score: 1

    I want the "Ferrari from India" sound.

    --
    What one fool can do, another can. (Ancient Simian Proverb)
  33. Not about the blind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is really about people too lazy to look. I see them all day long in LA. People that step out into the street without looking. I see a 100 of them for ever blind person I see. We have to deal with car noise because people can't be bothered to look both ways.

  34. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by wizardforce · · Score: 1

    You don't rely on the sound alone, but it does help especially as you said, with people who are visually impaired. Cars make quite a bit of noise at highway speeds but at lower speeds, there is less noise produced from the interaction between the tires and pavement. As far as peoples' behavior is concerned, it probably doesn't justify their deaths.

    --
    Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
  35. great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    great... just what we need... an excuse for people to put speakers on the outside of the car..... The cars that you can hear two blocks away while blasting the stereo weren't loud enough... Imagine how loud they will be now!

  36. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Heck I live over a mile for a train track and I can still hear them coming at night.

  37. Gods what an awful idea... by SvnLyrBrto · · Score: 1

    WTFH?!? If my muffler was broken and making undue and disturbing noise; I'd get a fix-it ticket and have to quite the thing down. Actually I wish they'd be more stringent on this; and especially to crack down on the jackasses who purposely disable their mufflers so as to be as loud and obnoxious as possible. (Fairly common, it seems, among motorcycle riders... ugh.)

    But now we actually finally have cars that are going to put out LESS noise pollution, and make the city a more pleasant place to be... give us MORE peace and quiet... and the government wants to screw it up and require cars to make MORE noise.

    hatehatehate...

    > Want your green car to rev like a Ferrari or BMW?
    > Just buy the right drivetone and crank up the exterior
    > volume.

    I weep at the thought. I really do. I, for one, keep my car well-maintained, including the muffler. And I'll bloody well find a way to disable any artificial noisemakers added to any car *I* ever drive.

    --
    Imagine all the people...
    1. Re:Gods what an awful idea... by EmperorOuk · · Score: 0

      A variety of crash factors were examined to determine the relative incidence rates of HEVs versus ICE vehicles in a range of crash scenarios. For one group of scenarios, those in which a vehicle is slowing or stopping, backing up, or entering or leaving a parking space, a statistically significant effect was found due to engine type. The HEV was two times more likely to be involved in a pedestrian crash in these situations than was an ICE vehicle.

      In light of the above results from the study linked to in the article, I don't think it's such a crazy law. A loud noise like a broken muffler would not be necessary; just enough for people in the near vicinity.

    2. Re:Gods what an awful idea... by Vectormatic · · Score: 1

      Drat, there goes my dream of having my 1.4 litre euro-econobox making the same noise as a v8 ferrari F1 engine at 15000 RPM

      --
      People, what a bunch of bastards
  38. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by LSDelirious · · Score: 1

    what about the deaf and blind? If Helen Keller were alive today, she would surely be struck down by these silent invisible menaces. I propose we add omni-directional microwave emitters to these vehicles, so that pedestrians can be made aware of their unsafe proximity to oncoming traffic by the severity of the burning sensation in their skin!

    --
    Slavery is the legal fiction that a person is property; A Corporation is the legal fiction that property is a person.
  39. The best sound by Kaenneth · · Score: 3, Funny

    Two halves of a coconut being clopped together.

  40. Here is the solution by Bugbear1973 · · Score: 1

    All the above suggestions are good but they don't go far enough. Our forefathers had it right when the first horseless buggy came out, requiring a man with a red flag to precede the vehicle. And as a bonus, think of what that would do for unemployment!

    --
    Wanted: A better sig than this one. I have neither the wit nor motivation...
  41. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by suomynonAyletamitlU · · Score: 1

    As others have noted, it's big in parking lots, where otherwise the only indication you have that something is about to START moving is brake lights going off--which doesn't help if you're in front (they backed into a spot or pulled forward). If you know the car is running (insofar as that applies to electric cars), you can give it a wider berth on principle, or at least know to check the lights / make eye contact with the driver.

  42. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by noidentity · · Score: 1

    Agreed that not looking before crossing a street is a good way to win a Darwin award, but that's no reason to have silent multi-ton vehicles either. Sound has the benefit that you might hear it even if you don't see it, or the driver doesn't see you and comes up behind you unexpectedly, or whatever. A good example where sound would be useful (albeit for a different vehicle type) is when some idiot cyclist comes up behind you and passes you on a sidewalk, and all you see is suddenly a bicycle a few inches from you zooming by.

  43. Forget that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I want my car to make the sounds to 'Frogger' game. Then throw in there every so often the sound when a frog gets hit. That will stop pedestrians.

    1. Re:Forget that by suman28 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      In India and other places, they use horns to "warn" people and it is so unbelievably noisy, and people are so used to the horns that it becomes white noise almost. You honk and the person(s) you are issuing the warning to, COMPLETELY ignores you and does whatever the hell they wanted to do in the first place. When I come back to US, it feels like bliss, nothing having to listen to that. Imagine, hundreds of thousands of people just honking all the time. I think this is just a bad law, and hope it does not pass.

    2. Re:Forget that by morgauxo · · Score: 1

      I wish I could mod this one up!

    3. Re:Forget that by Thansal · · Score: 1

      I don't drive, however my mum drives a Prius.

      With only the electric motor going, it's really surprisingly quite, to the point that she often surprises people in parking lots (where she is likely to just use the electric due to low speeds). It's something she independently noticed and commented on long before there started to be this public complaint about it (to my knowledge).

      Obviously, the law should have something that clearly defines what is and is not permissible/required for electric cars. They shouldn't be louder than a properly operating normal car. They shouldn't operate on any ridiculous frequency. And their noise should be steady, regular, and unobtrusive (you know, like the noises made by a car under normal circumstances). I mean, we have noise pollution laws as we don't want to end up like other nations where the horn basically consists of a "Hello, I'm here" instead of "LOOK OUT!".

      That all said, how about a wonderfully juvenile fart machine, with the 'intensity' of said flatulence sound being linked to the speed of the car?

      --
      Do Or Do Not, There Is No Spoon, There Is Only Zuul. Everything in the above post is probably opinion.
    4. Re:Forget that by Ken+D · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes,
      I think parking lots are the single most likely place for anyone, deaf or not, to be clipped by a silent car.
      I was almost clipped when a Prius suddenly started backing up as I was walking along the parked cars.

      But this could be fixed by requiring a 'backup beeper'

    5. Re:Forget that by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "In India and other places, they use horns to "warn" people and it is so unbelievably noisy, and people are so used to the horns that it becomes white noise almost. You honk and the person(s) you are issuing the warning to, COMPLETELY ignores you and does whatever the hell they wanted to do in the first place. When I come back to US, it feels like bliss, nothing having to listen to that. Imagine, hundreds of thousands of people just honking all the time. I think this is just a bad law, and hope it does not pass."

      If you lay on the horn too long and too often, you will likely get your ass handed to you by said honk-ee in front of you.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    6. Re:Forget that by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      "Obviously, the law should have something that clearly defines what is and is not permissible/required for electric cars. They shouldn't be louder than a properly operating normal car. They shouldn't operate on any ridiculous frequency. And their noise should be steady, regular, and unobtrusive (you know, like the noises made by a car under normal circumstances). I mean, we have noise pollution laws as we don't want to end up like other nations where the horn basically consists of a "Hello, I'm here" instead of "LOOK OUT!"."

      Hmm....I'd like to have some loudspeakers, that will blast out that tone at the frequency that only teens or below can hear.

      People all around complaining, and the police officer going..."WTF are you talking about, I don't hear anything".

      I got that app for my iPhone, that is fun to blast out at the mall.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    7. Re:Forget that by somersault · · Score: 1

      The engine in my car is in the middle. At low speeds (and therefore revs), people often don't hear me coming. I had to use my horn briefly the other day to tell a guy to get off the middle of the road (especially dumb of him because the roads are all snowy/slushy right now, so if someone wasn't paying attenion and didn't see him at first, they wouldn't be able to stop in time).

      --
      which is totally what she said
    8. Re:Forget that by Zencyde · · Score: 1

      Yes, I will accept a backup beeper. But for a car moving forward? That's dumb. Here's a tip, look in the road before you cross. And if you're blind, you should be waiting at a damn crosswalk. Jaywalking is illegal for us seeing-folk, too. Likewise, you're far more liable to notice something in front of you than in back.

      And my BIGGEST complaint: Drivers should be responsible for avoiding pedestrians. Not the other way around.

      --
      What day is it? Could you please tell me?
    9. Re:Forget that by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Drivers ARE responsible for avoid pedestrians. However, if are hit by a car, who will come out better?

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    10. Re:Forget that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With only the electric motor going, it's really surprisingly quite, to the point that she often surprises people in parking lots (where she is likely to just use the electric due to low speeds). It's something she independently noticed and commented on long before there started to be this public complaint about it (to my knowledge).

      My non-hybrid car is pretty much silent too. It's just a small efficient two liter engine. Pedestrians never hear me. The Prius isn't that special. Oh, and I get close to the same highway mileage too.

    11. Re:Forget that by Zencyde · · Score: 1

      My point is by implementing a law like this you are shifting responsibility from the driver back to the pedestrian. If only by implication. By having this law in place we are relieving the responsibility of safe and highly-aware driving. Even if just by a little bit.

      Of course I know that most drivers aren't highly-aware. But that doesn't take away from the fact that it's one of the goals of successfully operating a vehicle. Though, hitting things with your car is always fun.

      --
      What day is it? Could you please tell me?
    12. Re:Forget that by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      Two thoughts:

      1) Sounding one's horn before and during reversing is already the law in some places.

      2) I'm pretty sure silent cars don't present more of a danger to a deaf person than any other car.

    13. Re:Forget that by treeves · · Score: 1

      I don't think the *intention* is to shift the responsibility to the pedestrian. Its intention is to give the pedestrian a tool, an extra chance, to avoid being hit. We are all (all hearing persons that is) used to motor vehicles being easily detected by sound and electric vehicles don't fit that scheme.
      But it *might be* used as an excuse, shifting the responsibility away from the driver.

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    14. Re:Forget that by Phoghat · · Score: 1

      Sort of like car alarms in the USA. Who even pays attention to them anymore?

      --
      Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
    15. Re:Forget that by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      Personally, I am not wild about laws esp. when Driving. The facts are, that if a car and a pedestrian collide, almost always, the pedestrian is MUCH worst off. They have the ability to hear, so why not give them an opportunity to get out of the way, rather than having lawyers argue about we are dead.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    16. Re:Forget that by rhalstead · · Score: 1

      Strange thing is...They already have one...*Inside*. Pray tell, what good does it do there?

    17. Re:Forget that by haystor · · Score: 1

      I don't know, but I feel burned having purchased that annoying thing. It's loud too. There is no consideration for my ability to actually hear. I won't be buying *any* car with a backup beep inside the car again. I get to start my commute getting annoying while I back up out of my garage every day. Thanks Toyota. I know I'm backing up when I put it in reverse and the car goes backwards.

      --
      t
    18. Re:Forget that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This could be fixed by paying attention to what's happening around you.

  44. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Fluffeh · · Score: 5, Informative
    I would totally have to disagree with you on this sorry. I lived in Newtown sydney right next to a very very busy set of train lines, and while they were noisy, you could rarely hear a train as it was approaching.

    Here is Sydney, the trains are quite large, double storey and mainly 8 cars long but even with that they are almost silent as they approach.

    Secondly, even if you see a train, the stopping distance is so long that if you trip, fall, whatever while it is approaching, it won't likely stop in time to not hit you.

    Finally, you would be surprised about how many accidents involving people and trains are not accidents at all.

    The Bureau of Transport and Regional Economics (BTRE) suggests that the main issues for rail safety in Australia are suicides, level crossing accidents and pedestrians struck by trains (BTRE 2002).

    This is directly from a report published using data obtained (link to full PDF) from our Bereau of Transportation.

    --
    Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
  45. already solved by ouachiski · · Score: 1

    These brilliant people that drive around with loud speakers stuck out there windows so every one in a nine mile radius is required to here there crappy music have already solved this problem

    --
    sorry for my comments, I'm drunk
    1. Re:already solved by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      "You're listening to KRAP radio! Whether you want to or not!"

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  46. Horse shit by RobbieCrash · · Score: 1

    80% of the people I see on the street these days are either listening to PMPs or on the phone not paying attention to any noise around them.

    Forcing cars to make noise is dumb as bricks.

    --
    Keep on knockin'
    https://robbiecrash.me
    1. Re:Horse shit by EmperorOuk · · Score: 0
      The statistics disagree with you. Apparently hybrids which don't make noise are twice as likely to hit a pedestrian in certain scenarios.

      A variety of crash factors were examined to determine the relative incidence rates of HEVs versus ICE vehicles in a range of crash scenarios. For one group of scenarios, those in which a vehicle is slowing or stopping, backing up, or entering or leaving a parking space, a statistically significant effect was found due to engine type. The HEV was two times more likely to be involved in a pedestrian crash in these situations than was an ICE vehicle.

    2. Re:Horse shit by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      Those people that you think don't notice you...Most of them do. They just think that if they don't make eye contact, you will stop for them. I see this with pedestrians, and I see this with drivers. This is a people problem, not a car noise problem.

      So, I agree with you. Forcing cars to make noise is dumb as bricks.

    3. Re:Horse shit by EmperorOuk · · Score: 1
      But what if there was evidence to show that silent cars are twice as likely to hit a pedestrian in certain situations? I don't think it would be such a dumb idea to make hybrid cars produce a moderate amount of noise (still less than a normal car), when in those situations. The study linked to in the article provides the above evidence.

      A variety of crash factors were examined to determine the relative incidence rates of HEVs versus ICE vehicles in a range of crash scenarios. For one group of scenarios, those in which a vehicle is slowing or stopping, backing up, or entering or leaving a parking space, a statistically significant effect was found due to engine type. The HEV was two times more likely to be involved in a pedestrian crash in these situations than was an ICE vehicle.

    4. Re:Horse shit by Riceballsan · · Score: 1

      so essentially, the hybrid is twice as likely to hit a pedestrian in the 2-10 MPH speed range. this problem can be solved without noise, invent a toe guard for the tires, essentially something like the front of a train would do the job just fine. A car backing out isn't going to kill anyone short of a small child that happens to be under the wheel, otherwise you are talking about bruised elbows at the most extreme.

    5. Re:Horse shit by EmperorOuk · · Score: 1

      Exactly. It's mostly small children who get injured or killed in incidents where a car is backing out of a parking spot, largely because the driver can't see them unless they are very careful. Adult bruised elbows don't get reported as car accidents much, but the crushed limbs of infants do. The hybrid is twice as likely to cause these kinds of accidents. I don't think making hybrids produce a moderate amount of noise when moving slowly is an entirely unreasonable proposal, given the evidence that strongly suggests it would reduce these kinds of accidents.

    6. Re:Horse shit by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      Unless, hybrid car purchasers are a self selecting group, in which case the evidence is that there may be no causation due to the car and instead is a correlation between the kind of people that would buy a hybrid and the kind of people that don't pay attention when backing out of parking spots. Given that the sound level of many ICE vehicles made today is lower than the ambient noise level of many parking lots, it would seem to be something to consider before you start legally mandating noise pollution.

      So, tell me this... Do you think that there may be personality traits that would lead people to join a self selecting group that buys hybrids?

    7. Re:Horse shit by EmperorOuk · · Score: 1

      Do you think that there may be personality traits that would lead people to join a self selecting group that buys hybrids?

      That's certainly possible. Do I think those personality traits would necessarily have anything to do with driving styles? Not so much. You could however test that by seeing if hybrid cars also get into more accidents in circumstances where the engine noise made no difference. However the study conducted only found that hybrids were more likely to be in a pedestrian accident in situations when the car was traveling slowly ie when car noise would most be a factor.

      Of course maybe the effects of hybrid owners' reckless personalities are limited to when traveling under 10MPH, but that seems unlikely. There will always be several explanations for the facts, but often there is one that is vastly more likely than the others.

      Given that the sound level of many ICE vehicles made today is lower than the ambient noise level of many parking lots,

      That doesn't mean you can't hear the car.

    8. Re:Horse shit by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      You could also look at the accident rates amongst hybrid car owners from before they bought the cars. Either way, before legislating noise pollution, the other factors should be looked into.

      I think your wrong about those personality traits being a factor in how the people drive. Just as you are likely to find correlation between other car choices and driving styles.

    9. Re:Horse shit by Neil+Boekend · · Score: 1

      You should look before you cross. Noise doesn't have anything to do with that.

      --
      Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
    10. Re:Horse shit by EmperorOuk · · Score: 1

      Most of these car accidents don't occur on the street, but on driveways and parking stations.

    11. Re:Horse shit by Neil+Boekend · · Score: 1

      In which case the driver should take care and responsibility. Both are places where the pedestrian and the bicyclist have right of way (at least in the Netherlands). I have kicked many a car that was backing up. In some cases I would have thrown a brick through a window if I had one.
      Noise from the car isn't going to change that. The driver isn't going to look because the car makes some noise.

      --
      Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
  47. intelligent design, for dummies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    so they want these advanced electric vehicles to spit out noise where ever they go? Are they really trying to put a weakness of combustion engine technology back into electric, under the guise of safety on top of it.
    Any deaf person knows that before you cross the road, you look both ways... you don't take your earphones off and listen for noise, then blindly dart across the street.

  48. 30 years ago... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... I read an article on this very subject in "Co-Evolution Quarterly".

  49. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by silveride · · Score: 1

    Haven't you heard this again and again " The IQ of a group is equal to that of the least intelligent" . I guess it applies for the kids also. When you are in a social euphoria, rarely do you care about your surroundings or the interests of the being in the surroundings. Think about the noise and scenes we make when we meet a dear friend after a long while is a public place. I am not presuming that a small noise from the car is goining to gain their attention for good, but rather it would be advisable to the driver that he better stop if doesnt want to make a genocide.In my opinion, the cell phone also will put you into such a social euphoria at times, and you will loose your sense or manners in the public. I have seen a guy kicking a post while talking on the phone. Who in their right sense will do that in public! Perhaps, the right manners to teach kids would not be how to cross a road properly, but how not to embarass yourself while using a mobile phone, since mobile phones will be a part of our life for the forseable future...

  50. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by EmperorOuk · · Score: 0

    Besides, lastly but not least... unless the car is accelerating the biggest noise is the road noise (pavement vs vulcanized rubber). Last I checked, electric cars don't solve this problem. If you're relying on Engine noise to determine if a car is coming, you're already fairly screwed.

    Apparently not. From the study linked to from the article:

    A variety of crash factors were examined to determine the relative incidence rates of HEVs versus ICE vehicles in a range of crash scenarios. For one group of scenarios, those in which a vehicle is slowing or stopping, backing up, or entering or leaving a parking space, a statistically significant effect was found due to engine type. The HEV was two times more likely to be involved in a pedestrian crash in these situations than was an ICE vehicle.

    So a car without engine noise is in some situations twice as likely to hit somebody. Therefore relying on your ears is somewhat effective when dealing with normal cars in certain situations.

  51. Who is responsible? by RobinEggs · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you're an adult, you should know better. I see adults cross the street without looking while on the phone and not even notice me beeping at them. And this was back when I drove a beat up car that sounded like a Boeing 747.

    For every adult pedestrian who's been hit for jaywalking while talking on their cell phone without looking, there's another who got hit in a signaled crosswalk by a driver on a cell phone who checked only the oncoming vehicle traffic before pulling out, a guy who had a car door opened in his face while riding a bicycle in a marked lane, or a pedestrian who got hit by a car on the god damn sidewalk. I've been hit all three of those ways.

    I'm sick of self-righteous, insouciant comments such as yours (see also http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/09/19/2026211) about how stupid pedestrians are, about how it's just legislation to protect idiots, etc. If you're driving 4,000 pounds of steel you have to be more careful than the guy driving 175 pounds of meat, and guy driving the meat deserves some extra warning, including an auditory warning, when you're not doing your job. If he walks out without looking, you hit him and he dies. If you fuck up, you hit him and he dies. Staying alive is all on the pedestrian, no matter who would be legally at fault if they get hit. Don't act like they're all idiots and pedestrian safety is a trivial problem and this just one more step into a total abdication of personal responsibility. This is serious stuff and I believe the majority of people who get hit by cars were not stupid and not doing the wrong thing. Your snarky anecdotes about idiot children and cell phone users are a strawman, drawing all attention away from the thousands of pedestrians who get hit and killed by bad drivers while the pedestrians were doing everything right.

    1. Re:Who is responsible? by Opportunist · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Here's a radical idea, how about making it mandatory to have a guy with a red flag walk in front of every car? That should reduce traffic accidents almost to zero!

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:Who is responsible? by kannibal_klown · · Score: 1

      If you're an adult, you should know better. I see adults cross the street without looking while on the phone and not even notice me beeping at them. And this was back when I drove a beat up car that sounded like a Boeing 747.

      For every adult pedestrian who's been hit for jaywalking while talking on their cell phone without looking, there's another who got hit in a signaled crosswalk by a driver on a cell phone who checked only the oncoming vehicle traffic before pulling out, a guy who had a car door opened in his face while riding a bicycle in a marked lane, or a pedestrian who got hit by a car on the god damn sidewalk. I've been hit all three of those ways.

      First, I'm sorry about your luck. I hope those idiots (especially car-on-sidewalk) got in major legal trouble and you didn't get too physically damaged.

      Agreed, there are MANY idiots driving. And I admit, more idiot drivers than idiot pedestrians. As drivers, we need to exhibit good situational awareness. And obviously most cyclists and pedestrians are fine.

      But you have to admit, a cyclist and a pedestrian are both incredibly more agile than a car. I DON'T mean "therefore they should be able to jump out of the way." That's wrong.

      But I've seen many instances where a cyclist decides to stop short, or quickly change lanes, or cut people off, or all of a sudden decide to drive AGAINST 50MpH traffic.

      I've seen instances where people walking along-side traffic on the sidewalk decide to step out into a 40+ MPH zone without looking behind them to see if a car is coming right up their behind. Sure for every idiot cyclist I see, I see a dozen careful ones. And for every idiot jaywalker I see hundreds of people looking both ways.

      But I digress...

      The fact of the matter is: except for the visually impaired or when starting from rest in a parking lot, Engine noise doesn't come into play much. Between road noise and general noise pollution you don't hear it unless the guy is accelerating highly.

      Meanwhile we have a great advance: quieter cars. Reduces (but does not eliminate) noise pollution, a growing concern. The government's reaction: put it back in.

    3. Re:Who is responsible? by EmperorOuk · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Well done. Yes, safety regulation is about finding the proper balance between risk and inconvenience. Do you think making hybrid cars emit a modicum of noise would be a crippling burden?

      If you think it would be a waste of time, the evidence is against you. The study linked to in the article indicates that silent engines in cars doubles the likelihood of a pedestrian getting hit in certain situations. Forcing cars to emit some degree of noise is a very logical response to that problem, if it can be confirmed.

      A variety of crash factors were examined to determine the relative incidence rates of HEVs versus ICE vehicles in a range of crash scenarios. For one group of scenarios, those in which a vehicle is slowing or stopping, backing up, or entering or leaving a parking space, a statistically significant effect was found due to engine type. The HEV was two times more likely to be involved in a pedestrian crash in these situations than was an ICE vehicle.

    4. Re:Who is responsible? by kannibal_klown · · Score: 1

      I should elaborate on the "agility" thing since it reads a little snotty...

      What I meant to say was:

      A pedestrian not paying attention and walking along with traffic can take 2 steps to their left without looking behind them. In the time it takes to steps the driver now has a person appear without warning, and perhaps without enough time to stop.

      A biker can turn on a dime, stop on a dime, and swerve in the blink of an eye.

      Therefore, the "more agile" object should also take great care before performing such a maneuver. Don't just rely on ears of what you "think" is behind you, but look.

      But still, in the end a car driver needs to exhibit great situational awareness to keep an eye out for these things.

      And your example isn't lop-sided enough. I would venture to say that for every pedestrian hit because they weren't paying attention, there's probably like 10-20 who were hit because the driver wasn't paying attention.

    5. Re:Who is responsible? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're driving 4,000 pounds of steel you have to be more careful than the guy driving 175 pounds of meat...

      I bet you enjoy driving 175 pounds of meat, if you know what I mean.

    6. Re:Who is responsible? by musicalmicah · · Score: 3, Informative

      "A biker can turn on a dime, stop on a dime, and swerve in the blink of an eye."

      What? Have you ever ridden a bike?

      I got into a biking accident last month - an oncoming SUV took a left turn in front of me. I slammed on my brakes, turned my front wheel to skid, and still smashed into its side at normal cruising speed. Luckily I just had a couple scrapes and a gash in the inside of my lip, but the reality is, most bicyclists can't stop easily, and usually when they do have to make a hard stop, it's flesh and/or bone against a solid surface.

    7. Re:Who is responsible? by SharpFang · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I've got to agree with the other guy. The apparent sleekness of bikers may be misguiding. It looks like a biker turns on a dime, and yes, once the turn starts, it's pretty narrow. But if a biker turns the handle bar like a car driver, he'll just fall. Rapid braking, sharp turning, this all requires preparation - shift your body weight, turn minimally to the other side, let the bike dip towards the curve a little, move your weight backwards. The sharp turn at high speed itself takes 2-3s but the biker took another 2-3s to prepare for it. I have very good brakes in my bike but if I use them, I'll fall over the handle bars, hitting the road face first. So I have to brake the hind brake lightly, shifting my weight, bracing myself, and only then I can depress front brake fully, and go to a standstill from a rather high speed in a matter of 5-10 meters... after starting braking good 20 meters earlier.

      Unexpected rapid turn is very difficult to execute. You don't get a dip deep enough so your turning radius won't be short enough... and you slam whatever obstacle appeared. Add some slippery surface where the bike will skid, which is very nice when you're about to stop but very dangerous if your speed is still too high (and totally kills any ability to turn controllably) and you have a crash ready.

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    8. Re:Who is responsible? by Neil+Boekend · · Score: 1

      Idiot drivers should be and are sued.
      Idiot walkers have the risk of being ran over.
      In both cases a bit of noise pollution isn't going to help much. I will not expect a car on the sidewalk whether it makes noise or not. An idiot jaywalking without watching isn't alarmed by a bit of noise (since they typically use an MP3 player or a phone).

      --
      Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
    9. Re:Who is responsible? by kannibal_klown · · Score: 1

      "A biker can turn on a dime, stop on a dime, and swerve in the blink of an eye."

      What? Have you ever ridden a bike?

      I haven't ridden much in the last 3 years, even then it was just quiet roads.

      The "fall" is part of my "stop on a dime" thing. Though last I recall, stopping @ 25 MpH (without crashing) is shorter on a bike than, say, an SUV.

      I witnessed this last year.

      I was in my sedan was a couple of cars back, the road wasn't super fast.

      Anyway, a biker fell (I don't know if it was braking, mechanical, etc). I just know he went over the handle bars.

      Even falling + sliding, it was a shorter distance than the SUV behind him could handle. The guy had to brake+swerve the heck around to avoid squishing the cyclist.

      Fortunately the cyclist seemed OK and got appeared to continue riding a short while later.

      I'm just saying... it's a rare occurrence but it happens.

      Also people (such as a lower post) mention turning (like a 90-degree turn).

      I tend to mean changing lanes. From what I've experienced, you're much more nimble changing lanes on a bicycle than a large car.

      In the end, all of this talk detracts from the overall theme of my original post.

      If you're only relying on Engine noise (outside of a parking lot or if you're blind), then you're in danger. Between road noise and general noise pollution you don't tend to hear it. Visual cues are always needed, and unfortunately I often see people ignoring visual cues.

      If the companies want to put the feature in (due to user testing and such) then I'm for it. But I just find it silly that the government require it.

    10. Re:Who is responsible? by Kashgarinn · · Score: 1

      I believe that it is a priviledge to drive a car, a priviledge which bears the responsibility that you drive safely because as you say, it's a couple of tons of steel which can seriously hurt and maim people (people in cars kills more people than terrorist dontcherknow)

      I also think adding a sound effect to cars is a bad idea. roads are meant for cars, and although drivers are supposed to be watchful of any/all traffic, if you're a pedestrian crossing a road, you bear responsibility in doing so safely as well.

      Cars today are quite quiet anyway, and we'll all get used to hearing just the tiresound rather than the already quiet engine sound as well.

    11. Re:Who is responsible? by dlgeek · · Score: 1

      His point is not that the agility allows them to avoid the accident but that the agility gives them a greater ability to act unpredictably. While the drivers of cars may incite a collision because of a lapse of situational awareness, in most cases someone observing a car has a decent idea of where it will be several seconds into the future. It is much harder for the driver of a car to suddenly be in a different lane or be heading in a significantly different direction than it is for a bicyclist or pedestrian to do so.

    12. Re:Who is responsible? by imakemusic · · Score: 1

      Or from another angle: SUV driver doesn't leave adequate stopping distance between themselves and the bicycle in front and consequently almost runs over the cyclist. If you were driving a car, had to stop suddenly and were hit by someone behind you would you say that it was your fault for braking too quickly?

      --
      Brain surgery - it's not rocket science!
    13. Re:Who is responsible? by j_sp_r · · Score: 1

      Agree, you should leave enough distance that you can react+stop (about 2 seconds * speed) if the object in front of you comes to a sudden halt (aka hits something hard and heavy).

    14. Re:Who is responsible? by RichiH · · Score: 1

      While I agree with most of what you said (and I lost a friend Acting Correctly to a car), I am not sure maintaining the level of noise is the right thing to do.

      Assuming you live in the USA, things like educating drivers so they can do more than drive in a circle, requiring regular mandatory technical checks of all cars and other things that seem painfully obvious would do more good than a beeping car.

      And if you are honest, being able to hear those cars would not have helped in situation 2 & 3. And it's not certain that it would have helped in situation 1.

    15. Re:Who is responsible? by delinear · · Score: 1

      Possibly, but it wouldn't solve any of the examples GGP used of poor driving. If I'm walking on the pavement and hear a car, I don't expect that that car has mounted the kerb and is about to hit me, so noise or not I wouldn't take evasive action. Similarly I would assume in the crosswalk situation that the pedestrian was aware of the cars and it was only the fact that the car wasn't aware of the pedestrian that led to an accident - again noise or no noise would make little difference there. And the final example of course has nothing to do with noise or even with the car moving at all (although you could equally argue in that case that maybe bicycles should make some noise so drivers know not to open doors into them). The point is that noise is actually only useful in a minority of road safety instances, and perhaps there are better ways to provide for those instances that are not being investigated.

    16. Re:Who is responsible? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you're meant to leave enough space between you and the vehicle in front to safely stop even if they slam on their brakes in an emergency maneouvre. If you were in a car and the guy in front suddenly decided to pull across in front of you it would be considered entirely your fault for not leaving sufficient braking distance - I know this from personal experience, driving on a two lane road at safe speed and having a guy accelerate past me and pull from the right turn only lane into my lane at the last second because he wanted to get one single car length ahead at the risk of everyone's personal safety, then slamming on his brakes to avoid hitting the cars in front, causing me to hit his rear bumper, the insurance company considered the fault mine even with an independent witness who verified my version of events. Most cyclists are even more irresponsible than drivers, putting themselves in positions of incredible danger and relying on the common sense of drivers not to squash them. It's not unreasonable for cars to follow quite closely at reasonable speeds as they have the ability to stop quickly, but cyclists frequently tailgate cars knowing if the car slams his brakes on they won't stop in time, they frequently ignore traffic lights, considering they somehow magically have the properties of both a roadgoing vehicle AND a pedestrian, they undertake all the time, often turn without signalling, frequently drive in the dark without sufficient lights. If I, as a driver, did half the crazy stuff I've seen cyclists doing I'd have my license taken away.

    17. Re:Who is responsible? by houghi · · Score: 1

      Please do not start about bikers. I live in a student city in Europe and they are terrible. In most (all) European countries bikers and pedestrians have more right of way, because they are the weaker group of people. I am all for that. That means that there is a positive discrimination towards them and people in cars should pay more attention.

      That said, the bikers also should understand that it is NOT a free card to do anything they like. "But I had the right of way" does not look nice on a tombstone.

      Even more importantly, when looking at the weakness, pedestrians are even weaker, yet they the bikers NEVER (and I mean I have not noticed it happening one time in 10 years) stop at a crossing out of their own free will. Instead of stopping, as they should, they (try to) go around people and then look pissed of that they had to do that.

      The only reason they stop is if I (or some of my friends) jumps right in front of them. If they are lucky, they say sorry, if not, they will hear why they should have stopped.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    18. Re:Who is responsible? by couchslug · · Score: 1

      "This is serious stuff and I believe the majority of people who get hit by cars were not stupid and not doing the wrong thing."

      The vast majority of pedestrians and cyclists I've seen in decades of commuting wear dark clothing (= low vis at dawn and dusk) and don't use crosswalks. They aren't smart enough to walk AWAY from the road, and since being carless is generally a result of losing your license for being a drunk, the sort that get killed in my area tend to aid the process by wandering where they'll get squashed. Mopeds especially are used by drunks (fair enough since they shouldn't be driving anything heavy!) and being a small mobile obstacle with poor lighting they get drilled fairly often.

      Roads are for MOTOR vehicles in practice. Bicycling is recreation, not transportation. Riding one is basically suicidal in much of the US where it will NEVER (sorry, NEVER) be worth the vast investment to widen the roads and most distances are too far for practical biking.

      BTW I grew up in urban New Jersey and never knew anyone who got hit as a pedestrian. The accepted rules:

      Stay the fuck off the road. Look before you cross so nothing is close enough to be ABLE to hit you. Run across the street or walk VERY briskly. If walking by the road, try to stay outside guardrails etc.

      As we taught our motorcycle safety classes, it doesn't matter if you are in the "right", it matters that you don't contribute through action or inaction to getting hit!

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    19. Re:Who is responsible? by Scott+Wood · · Score: 1

      Roads are for MOTOR vehicles in practice. Bicycling is recreation, not transportation.

      Bullshit. That many places are hostile to bicycle use does not make it illegitimate as a transportation mode.

      BTW I grew up in urban New Jersey and never knew anyone who got hit as a pedestrian. The accepted rules:

      Stay the fuck off the road.

      That's hard when there's no sidewalk or other place to walk. In many places in the US, people view pedestrians the same way you view bicycles.

      Look before you cross so nothing is close enough to be ABLE to hit you.

      So I should camp out at the corner for hours until traffic dies down, lest some driver turn without checking the crosswalk?

      Once I was crossing at a crosswalk, with a walk signal. The turning car closest to me yielded. The car behind that one couldn't conceive of what was holding up his turn, and swerved around the car in front to turn from the far lane. Missed me by a couple feet.

      Of course there are also idiot pedestrians and bicyclists that jump out into traffic recklessly, expecting people to slam on their brakes -- but even for those who are behaving reasonably, some audible warning of what the big hunks of metal are doing is useful. We can't look everywhere at once.

    20. Re:Who is responsible? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've been hit all three of those ways.

      I have to say, statistically, that you must be the one at fault. Or you're an insurance fraudster.

    21. Re:Who is responsible? by musicalmicah · · Score: 1

      Again, I don't think I agree. With the exception of kids playing on the sidewalk, the cars in every place I've lived have always seemed more unpredictable to me than the bicyclists and pedestrians. Eye contact is harder, and, as you pointed out, lack of situational awareness is generally a much bigger deal in cars - and unfortunately, ridiculously common.

      You may have that perspective from driving in cars - whenever you see a bicyclist, you probably think "Oh no, what's that person going to do? I don't want to hit him." I understand, because I feel the same way when I'm driving past someone on a bike.

      But try riding a bike to and from work in a mid-size city (or larger) every day, even one with bike lanes. When every car on the road has the potential to end your life with one user error, your perspective changes.

    22. Re:Who is responsible? by sjames · · Score: 1

      One factor to consider, the newer tires with lower rolling resistance are most frequently found on hybrids and electrics as well, so you also get less road noise.

      But most of this is, in fact, intended to help in parking lots and crosswalks.

    23. Re:Who is responsible? by dlgeek · · Score: 1

      I'm not talking about behavior; my assertion was purely based on the physics of the various objects. An automobile has much more inertia and much less agility than a bicycle or a pedestrian.

      I agree with you that automobiles tend to act more unpredictably in general from a behavioral point of view. However, compare a car stopping short versus a person. Have you ever been walking and all of a sudden the person in front of you just stops walking without notice (or have you been that person)? A car can't do that - even by slamming on the brakes, it takes time to come to a stop and there's a visual notification from the tail lights.

    24. Re:Who is responsible? by musicalmicah · · Score: 1

      At twenty-five MPH, it's very hard to turn or stop. I'm not sure that your anecdote is a measure of this, since the biker went flying. I regularly ride on a 25-mph roads, and I have to slow down to half speed or less to make a 90-degree right turn. Even then, it's still an intense turn, with me having to do some serious banking. If I didn't do that exact turn every day, I would take it much slower.

      When someone on a bike tries to turn or stop immediately while moving at 25MPH, they are risking a life. When someone on a car tries to turn or stop while moving at 25MPH, they are generally just risking repair bills.

      Back to your original point - you aren't ever "only" relying on engine noise, but while on a bike, you do hear quite a bit. Being inside a car masks your ability to hear where noises are coming from (how many times have you sat in your car, heard a weird noise, and thought, "Is that my car or someone else's?"), but when you're on a bike, you hear everything... except that Prius behind you!

      Not that I'm lobbying for this to be a requirement. I think it would be worth studying, however. There may be absolutely no positive effect to adding sounds to hybrids, but I think that should be determined by experts and not forum posts. Also, right now, hybrids are in the minority, which is one of the reasons it's so jarring to have one sneaking up behind you. If the average person is driving a hybrid in ten years, I think we all might simply "get used" to it.

      Alternatively, I think there may also be some use to having an optional "growler" sound -- something less intrusive than a horn but still "engine-like" that the driver can just switch on whenever it's necessary.

    25. Re:Who is responsible? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It must suck to know the universe hates you.

    26. Re:Who is responsible? by musicalmicah · · Score: 1

      You seem to be arguing that automobiles are less agile because they're faster. And I do agree that at slow speeds (less than 5 MPH), it's easier for a pedestrian or bicyclist to turn than a car.

      However, I still feel that even at 5 MPH, it's easier to stop in a car than on a bike. And at what a bicyclist might call "fast" (25 MPH), it's far less risky for a car driver to slam the brakes (possible fender bender, maybe some slight swerving) than it is for a bicyclist to slam the brakes (body separates from bicycle, flies into pavement). Same for quick turns.

      But perhaps more importantly - for this argument, we can't isolate one factor (physics), because the other factor (behavior) IS so important. The road is a dangerous place for both reasons, because it is loaded with 1-ton battering rams that can swerve and kill a bicycle or pedestrian at any moment.

    27. Re:Who is responsible? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The vast majority of pedestrians and cyclists I've seen in decades of commuting wear dark clothing (= low vis at dawn and dusk) and don't use crosswalks.

      being carless is generally a result of losing your license for being a drunk,

      Roads are for MOTOR vehicles in practice. Bicycling is recreation, not transportation.

      These are lies that you tell yourself so that you can excuse your stubborn refusal to pay attention to pedestrians and bicyclists on the road. But you are unable to get yourself to really believe them.

      Bicycles ARE for transportation, and they do belong on the road. This is an absolute and indisputable fact, and it is impossible to disagree no matter how much you want to.

      You're screaming at your monitor right now, impotently raging at having been forced to face your dishonesty and stupidity.

    28. Re:Who is responsible? by GrumpySteen · · Score: 1

      At the crosswalk, I doubt you weren't aware of the car, even if was silent. The car door opening doesn't have anything to do with the engine running. Nobody walking on a sidewalk beside a road is going to suddenly dive for cover if they hear an engine.

      How would the vehicles that hit you being noisier have made any difference in any of the examples you offer? The reality is that bad drivers will still kill people no matter how noisy their cars are.

      That said, I think the the law is a good idea since blind people exist. It doesn't matter if it's only 1 in 600 people that's blind, either, because that's still around half a million people who need this safety standard to be put in place.

    29. Re:Who is responsible? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've had far more close calls with bicyclists than with cars and a day doesn't go by that I don't see a few blowing stop signs and red lights, weaving between sidewalks and streets and generally driving like a crazy person.

      Percentage wise, car drivers are far more responsible than bicyclists.

    30. Re:Who is responsible? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, as a walker, bike rider, and driver, most of the fault I see is with pedestrians. I've gotten so sick of being associated with idiots with you because I bike ride, I've actually taken to bicycling more on trails. You call him self-righteous. I don't agree with everything he says, but I think you are the one with the wrong set of values. I'm going to get a little mean here, because you always seem to get highly mod'd up on /. for some stupid reason.

      If you and the mods lack the comprehension that a 3-5k of metal is harder to stop than you walking or your bike, you have serious issues. People talk about how the world doesn't understand science; well science says you are freaking wrong. As you say, staying alive is all on the pedestrian--no shit, and that's the reason why you are WRONG--you are noting a basic truth and then coming to the opposite conclusion. If you want to stay alive, that is your desire and that should be understood because it's YOU, and YOU KNOW the people around you will make mistakes, as that is the nature of humanity. YOU NEED TO LOOK OUT ESP. IF YOU ARE IN THE WEAKER POSITION OF THE EQUATION. What you instead are advocating is some stupid morality that is opposite from every natural force out there--esp. that of physics.

      Reminds me of a saying I asked my dad about, who was in maritime shipping--"I heard the smaller boat actually has the right of way." His response, "Yup, and it's a fool who uses that to protect himself. There is no way the oil tanker is always going to be able to avoid the sailboat and jetskis." Even when there was an accident, it's a gentleman's agreement; something done has a force of habit, but to RELY on it with your life, or to insist that the moral cause is on your side, is idiotic.

      Driving 5,000 pounds of steel is sometimes hard. I've gone up through intersections having a green, looked for pedestrians, and then nearly clipped runners that caught up to me when I was being careful or popped up from behind a van, probably tying their shoe quickly then seeing they have a crosswalk and the white walker signal, popping up, and running into the street without looking. Walkers, runners, and bicyclists can, compared to a car, stop and turn on a time. THEY CAN AVOID ANY WHICH WAY. A small car, a truck, and suv, a semi, cannot. They have to maintain their path, or as you point out, end up on a sidewalker, shoulder, or in another lane, at which point the damage is greater.

      Also, the "pedestrians are right" attitude is also used as a weapon by many pedestrians, as an excuse for their inattentiveness and bad behavior.

      I don't give a damn if there's a crosswalk there--you can't see them, and you can't react that fast either. I've been WALKED INTO while stopped for a red light. I've been in mid turn, gotten blocked by a running pedestrian and stopped, then when about to proceed get out of the crosswalk, SWARMED AROUND by a group of shoppers (and then given dirty looks while waiting patiently for them to get around me--how bad is your situational awareness when you don't see the car that was in the crosswalk). I've been driven into too. My favorite is the crowd standing right at the corner, light changes, you stop to let them go since they have the right of way, THEY DO NOT PROCEED, no one goes because they aren't paying attention, the path is clear, you start to slowly go around, then suddenly the couple saying hi to each other, flirting, the girls shopping who stop gabbing to realize where they are, see the light is in their favor, just suddenly STEP OUT. There is, simply, no human reaction time that can anticipate that--you wait 5-10 seconds, no one goes, then suddenly they do? Please.

      You want to improve pedestrian safety? Give them GOD DAMN RULES TOO BEFORE STEPPING OUT INTO TRAFFIC LANES DESIGNATED FOR THE LARGER (and to you, one-sidedly dangerous) VEHICLES. What? You don't have them? Don't advocate for this? Then the problem will continue. Even simply having a zone at the corner that you don't

    31. Re:Who is responsible? by Have+Brain+Will+Rent · · Score: 1

      I think there is a serious problem with the way children are not being trained to respect the damage a moving object will do - regardless of whether they have a legal right to be doing what they are doing they shouldn't feel like that invalidates the laws of physics.

      Now having said that... I travel by cycle, foot and car. Whether I'm on foot or bike I see and experience lots of poor drivers doing all sorts of stupid and illegal things. And there are lots of stupid pedestrians doing stupid and illegal things - for example whether cycling or driving I get so tired of pedestrians walking against a sign making me lurch to a stop for them thereby missing my chance to make a turn or cross somewhere. But I find the most disrespectful of the law are cyclists. Riding on the sidewalk, riding without helmets, not stopping at stops signs, not signalling lane changes and turns, not having a headlight and reflectors on their bike etc. all violations of the law around here. As a pedestrian I have trouble with cars at intersections and while it's infuriating that's about it but I have to constantly be on the lookout for cyclists being bone heads. If the average driver was so cavalier the roads would be awash in blood.

      As for cars and cycles - well I don't really care that I have the right of way - I stay out of the path of large and small moving objects because I'm the one who'll suffer the pain and "being right" won't help that at all.

      --
      The tyrant will always find a pretext for his tyranny - Aesop
    32. Re:Who is responsible? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      His point is not that the bicyclist can avoid a car by moving quickly, but that a bicyclist can move quickly INTO the path of a car, if the bicyclist isn't paying attention. That's the "more agile" part.

    33. Re:Who is responsible? by falsified · · Score: 1

      "A biker can turn on a dime, stop on a dime, and swerve in the blink of an eye."

      Swerve where? Out of the bike lane, into the automobile traffic lane, while having no time to look and see if it's clear? I'll take the car door in my face, thanks.

      --
      HI, MY NAME IS ISAAC.
    34. Re:Who is responsible? by mojo-raisin · · Score: 1

      I've had the same thing happen to me - oncoming car took a left hand turn on MY green without yielding to me. I slammed on the brakes and put my head down, so my helmet took the force as I broadsided the van.

      The stupid driver claimed *I* had a red light.

      I was younger and stupider, then. I should have got his license plate, and name.

    35. Re:Who is responsible? by musicalmicah · · Score: 1

      That was just happened to me, and exactly what I did (or rather, DIDN'T do). I still beat myself up for this - by reporting this kind of irresponsibility, we could have made the roads that much safer.

    36. Re:Who is responsible? by Celestialwolf · · Score: 1

      Speaking of which: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIW-cQjVDa0

      I don't think noise or lack thereof would be a factor in most pedestrian/vehicle encounters. I'm sure the car in the video made a lot of noise when flipping; however, the pedestrian really had no way to react fast enough.

  52. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by antifoidulus · · Score: 1

    I take it you never bike. Knowing if a car is coming up behind me or not is pretty damned important, especially if I need to pass somebody on the road or there is someone coming the other direction. In fact I get really pissed off when I see cyclists wearing headphones, being able to hear is an integral part of bike safety.

  53. The more obvious solution... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Instead of taking away one of the most pleasant features of an electric car, why not have all blind people and cell phone texters wear giant flashing light on their heads.

    Lets be honest no amount of noise is going to save texters, one of these idiots walks out in front of me every day, and my muffler is shot...

    1. Re:The more obvious solution... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Lets be honest no amount of noise is going to save texters, one of these idiots walks out in front of me every day, and my muffler is shot...

      I don't think that's the intention. At least I hope it ain't. Darwin should be right.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  54. Bumps Ahead by gakn8r · · Score: 1

    This makes perfect sense. At least in the Idiocracy I live in.

    My tax dollars are spent adding speed-humps to otherwise perfectly smooth and already expensive roads.

    making a silent car noisy would fit right in. Unless it was low enough that it made a nasty scraping noise when it failed to clear the speed humps...

  55. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by wooferhound · · Score: 1

    Watch out for that Bus ! !

    --
    We are Dead Stars looking back Up at the Sky
  56. Noise? That will solve everything.... by n_djinn · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I have a black Nissan Titan with a 6 inch lift and a winch bumper that is made from 1/4 steel. My tires are 35x ProComp Xterrains and my truck has a Banks exhaust (not my choice, it's annoyingly loud, rumbles even at idle), The truck is huge, ominous and pushing 400HP with a wide open exhaust. People step in front me all the time in parking lots. In fact the one thing I don't like about my truck is that the windshield edges are huge blind spots. Some lady tried to walk in front of me today in the parking lot of a local box store. HEY STUPID, IF YOU CAN'T SEE THE DRIVERS FACE, HE CAN"T SEE YOU. [anyone with issues with guys that drive big trucks; I am in Alaska, I am a volunteer medic and wilderness rescue tech. I have used the winch on my truck no less then 120 times to pull stuck cars out of snow banks, rivers, etc since I bought it in 2006]

    --
    I do not play in the middle of the road
  57. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by ForestHill · · Score: 2

    lastly but not least... unless the car is accelerating the biggest noise is the road noise (pavement vs vulcanized rubber). Last I checked, electric cars don't solve this problem. If you're relying on Engine noise to determine if a car is coming, you're already fairly screwed.

    This is really just not true. I spend a lot of time on a road bicycle during the warmer months, so cars are passing all the time; and hybrids in electric mode are dead silent coming up behind you, frequently scaring the crap out me and my team mates. All other vehicles make audible noise. Not sure if it's the engine, the engine fan, or what. But you definitely hear it on internal combustion engines and not on hybrids in full electric mode.

  58. only works if by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Only works if they ban pedestrians from using mp3 players and mobile phones.

    Otherwise it is a waste of time

  59. Really dumb idea by DaveAtFraud · · Score: 1

    Quite some time ago OSHA required that all construction equipment (and commercial vehicles) emit a warning sound when backing up. Their assumption was that the operator couldn't see very well when backing up and this would warn people to be aware of a machine moving in reverse. Now when you walk past a reasonably large and busy construction site, all you hear is is a cacophony of beeps, clanks, bells and other assorted warning noises. The result is that the warning noises serve little or no useful purpose since it's impossible to distinguish which of several different machines might be backing up toward someone who isn't aware of it.

    Any sort of continuous noise from electric cars would have the same result in a busy traffic situation. If there isn't much traffic, a noise maker might help. A better solution was suggested by someone else, above, of using a transponder and receiver or something similar. This would be a better solution for the hearing impaired while the rest of us just need to get used to the idea that electric cars are really quiet. In the mean time, Darwin gets a chance to get a few of the clueless out of the gene pool.

    Cheers,
    Dave

    --
    They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty.
    Ben
    1. Re:Really dumb idea by hawguy · · Score: 4, Informative

      Have you worked in a construction site? The sound of a truck 25 feet away backing up in your direction is much more noticable than a truck 100 feet away. The warning sound is especially useful in a busy construction zone where you have trucks in front, behind and to the side of you and you're concentrating on your task at hand, so you're not always facing the truck that is backing up toward you. The backup alarm is typically a directional horn - it is much more noticeable directly behind the truck than to the side.

      Likewise, if you hear a cacophony of electric car noises, that probably means that there are a lot of electric cars in that direction so you should pay attention.

      High tech solutions like a transponder and receiver have many failure points. A speaker is easy to hear, easy to verify that it's working, and the recipient (which could be a child, a bicyclist, or just a distracted pedestrian) doesn't need to buy and care for a transponder receiver.

    2. Re:Really dumb idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I want noises like a big ass v8 hemi, enough rumble to shake the sidewalk. that would be like, so cool.

  60. MP3 Noise! by cfriedt · · Score: 1

    My electric car is sooooo going to sound like a Hemi at stop lights!

  61. easy.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just require every vehicle to be "pimped out" on "Pimp My Ride." The Bass noises and similar will make more than enough annoying noise to make that EV noticeable.

  62. As all motorcyclists know... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Loud pipes save lives.

    1. Re:As all motorcyclists know... by hardburn · · Score: 1

      Came to thread for this comment. Disappointed that it's at the bottom of the page, and left by an Anon Cow.

      --
      Not a typewriter
    2. Re:As all motorcyclists know... by Neil+Boekend · · Score: 1

      Loud pipes destroy hearing and chase wildlife away.

      --
      Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
    3. Re:As all motorcyclists know... by RapmasterT · · Score: 1

      Loud pipes save lives.

      No, loud pipes serve the childish "hey everybody look at me!" fantasies of childish riders.

      Loud pipes are only truly audible to people BEHIND the bike, not the people in front who are likely to be a danger to the rider.

  63. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by joocemann · · Score: 1

    what you've described is either suicide or natural selection.... both being forces that we cannot 'fix'.

    awareness is tied to common sense; common sense is less common every day it seems.. no wonder we 'need' a mommy government. I'd prefer the lower noise pollution and the reduced population of idiots --- but I know I'll get modded down for calling an idiot an idiot. who cares, mod me down -- idiots are idiots. We learned to look both ways before kindergarten.

  64. Silent vehicles are common by driptray · · Score: 1

    Pedstrians who step on to the road without looking are a real danger to cyclists. It happens a lot on busy inner-city roads, and it's obviously caused by their assumption that vehicles make noise, an assumption that is wrong for both cyclists and EVs. The last thing I want is for that assumption to be reinforced by legislation. The better option is to mandate quieter (or silent) conventional cars, or just ban cars altogether. (OK, I know that aint gonna happen, but it would certainly make the streets safer. Quieter too.)

    1. Re:Silent vehicles are common by Ismellpoop · · Score: 1

      Why would there be streets if there were no cars.
      If cars don't exist, no need street, then no noise. You can have one big friggen sidewalk.

  65. Powerhouse by bitbucketeer · · Score: 1

    Raymond Scott's Powerhouse should be mandated by law to play from all electric/hybrid vehicles.

  66. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by joocemann · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's probably smarter and more cost effective to equip the visually impaired with a sonar-type device than to force *every* (i'm thinking future) vehicle to maintain noise pollution for such a small number of people.

  67. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by R.Mo_Robert · · Score: 2

    If you're relying on Engine noise to determine if a car is coming, you're already fairly screwed.

    I agree with your post completely. I would like to add that in the city, I am primarily a cyclist; thus, my vehicle is even quieter than an electric vehicle (even when freewheeling). You would not believe the number of pedestrians who dart out onto the street in front of me without looking. Luckily, unlike a car, I am (in good weather) usually capable of going from 20 to 0 in a ridiculously short distance.

    The real solution to this problem is to look before you cross the street. I realize this doesn't help visually impaired individuals, but this proposed law is relying on the incorrect assumption that noise should be a cue for oncoming traffic. It never has been. Use other cues instead.

    --
    R.Mo
  68. The importance of sound... by andyr86 · · Score: 1

    I have read a few comments here that downplay the importance of our perception of sound when realising danger. The ear plays a massive role in our perception of our environment from the location of objects through binaural location. The location of a sound source via the difference in the frequency spectrum in the left and right ear as well as the acceleration of a sound source through the Doppler Effect. I welcome this legislation in many ways as it can help influence a pedestrians decision making whether they are wearing headphones or not (the discussion of the effect of in ear headphones is something the medical world should take up with the audio industry. In ear headphones have developed a situation where my generation and my childrens generation will be deaf before our grand parents, sad times but sadly no one gives shit. Yet.) Lets not forget that an in ear headphone has very little external sound dampening and that road noise is often around 70-85dB. Louder than most people can reasonably cope with in, in ear headphones. My only real worry with this is that traffic police are still exposed to consistent dB levels for the sake of pedestrian safety and i think that is something that needs to be considered. Lets not forget that you have some very accomplished acousticians informing this proposal and they certainly know what is safe. New technology is one thing but I get the impression that slashdot doesn't really care what affect this technology can have.

    1. Re:The importance of sound... by Neil+Boekend · · Score: 1

      The noise should not be a factor in realizing road danger. You have eyes I presume?

      --
      Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
  69. Needs More Ambition by Venerence · · Score: 1

    It might be well and good to play a crazy sound from the car, but this idea can be taken farther. How about we tape a kinect to each side of the car, have it recognize humans optically, and play the metal gear "BWEEP" whenever the car gets close. Bonus points if it automatically records the person jumping a foot in the air and diving in the nearest bushes.

  70. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Splab · · Score: 2

    You guys don't have reverse lights?

    Also, why not just do as the rest of us and require lights to be on at all times when driving?

  71. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    Simpler solution: Make turning on your headlights mandatory when the car is moving. We've had that for a while now, allegedly it also helps avoiding accidents during twilight (ya know, the time JUST before you turn on the headlights because you need them) because it's easier to see cars coming.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  72. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am not presuming that a small noise from the car is goining to gain their attention for good, but rather it would be advisable to the driver that he better stop if doesnt want to make a genocide.

    I want a car like that!

  73. Okay, here's a thought. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If I buy an electric car in the future, install an aftermarket sound system and go blasting it, the police can just go fuck off. No more pulling over, tickets, or court cases. How about that? After all, by making so much "noise" while driving down the street, there's no way in fuck anyone but the deaf can't hear it. And even they would probably *feel* the vibrations produced.

    Hey, those Harley-riding assholes get along with far noisier machines on the road than my sound system has ever been--and I doubt there's a law to pull those showoffs over and give them a ticket for the noise.

  74. Why do I get reminded of the old joke... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    "Mechanic, can you turn my horn louder?"
    "Sure, but first we should address your breaks, they're really worn out!"
    "No, that's too expensive. Why do you think I want a louder horn. Duh..."

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  75. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Idbar · · Score: 2

    I agree. Gas engine based cars have become really quiet. I used to play to determine the brand of a car near me, when walking anywhere by ear. I've been aware of the noise cars produce and some cars are so quiet that sound like hybrids if you don't pay careful attention.

    I would assume that they would have to start imposing noise levels (on the low range) for gas cars too.

  76. i have a prius by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have a prius and there are a large number of small cars that make as much noise as mine while idling around a car park. Stupid laws to protect stupid people.

  77. I claim prior art. by Shag · · Score: 1

    My late uncle had a Chevette, under the hood of which he mounted an air horn from a Mack Truck. Just in case anyone was in his way and "couldn't hear him."

    A red GMC grille badge somehow found its way onto the 'vette, too.

    --
    Village idiot in some extremely smart villages.
  78. And yet... by QuietLagoon · · Score: 0
    This law may very well be passed. Yet there as those in Congress who have unabashedly and shamelessly exploited 9-11 for their political ends, and who now balk at providing those Heroes of 9-11-2001, the First Responders (those who ran into the burning buildings to save others), the literally life-saving treatment that they require to stay alive. The Congressmen are demonstrating hypocrisy at the highest and most refined level.

    .

    Yet they can pass a law to require cars to be noisy.

  79. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by smellotron · · Score: 1

    I never trust my ears when deciding whether to cross the street.

    Nor do I, but people make mistakes. Maybe I looked, saw that there were no cars, but didn't notice someone peeling around the corner or out of a parallel parking spot. My ears have a chance at catching what my eyes miss. That increases my safety, even though I do not rely upon it.

  80. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's primarily for blind people, because road noise only works in certain environments. On a clear road with an electric car coming at reasonable speed and no background noise, You can easily tell that there is a car by ear, however:

    -Judging distance is just as important as judging whether or not a car is there. I personally find it much harder to work out how far away a car is just by the sound of the tyres, after many years of listening to the engine.
    -In a city, there's always background noise. If you add in some road works, a few honking horns, people talking to each other and on the phone...suddenly, you might not be hearing the cars as well as before.
    -There'll be a transition period of petrol to electric lasting decades at least. A Diesel bus will drown out the sound of any nearby cars based purely on road noise, let alone something like trucks.

    And anecdotally, I was nearly hit by the first hybrid I ever saw. I was crossing the street, when suddenly the parked car next to me pulled forward and just missed me. Bright sunlight, dark tinted windows, headlights turned off, and exactly zero warning to indicate the car was anything but parked until it moved.

  81. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by icebike · · Score: 1

    I see adults cross the street without looking while on the phone and not even notice me beeping at them.

    Well its entirely possible they thought they had as much right to walk across that street as you did to drive down it.

    There are starting to be a rather vocal and militant group that insist the North American traffic laws are simply wrong headed when it comes residential streets and shopping areas, and one citizen's right to cross a street should not be subordinate to another citizens right to drive down that street. There is a perception (somewhat based in law) that the pedestrian always has the right of way.

    Clearly this is a recipe for traffic gridlock.

    But it has been brought on by total disregard for pedestrian deaths over the years. In 2008, 69,000 pedestrians were injured in motor vehicle crashes in the United States, and 4,378 pedestrians were killed. Pedestrians comprise about 12 percent of motor vehicle crash deaths each year.

    The accident rate is actually falling in recent years.

    Not wanting to start a flame war here, this is not necessarily my viewpoint, just reporting one possible reason people don't automatically yield to motor vehicles.

    --
    Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
  82. obviuosly... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    spokie-dokies

  83. Adjusting to noiseless vehicles by Twinbee · · Score: 1

    Didn't they do a study where they found that wearing a helmet (pushcycle or motor?) caused more accidents, because people felt they could take more risks?

    I really think we just need to get used to the idea of a noiseless motor-car. Everything seems to like to make noise, from the microwave, to the heater, to the computer fan etc.. To have a chance of removing one major source of noise like cars would be great.

    What could be an interesting test is to have noise-emitting cars for 3 years, and then silent ones for another 3 years. See which people prefer (make sure every car is electric first off all though).

    --
    Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
  84. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Kjella · · Score: 1

    The "kadunk-kadunk" of freight trains is pretty much limited to freight trains, because the thumb is really annoying for the passengers. Modern passenger trains on a modern railroad track are awfully quiet and awfully quick. Plus if you're trying to hold a conversation on the cell phone in a noisy environment, you often mentally shut out everything else to focus on the voice. So it's not so much "there's noise" as in "this noise I *shouldn't* ignore". Same as in my office landscape when people think holding a conversation across the room is a good idea, I just mentally shut it out. For the office it'll save your sanity, on a railroad crossing it might kill you.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  85. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by MSojka · · Score: 1

    The thing that floors me is that people get hit by trains. TRAINS! We're talking like five-thousand plus tons of steel rumbling down a track, and people don't notice. How is this even possible? How self-absorbed do you have to be to notice a freaking TRAIN. I used to live not far from a freight line and the whole bloody ground shook when a train went by...

    Having both of my grandfathers working for the local rail company at some point, and living about 50m from a heavy-duty rail line the first years of my life, I can safely say that most people have just no imagination as far as the physics of a moving train goes, and why you should double- and triple-check if you're free to cross the line even if it has traffic lights which say you're free to go.

    On the negative side, I don't need to imagine the consequences of when you don't check properly ... and I cringe every time expecting another bloody mess whenever I see people doing stupid stuff like ignoring railway crossing gates being down.

  86. Aarrgh! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can't take it anymore!! Stop the insanity!! Hybrids are too quiet! Wind farms are bad because they kill birds! Transmission lines ruin the environment! The record freezing is a sign of global warming! You can't smoke cigarettes in a fucking HASH BAR!!

    You are all nuts!!

  87. pfft - cant hear them now with ipods in thumping by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    so what difference will it make. Maybe have ipod makers make them detect cars nearby and make annoying sounds. ;-)

  88. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by SharpFang · · Score: 1

    I guess it all depends on trains and tracks. Here, in Poland, you hear the train a good minute before it passes by. "Silent rails" exist, but are expensive and require well-maintained "fleet" to survive - if you hear one-two cars literally jumping with each turn of the wheels the whole empty metal box resonating, meaning likely the bearings of the axis damaged, you can hear them from faaaar away. The rails squeak loudly. The engine whinies quite a bit. Nope, not nearly quiet enough.

    There is a case where you can get hit by a train easily though. A single engine, or one pulling 2-3 cars, on a side track, appearing from behind some trees, going quite slowly, drowned out by cars. I remember seeing one maybe 10 meters from me, startling me totally.

    --
    45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
  89. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 1

    You've overlooked parking lots. When walking in a parking lot, you often can't see if someone is in a car. The engine sound provides an important clue that a car might start moving.

  90. Not the first industry.... by bm_luethke · · Score: 1

    Electric cars aren't the fist industry to be effected by this. They aren't the first electric vehicles around pedestrians in the wild, nor are they they first to find too silent means people get run over.

    Ever wonder why so many electric vehicles make that nice annoying beeping when backing up (say, forklifts and such)? That is because so many people got backed over and severely injured even with alert drivers. Tire noise? Yea, that will work in so many places where the noise (even if everyone was electric) is high enough you can't hear the gravel crunching (and woe be to any place that smooths surfaces). Want to have to driver watch - do you *really* want the guy with 4 hours of sleep last night and two beers being the primary responsibility you can walk the rest of your life (again note that tire noise isn't that loud when in most public places)? It may be a moral victory that he was in the wrong, but I would rather have working legs than a moral victory and needing to navigate by pushing a small rod with my tongue.

    I've been in more than one place where an electric vehicle pulls up behind me and the drivers voice makes me jump. They have been with cars, forklifts, and simple golf carts. The only ones that have ever truly scared me are the cars - they have been the only ones that *both* of us jumped when it was noticed (and in all cases they were backing - I'm not counting someone focused and alert trying to scare me, those are irritating but not severe accidents due to accidental circumstances). The others all had audible cues when they were moving in any way other than forward, even then being the person outside the reinforced steel cage I wish they had some audible cue they were moving. Whilst I've certainly been one inside of said cage (that is - driving forward whilst alert in an attempt to make someone jump), I've also felt the idea of if the driver had been distracted and rolled a 2 ton monstrosity over me due to inattention so we could be extra quite to be, well, not really a good idea. I rather suspect that most people would feel the same way - that a life in a wheel chair (and I have to note that this is being optimistic and assuming you live through the accident) wasn't worth everyone else not hearing a slight hum.

    But hey - lots of people here do not want that noise!!!!

    Quite is certainly good and a reduction in noise pollution is certainly a plus for electrics (and hybrids - where most of us have experience with a vehicle running under electric power). Yet one can get too quite when you are talking a high fraction of a metric ton (or usually greater) moving at speeds enough to kill. Tire noise isn't that much and with most electrics that is all you get. Even were it only the blind I would argue for it, however for those of us gifted with sight we *still* use our ears more than our eyes for situational awareness. There isn't *anyone* on this planet that this wouldn't benefit.

    --
    ------- Sorry about the spelling, I suffer from two problems. Dyslexia makes it difficult to spell well, lazy makes it
    1. Re:Not the first industry.... by noidentity · · Score: 1

      I've found people here on Slashdot unable to grasp redundancy with safety systems. In past threads about this issue, there were also many people stuck on the idea that the only reason anyone would benefit from audible cues if he isn't paying attention. It's lost on them that sound works regardless of what one's attention is on, and works in all directions regardless of what direction one is facing. Others have argued that you can't even hear vehicles, which is the exact opposite of my experience; I regularly walk/bicycle and make good use of audible cues for vehicles and people (and don't even own a portable music device or phone, so my attention is never divided).

    2. Re:Not the first industry.... by spectro · · Score: 1

      What's with all these people that thing everybody else needs to do something to keep them safe?, why not do something yourself.

      When I drive, I am always looking way ahead to what might happen to make me stop. Once I saw a basketball rolling in front of my car 50 yards away, I stopped just in case a kid might run after it and he did.

      When I walk around a parking lot I pay attention to all the cars I'm walking by, do they have their backing up lights on?, then I stop or steer clear.

      Maybe people need to get rolled over a couple times by quiet cars so they start paying more attention.

      This law is stupid, there is too much noise pollution in cities already. The trend should be towards quieting down, not noising up.

      --
      HTML is obsolete. It's time for a new, simpler and richer markup language.
  91. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Road noise is wasted energy. Electric cars need to do everything they can to squeeze out the maximum range, so their tires are specifically designed to minimize noise. Any car will be noisy at highway speeds, but on an asphalt residential street where cars don't go very fast, an electric car can be nearly silent. Of course the speed at which you can easily hear the car is much higher than the speed it becomes dangerous, so this isn't complete nonsense.

    dom

  92. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ok, but those Sydney trains you site are not FREIGHT trains.
    I live right next to a train line as well and since my window is facing the opposite direction, I rarely notice the passenger train go by.
    But when the freight train rolls by at 10pm and midnight, it shakes the place.

  93. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by twidarkling · · Score: 2

    Well, I'm ready to get modded down myself for calling an idiot an idiot, because awareness doesn't have a fucking thing to do with common sense, and you're an idiot for thinking it does. Awareness is a function of mental alertness and fatigue levels. If you're tired, it takes more effort to focus on your task at hand, leaving you less capacity for awareness of other factors. Further, modern society blasts a person with constant visual and aural input, increasing mental fatigue more quickly than in previous generations. Lastly, the human brain itself is hardwired to disregard any noises that it doesn't deem immediately necessary (in a room with a ticking clock, how many times have you suddenly become aware of the ticking, having paid it no mind previously while you were concentrating?), which can easily include traffic noises if they've been constant for a while.

    The only possible role common sense can have in awareness is helping to determine in what direction they should focus whatever mental reserves they have. So, by your own values, and lacking the common sense to see how common sense applies in this case, I'm pretty sure you should go lie down in front of a speeding train.

    --
    Canada: The US's more awesome sibling.
  94. Cheap solution... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... have a piece of stiff cardboard flap against spokes on the wheel

  95. Well in the US by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 2

    Trains are hard to miss. The actual train itself, well it isn't all the loud. The big diesels are very low frequency and the wheels make surprisingly little noise. You feel it, more than hear it, and then only as it is passing you.

    HOWEVER you do hear them because at every rail road crossing they blow their horns and those things are fit to wake the dead. They are required by law, and they do, to sound their horn as they approach a crossing. You cannot miss the sound. At close range it is over 120dB, so you can hear it for a mile or so (I grew up in a town where trains came through over every 15 minutes, every day, all day).

    Also all crossings are clearly marked, and have lights (and nearly always gates as well) which are activated by a switch on the rail, well in advance of the train's arrival. The tracks are quite visually distinct too. The road looks very different where they are since they have to be heavily reenforced to handle the weight. it is made of different materials. Then there's the fact that the trains are MASSIVE. You can see them quite a long distance off. Now they move fast, so it isn't like "Oh I can see a train in the distance I'll cross leisurely," but you can see one and then not get on the tracks.

    Remember that in America with very, VERY few exceptions all trains are freight trains. America has nearly no light rail. It has some subways in a few cities, but those are underground primary (as the name implies). There is Amtrack in a few places but like I said, rare. However the US has a massive, probably the biggest in the world, heavy rail system. Trains move around materials and goods of all kinds because it literally takes 0.5-1% of the energy as moving by truck. They are massive, and the make a shitload of noise when they wish to. Also, as all trains do, they travel on defined courses.

    So yes, people do get hit, but they are dumb as shit. The trains do not sneak up on you. You are being oblivious if you get hit. Like I said, I grew up in a town that had thousands of trains a year. Tracks cut right through the middle of town too. Despite that, there were not people dying all the time to the trains because of all the safety features I mentioned. Only time people tended to die was when they were drunk and wandering on the tracks.

    1. Re:Well in the US by xaxa · · Score: 2

      Trains in the US also go relatively slowly. Most (perhaps all?) tracks in the UK are fenced off. The rails are welded, and the expansion joints are tapered, so there isn't a "clackity-clack" noise. The locomotive may well be electric, or there might not be a locomotive -- instead there might be smaller electric motors on several axles through the train. It's more like "ssssssSSSSHHH-ompff-ompff-ompff-ompff-ompff-ompff-ompff-ompff-ompff-ssssh" (e.g. here).

      There's still the occasional death, typically on a level crossing on private land (i.e. not a public footpath/road). The owner/users of the land are meant to phone the signaller if they want to cross, or follow red/green lights where they're provided, but they get complacent and assume the way is clear because the train ought to have passed three minutes ago.

      There are 40 longish- or long-distance trains scheduled to pass my house in the next hour (20 each way) on one line (4 track line). There should be a train every three-four minutes on the underground (subway) in each direction, which is above ground here as I'm a good way away from the centre of the city. Neither makes enough noise to disturb me, the airport and the road are much worse.

    2. Re:Well in the US by adolf · · Score: 2

      Tracks in the States tend to be welded, as well, unless it's a particularly old line that isn't frequently used. Our lines are not generally fenced -- generally, not at all. And, as you say, trains move relatively slowly here (generally 55MPH, IIRC).

      But our trains are LOUD. Huge diesel-electric locomotives, sometimes three or four of them, all grunting along and pulling enormous quantities of cars. Our signalling system is antique in design, relying on physical gaps in the track to trigger things like crossing gates as train wheels roll over them and conductively bridge them, contributing to the loud. Our expansion joints might be a bit tapered, but it seems as if any tapering is simply the result of it being hammered down by the onslaught of heavy steel wheels, and they are therefore also quite loud. And nevermind the horns, which are hurtfully loud at close range and can be felt in the chest. Or the bright flashing light which can be blinding at absurdly-long distances. The combination of all of it makes the earth shake and the pant-legs vibrate.

      Most of our car-train accidents seem to occur in rural areas where the crossing has no electric signals or gates, and folks just get complacent and don't even bother to look for a train, let alone roll down a window and listen for one, or even slow down. "Ah, nobody ever uses this line anymore... I haven't seen a train out here for years." *squish*

      The only pedestrian-train accident around here that I'm aware of, recently, involved a kid getting his leg caught in a moving switch, only to be squished a short time later.

      (We'd rely on schedules to justify our stupidity instead, as you say is done over there, but our trains are seldom very regular. I guess the mentality of the squished is similar, though.)

      It must be nice to have quiet trains, and it does sound like a lovely bit of engineering, but I've lived relatively close to railroads for most of my life and have never been bothered by the noise. I've also walked railroads, sometimes for tens of miles at a stretch, and have never been surprised by a train (though I've encountered plenty) -- I find that they're detectable well in advance, even with headphones on, both day and night.

      Whatever the case, I'd rather have loud trains than dead people.

  96. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Merls+the+Sneaky · · Score: 1

    I live right next to the tracks in Sydney mate. there is no more than 200 feet between my television set and the first track. I know when every train is going past unless I have music blaring. People know on TS when I am in the back room when a train goes past. So even in my back room it's noisy. If you are closer to the city, Strathfield to North Sydney you won't notice the noise as they have sound barriers (they also don't travel as fast as they do once you get west of Parramatta) and traffic noise to compete with. Even when they coast into the station they make enough noise I can't talk in my front yard, pulling into the station they can quiet off quite a bit due to the noise being bounced away from you by the platform.

    Your dead on about stopping distance.

  97. whoosh - the red flag act by N+Monkey · · Score: 2

    Well done. Yes, safety regulation is about finding the proper balance between risk and inconvenience.

    "Well done" :-), you completely missed the historical reference and hence the joke.

    1. Re:whoosh - the red flag act by imakemusic · · Score: 1

      Joke? I thought it was a snarky, reductio ad absurdum strawman.

      --
      Brain surgery - it's not rocket science!
  98. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Charliemopps · · Score: 1

    Commercial electric vehicles have had noise making devices for decades for this very reason. The fact of the matter is that the human mind is animal at its base, and split second decisions like "Jump back out of the street!!!" are decided by that animal part of our mind. Our ancient hunter gatherer ancestors would assume that something that weighs 2tons and his hurtling at you at 60mph should be making some sort of noise. So you see such a thing out of the corner of your eye, and your defense mechanisms decide it's probably an optical illusion due to the silence so it turns the whole affair over to the logic part of your brain, so you turn your head to review the situation just in time to an old lady in a Prius with murder in her eye.

  99. Full circle. by miffo.swe · · Score: 1

    Some of the first cars was deemed dangerous and to silent so in order to drive them in town you had to put a bloke infront of it walking in advance with a ringing bell to warn eventual pedestrians. I guess we have now gone full circle and arrived at the same place of utter madness.

    --
    HTTP/1.1 400
  100. yeah isnt it. by unity100 · · Score: 1

    if you have the right of way, legally, you shouldnt take it. because.... some morons driving cars think that it is their right to have the way, DESPITE they are not legally entitled to it over others.

    1. Re:yeah isnt it. by pipatron · · Score: 1

      You have the "right of way" to walk in to a biker's bar dressed up as a hippy, chain yourself to the wall and yell "All bikers are fucking fags". Doesn't mean normal people do that, because even if you have the right, it can cause major internal bleedings.

      --
      c++; /* this makes c bigger but returns the old value */
    2. Re:yeah isnt it. by unity100 · · Score: 1

      in that case, all the people in that bar that have assaulted that person becomes guilty under law, and gets charged, and jailed, when caught.

    3. Re:yeah isnt it. by bdparsley · · Score: 1

      And the the hippy chained to the wall could also be charged with trespassing and inciting violence. After having their spleen repaired, of course.

    4. Re:yeah isnt it. by unity100 · · Score: 1

      or maybe he could be charged with bullshit ? like, someone being charged for having eyebrows over their eye sockets ?

      get real. his rationalization for justifying violation of legal rights of pedestrians, was shitty. dont sweat it.

    5. Re:yeah isnt it. by operagost · · Score: 1

      I don't think I'm being too demanding to ask whether a world where pedestrians can cross a highway anywhere, anytime is more dangerous than one when they must use a crosswalk. If CA actually has laws like the former, that needs to be fixed.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    6. Re:yeah isnt it. by bdparsley · · Score: 1
      My comment was as a followup to yours, not against yours.

      Both the bikers and the hippy are in the wrong in that situation. The hippy in the original case doesn't actually have the right to chain himself and basically shout "fire", even though he can. And in reverse, just because someone has the right, doesn't mean they always should.

      Back to the original pedistrain issues I agree with you fully; even if i have the right a way in an intersection, i'd be foolish not to take every percaution possible when entering it.

  101. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Crossing open roads probably isn't the main issue here. Nothing helps against stupidity and/or lack of a solid upbringing here, I agree.

    However I do wonder how much experience you have as a pedestrian in a city environment. Road and tire noise is certainly very audible at speed, yet the main problem are cars moving below 25 MPH or so in crowded areas with lots of other noise sources, IE. other cars moving on the road. For instance without some kind of noise from a vehicle, it is impossible in most situations to know if it is about to back out on a crowded parking lot, a situation where even the most attentive driver will be plagued by blind angles and visual obstructions from other cars around him. Today we rely on the engine noise and possibly the lights to see which cars may be about to back out.

    It is the same reason why large trucks, entrepreneur machines and the likes has a back-up warning sound. Lots of blind angles and loud external noise sources, making it hard for both driver and pedestrians to spot each other.

    Finally, we don't have 360 degree vision. When car noise at low speed can be drowned out by people talking next to you, then there is a problem. Whether you realize this or not, then we all rely heavily on sound to warn us of approaching vehicles behind us, and when we happen to be looking in the wrong direction.

  102. Let's go for a technical solution. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Keep track of all blind people

    Post their positions on the internets using a searchable API.

    Construct a car that is noisy when close to a blind person

    Profit

    1. Re:Let's go for a technical solution. by Issarlk · · Score: 1

      That sure would be handy for robbers to spot easy victims in a city.

  103. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by kannibal_klown · · Score: 1

    Our ancient hunter gatherer ancestors would assume that something that weighs 2tons and his hurtling at you at 60mph should be making some sort of noise. So you see such a thing out of the corner of your eye, and your defense mechanisms decide it's probably an optical illusion due to the silence

    Even a fully electric car, at 60MpH is making a lot of noise. Road noise. That makes up a large percentage of the noise generated by a car and tends to even drown out most of the engine noise unless the car is revving/accelerating. I was watching a special a couple of years back about noise pollution and didn't realize that fact.

    So yes, noise IS an important part. Which is why someone with a hearing disability has to take a little extra care over an average person when in public.

    So the only place it's really a danger is when the car is doing like 5-10 MpH in a parking lost: slow enough so the road noise is drowned out by ambient noise.

    If a company wants to put it in. Fine. Even if every company decides to put it in.

    But the government saying "You MUST do it" just seems silly.

  104. Also bicyclists must now go VROOM VROOM! by Timmy+D+Programmer · · Score: 1

    Bicyclists must now go VROOM VROOM! so they can be heard by the blind and wear carnival heads so they can be seen by the deaf. They are also offered the alternative of going Brrrrummbumbumbumbum! and waving flares in the event a carnival head is not available.

    --


    (If at first you don't succeed, do it different next time!)
  105. Is it only me? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are people really more likely to get hit by a car if they can't hear it? If so, someone can point me to the studies showing that currently there is a significantly larger percentage of deaf people getting hit by cars than people who have perfect hearing.

    Until then, I don't think electric cars should be made noisy. Just use common sense: Surely pedestrians can walk on the sidewalk. If they need to cross, they can find a zebra crossing, look both ways and cross. In case of an emergency, the driver can honk.

    If the deaf get hit by cars more often than people with good hearing, what about we fit all current cars with big arrays of flashing lights? Would also go with the season.

  106. Homemade sounds? by Ismellpoop · · Score: 1

    Listen to the sounds of my penis smacking you in the forehead. MAWAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  107. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Chrisq · · Score: 1

    Road noise is wasted energy. Electric cars need to do everything they can to squeeze out the maximum range, so their tires are specifically designed to minimize noise. Any car will be noisy at highway speeds, but on an asphalt residential street where cars don't go very fast, an electric car can be nearly silent. Of course the speed at which you can easily hear the car is much higher than the speed it becomes dangerous, so this isn't complete nonsense.

    dom

    While true you can make a lot of noise with very little power, particularly at higher frequencies. Anyone who has one of those battery-powered personal alarms can testify to that.

  108. Well, it's a start by Rogerborg · · Score: 1

    Now they just need to capture all the pollutants from the fossil plants that produce (at least, California is the best case) 80% of the electricity for these abominations, and have them pump it out of them as they drive.

    Honest to god, I can't decide whether (current) photovoltaic cells or (current) electric cars are the bigger greenwashing scam, but they both boil my piss. Take fossil fuels, add a liberal dose of my tax money, and hey, you have something that will never, ever recoup the energy costs it took to make it in its working life. SCIENCE!

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    1. Re:Well, it's a start by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      While I'll agree that the current crop of electric and hybrid cars are too expensive to pay off their cost (unless you keep them a long time), it is a step in the right direction. Electricity might be produced at pollution-causing power plants, but these plants are 1) more efficient and 2) a lot easier to put pollution controls on (being that there are fewer of them) than the millions of small internal combustion engines rolling around. (Plus, there's other pollution that gas powered cars indirectly cause such as gas being burned by trucks delivering gas to the stations.) I think electric cars are the future. We just need to wait a bit for the prices to drop before they're more economically feasible.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    2. Re:Well, it's a start by Rogerborg · · Score: 1

      Internal combustion engines are very clean now. Fossil plants might become clean in the next generation, which means in about 20 years time. The time for electric cars is therefore in 20 years, not now.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  109. Proposed solution.... by Veneratio · · Score: 1

    When I was a kid, I used to attach a playing card to a spoke on one of my bike's wheels. Just a thought...

    --
    "Sarcasm is for *winners*, Alan." - Charlie Harper (Two and a Half Men)
  110. I'm surprised they didn't require offroad tires by Locutus · · Score: 1

    but I'm hopeful the vuvuzela requirement is forthcoming.

    LoB

    --
    "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
  111. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Neil+Boekend · · Score: 1

    You should use your eyes. In the Netherlands you are not allowed to overtake someone unless you know it's safe to do so, whether you drive a car or a bike.
    Someone coming the other direction? WTF? Are there no rules on which side you should ride a bike where you live? The only case you can have a problem with someone coming the other direction is on a separate bike lane, where the car isn't an issue.
    If you trust your ears to know whether a car is coming up from behind you are an idiot. There may be a bike coming up from behind.

    --
    Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
  112. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by antifoidulus · · Score: 1

    Read the post again, I said your ears are the SECOND most important tool behind your eyes. Obviously you should look but it's not always possible or even that accurate. As per another bike coming up behind you, they are supposed to ring their bell before passing you, thats common courtesy. Again, ears augmenting the eyes. Please actually read posts before going on a rant next time, ok?

  113. This is a silly solution to a non-problem by grimsnaggle · · Score: 1

    When crossing streets I pay no attention to noise whatsoever. There's already so much of it that there's no information in the din. Vision is the way to go if you can. If you're blind, you're already used to taking precautions - using a guide dog, relying on crosswalks, etc. Is that a perfect, foolproof solution? No. You can't protect everyone from everything, and we haven't figured that out as a society.

    Nobody has demonstrated that blind people being run over by electric vehicles is a real problem, yet here we are championing a legislative solution. What about the 400k people dying every year from smoking related lung cancer? What about the ginormous budget deficit? Declining quality of public education? Wars abroad? You'd think our legislators would have some idea of how to prioritize. Instead, they're coming up with silly solutions to non-problems. If this proves to be a big problem in the future, then by all means, we should deal with it. But until then, we're fixing what isn't broken.

  114. iPod Haze by jklovanc · · Score: 1

    An even more dangerous issue is iPod Haze. I was driving slowly through a parking lot in a noisy car looking for a parking spot. I scan to my left looking for a spot and forward to keep from hitting something. On one forward scan there appeared a girl directly in front of me. She was engrossed in her iPod. She had walked out of a side aisle from behind an suv without pausing or looking. I stopped in time and she continued on her merry way. I ended up in line behind her at the coffee shop and asked her if she knew that had I been going a bit faster she would have been run over. She never knew I was there.

    When one has music blasting into one's ears a noisy car does not help.

  115. Spokey Dokes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This sound like a good opportunity for Spokey Dokes to broaden their product range.

  116. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Foobar_ · · Score: 1

    Pedestrian on phone killed by truck

    Toronto Police say the woman was standing on the northwest corner of Front St. and Blue Jays Way just before 9:30 p.m. Wednesday, waiting to cross to the south side of the street, when a southbound delivery truck pulled up to the intersection and turned right in front of her as the light changed.
    "The victim was on a cellphone at the time and she literally walked into the side of the truck as it was making its turn," Sgt. Tim Burrows said yesterday. "She was knocked down and the rear wheels of the truck drove over top of her."

    "I think society is in a sad state if it needs to pass a law to protect people from this," Burrows said, adding a little common sense should be all that's needed.

  117. backfiring Ford Model T by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 1

    Noises from rattling of loose metalwork or unbalanced rotating elements would also be welcome. Backfiring interspersed at irregular intervals, along with the odd component dragging the ground or falling off. The brakes should cause squealing and skidding noises.
    A car should sound like a real car!

    --
    Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
  118. Red Flag by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'd be more likely to step out in front of such cars so I wouldn't ever have to hear that again.

    There may be more of a future in that than you suppose. I expect that we'll regress to having a person walk in front of such vehicles, waving a red flag to warn bystanders of its approach.

    --
    Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
    1. Re:Red Flag by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      Funny, I was making comments a couple years ago, about how I'd miss the wonderful throaty sound of a nicely tuned exhaust note from a performance car in a future of electric vehicles.

      I used to have a 911 Turbo...and man, that thing was great. It had a very low rumble with the Borla exhaust..going through parking decks was fun when it would set off numerous car alarms that were set too sensitive, and God help you if I was going under a bridge or the like and the turbo kicked in...I've had pedestrians diving for the sides of the road not knowing what it was.

      I can't imagine an electric motorcycle would be much fun either...If I had to have one that didn't rumble, vibrate and have the "smell" of an internal combustion engine, I think I'd just soon give up riding.

      Thankfully, that will likely not happen in my future.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    2. Re:Red Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought the sound was to aid the blind, not the deaf ....

    3. Re:Red Flag by Capt.DrumkenBum · · Score: 1

      I can't imagine an electric motorcycle would be much fun either.

      I do have an electric motorcycle (Home built.) and it is a blast to ride. Virtually unlimited torque, so far I do not know what the top speed is.
      Technically I suppose it is a hybrid. But it is a properly designed hybrid. The drive train is all electric, with an internal combustion system for recharging only when the batteries run down. As soon as I get the automatic recharging system working reliably it will be one awesome machine.

      --
      If I were God, wouldn't I protect my churches from acts of me?
    4. Re:Red Flag by RapmasterT · · Score: 2

      I used to have a 911 Turbo...and man, that thing was great. It had a very low rumble with the Borla exhaust..going through parking decks was fun when it would set off numerous car alarms that were set too sensitive, and God help you if I was going under a bridge or the like and the turbo kicked in...I've had pedestrians diving for the sides of the road not knowing what it was.

      We should really have a name for people like you who are so thrilled with making loud noises.

      oh wait, we do. "Children"

    5. Re:Red Flag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh wait, we do. "Children"

      Hey! This is Slashdot! The correct term is here "Asshole" and should also be applied to those that ride the unmuffled Harleys too. Posted Anonymously for a reason, don't want the Hell's Angels fellas after me....

    6. Re:Red Flag by i.r.id10t · · Score: 1

      Go for the original Porsche high performance engine - the 4 cam Carrera

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
  119. Howl like a Stuka by niks42 · · Score: 1

    How about one of those wailing sirens like a Stuka used to use on a dive? Operated by the wind blowing through them .. faster they go, the more noise they make. Mind you if the wind were in the right direction, a car park would sound like a herd of dying animals.

  120. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Neil+Boekend · · Score: 1

    No, still can't find anything about "second". Chrome search function can't find it either
    'Round here it's not common to ring your bell when just passing someone. It may even be illegal (since it's supposed to be a warning sound. No one is in danger), but I'm not sure about that. Just as you are not allowed to honk your horn when overtaking someone.

    --
    Well, I might have a way, but it only works on a semi spherical planet in a vacuum.
  121. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by daid303 · · Score: 1

    Ah, a fellow dutch biker.

    You don't use your ears as the only system, but you use it as an early warning system for cars. You still need to look. If you want experience with how this works then get your bike to Arnhem and bike trough the city. Soon you'll start to notice something is "off", there are these big ass buses that don't make much noise. They aren't as silent as small electric vehicles, but they are also electric and don't make the noise you expect from something that large. Even after years of biking there I they still managed to scare the crap out of me, and I got almost hit by one once.

    It's large, blue and creeps on you: The god damn Arnhem trolleybus.

  122. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by pedestrian+crossing · · Score: 1

    Yet, every time the subject of cycling comes up on slashdot, there is no shortage of IDIOTS who insist that cyclists should use the sidewalk...

    --
    A house divided against itself cannot stand.
  123. Penalty for electric cars by captainpanic · · Score: 1

    This will make electric cars more expensive. And in addition, it will make them sound annoying and stupid, especially if lawmakers get involved in choosing the beeping sound.

    I don't know which lobby was involved, but I don't think that the regular petrol engine car industry opposes this silly new proposal.

    1. Re:Penalty for electric cars by Wagoo · · Score: 1

      I think it'd make living next to a road like being in room full of students all being SMS bombed.

      This is the future, come on - develop thermal proximity sensors for safety reasons, not a constant annoying sound.

  124. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Cosgrach · · Score: 1

    The "kadunk-kadunk" of freight trains is pretty much limited to freight trains.

    Umm. Not always so. The 'Kadunk-kadunk' is the wheels passing over a rail joint or switch frog. Welded rail takes care of most of it, but even passenger trains are subject to this noise. The other noise often related to moving rail cars is the 'tunk, tunk, tunk, tunk.....' of a flat wheel. These also occur on passenger cars. The most annoying is the flange squeal. Flange greasers help but it does not make it go away completely. Anyway, a friend of mine toasted a pickup truck with a locomotive today. He was on the horn the entire time - up until the moment of impact. The driver and passenger in the truck were not injured, but the truck was a total loss. The guy said that he did not see him. Ummm. Yeah. Right. The truck driver was a railroad worker as well. This happened in the yard. It is clear to everyone around that he was trying to beat the train through the crossing. Stupid.

    --
    Why is it that most of the people that I encounter seem to have been shat from the Sphincter of Mediocrity?
  125. Me drive car! by witherstaff · · Score: 2

    Sesame street has a toy with a steering wheel and various sounds. One is Cookie Monster saying "Me Drive car!".

  126. TPSEA? by Tolkien · · Score: 1

    Come on! The gov't seems to be slacking off in the outrageously-false-backronyms department!

  127. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by moonbender · · Score: 1

    Well, say you've got a high-speed passenger train coasting at 300 km/h. If you hear it coming from 1 km distance, you've got about 10 seconds to live unless you figure out what the noise is and move out of the way -- ideally with a bit extra distance since I assume standing next to the tracks as a 300 km/h train drives by isn't safe, either. Ten seconds is a fairly generous amount of time, but I also think 1 km is fairly generous example, in many situations you might not hear the train until half a kilometer or less. Since high speed rail tracks are usually quite straight, you do have a good chance of seeing the train coming from a long way, at least.

    --
    Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
  128. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by xaxa · · Score: 1

    If joints between lengths of welded rail are tapered there's hardly any "cluck" when a wheel goes over. photo. I'm not a railway engineer, so I don't know if this is the typical kind of joint, but I do know that I don't hear "clunk-clunk" from most long-distance trains I've used in the UK, except when crossing points (switches).

    Ah, I've found the Wikipedia article.

    Sloping the track (one rail higher than the other) presumably helps reduce flange noise.

  129. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by delinear · · Score: 1

    What happens if it's a bicycle or a coasting car producing little sound coming up behind you? Sound is a useful indicator taken along with all other available cues, but relying on sound to such a high degree is a bad idea from the get go, you either need to turn and look or use a mirror - every other road going vehicle has to be fitted with them. Forcing everyone else to accept noisy modifications to their vehicles just so you can continue to fool yourself that you are safe relying on sound is not the answer.

  130. It's shit like that by mapkinase · · Score: 1

    Almost every single item upgrade I do recently (clothes, electronics, car) has very dubious improvements for me, but a lot of changes which the sole purpose to improve the bottom line of a big fat ass company that makes this tool.

    --
    I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
  131. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by delinear · · Score: 2

    Exactly - the answer is not to put in place incredibly fallible systems that lead people into a false sense of security. That won't do as much to reduce accidents as raising awareness of the need to take care when crossing, there are other ways to address the visual impariment question that don't rely on making things noisy for everyone else. This just sounds like yet more knee-jerk legislation that fails to provide time or thought for investigating better solutions (and once every car has these things it will be too costly to change to a better system).

  132. Re:One Hand Clapping by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 1

    Mu.

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  133. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by delinear · · Score: 1

    I went Christmas shopping yesterday and I walked across the car park because the pacements were icy - I can tell you that once you have even a handful of cars moving around you the ability to distinguish that a car is suddenly about to pull out of a space falls to practically zero. I had to be extremely vigilant and twice had cars pull out right in front of me (and it's not like I wasn't visible, it was daylight and I was carrying a pretty big box). I still think there are a handful of situations where having a noisy vehicle is in any way useful and in almost every other situation it's just an annoyance. If we can find better solutions to that handful of situations (have moving cars have to use their headlights, like in large parts of Europe, for instance, to give you an indication that someone is in the parked vehicle ahead and may be about to pull out) then we can eliminate a massive source of noise pollution in our major cities over the next decade or so.

  134. oh no... by SuperDre · · Score: 0

    I do hope only a few motorsounds are permitted, otherwise it will be a hell as we all know a lot of people will have very annoying sounds.. Personally I don't think a car should have to make noise at all, it's not like a bicycle makes a lot noise.. Pedestrians should just watch were they are going and not just cross a street without first checking (you learn that as a toddler)..

  135. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Laurence0 · · Score: 1
    I agree - I'm just posting to add the other thing that nobody's mentioned yet...

    The rails sing when a train's approaching. I've waited at level crossings a few times when the barriers have come down, and well before you can hear the rumble of the train, you can hear a fairly high pitched tone from the tracks, similar to running your finger round a wine glass. In my experience, that's the first and most obvious sign of an approaching train.

  136. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by zippthorne · · Score: 1

    Two words: "Parking lot."

    It's not to protect the blind at street intersections. Toned signal posts already do that. It's to protect pedestrians in parking lots, where there isn't significant road noise to warn you, and you're likely to be distracted by task loading.

    Or, at least, that's where it's useful, anyway.

    --
    Can you be Even More Awesome?!
  137. Why not by Vahokif · · Score: 1

    Couldn't you just make cars broadcast some kind of signal that can be picked up by a receiver the visually impaired can carry, thereby getting rid of most noise pollution?

  138. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Skater · · Score: 2

    Here is Sydney, the trains are quite large, double storey and mainly 8 cars long but even with that they are almost silent as they approach.

    Those are passenger trains. They're relatively light and as you say, you don't really hear them. The GP was talking about freight trains, which is mostly what we have in the US. I camped near a rail line once for a couple days, and the difference between the two was night and day - the freight trains rumbled like nothing else, but the passenger trains felt like it was just an engine rolling past.

  139. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Eh? I have mirrors on bike precisely to make it always possible.

    Cheapskates who won't spend $10 on a mirror to safeguard their own ass (literally!) deserve to be run down -- they're right up there with all these ninja cyclists I see riding after dark with no lights.

  140. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by pipatron · · Score: 1

    Impress your friends by pretending to have an awesome sound system! Try to time the earthquake in some movie with the train schedule!

    --
    c++; /* this makes c bigger but returns the old value */
  141. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Skater · · Score: 1

    But... why are you standing that close to the tracks in the first place? We KNOW where trains are going to be: in the places with tracks (unlike cars which can drive on some unpaved terrain). Why would you be standing on/walking on the tracks or close enough to the tracks in the first place?

  142. only one real solution by Combatso · · Score: 1

    Make the cars hover, above our heads.. I mean come'on already... ofcourse, all hover cars have to make that "whirr whirrr whirr" 1950's hovering car noise... its the law

  143. Just look to Cleveland's RTA for the solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We've had a rash of bus fatalities recently. The solution, at first, require buses to honk when turning. This was a stop-gap until they had time to install the real solution. Loud speakers that say, and I quote, "Caution, pedestrian. Bus is turning. Bus IS turning." And the beauty, it's automatic. So any little bump, sharp enough curve and it says this. Not only that, downtown Cleveland has buses all over the place saying this constantly.

  144. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Builder · · Score: 1

    Headlights on at all times cause more motorcycle deaths though.

  145. Red Flag? by SJ · · Score: 1

    How about we just make it a law that you are more than welcome to have one of these new fangled quiet cars, so long as you employ someone to walk in front of it carrying a large red flag.

    1. Re:Red Flag? by DadLeopard · · Score: 1

      You forgot to have him blowing a horn in addition to the red flag, which was the original ordinance. "the Locomotive Act, in 1865 requiring self-propelled vehicles on public roads in the United Kingdom be preceded by a man on foot waving a red flag and blowing a horn. This effectively killed road auto development in the UK for most of the rest of the 19th century", now that would make it really safe for everybody, though it would put a bit of a crimp in driving the Freeways and Interstate highways!

  146. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by confused+one · · Score: 1

    Well, I can assure you when you've got a multi-engined 200+ car freight passing your house, even if it's over 1/4 mile away (sorry mate, that's 400 meters), you definitely know it's there. Even the 90mph passenger trains are obvious, if only because they have to lay into the horn well in advance of crossings in order to warn off the idiots (I have to agree with the grand-parent; how can you not notice a train?)

  147. Wow: "The Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act" by pottymouth · · Score: 1

    Is there no end to the level of control this government thinks it should impose on people of this country? The fact that this seems to be taken with humour rather than concern says a lot about the mentality of this audience. Wise up kiddies, Government's natural desire to intrude (gain power) combined with the monitoring and control capability that can be achieved with today's technology should scare the hell out of everyone. I would think the people that read a site like this would appreciate that more than most. Laugh stuff like this off and you can look forward to a future where you can't take a breath without the government having control over it.

  148. Require blind people to make noise instead! by Shompol · · Score: 1

    There are two sides to this equation. Since there are fewer blind people than there are cars, same effect could be achieved at a lesser expense and city noise pollution.

  149. The woosh is on you by sourcerror · · Score: 1

    I knew about the red flag act, and GP still totally made sense.

  150. I have a solution by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

    I've finally found a purpose for all those fart apps on my iPhone.

    --
    Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
  151. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by icebrain · · Score: 1

    Most of the pedestrians I've read about that get hit by trains were either there on purpose (ie, attempting suicide), or walking down the tracks away from any marked crossing (and maybe even with headphones in, drunk, or otherwise distracted).

    There are also cases of railyard workers being struck by a loose railcar rolling around (which can be all but silent), or pinned between two of them.

    But most train accidents I read about are train vs. vehicle, where the driver of said vehicle did something stupid like stop on the tracks, go around the gate arms, or try to beat the train and cross before it got there.

    A large, modern diesel train can be surprisingly quiet if it's not blowing the horn, especially if it's moving fast.

    --
    The meek may inherit the earth, but the strong shall take the stars.
  152. Cruisetones. by FellowConspirator · · Score: 1

    I had the idea about 5 years ago for an implementation of downloadable sound packages for electric vehicles and speakers in the car's exterior to play them for just this very reason. They'd respond the the car's velocity and change in velocity so you could get the sounds of associated with changing gears, or switching from a trot to a gallop.

    I toyed with the idea of patenting the whole thing, but decided that the risk was too high (risk that there'd not be enough electric vehicles before the patent expired, risk that you'd barely make back the investment in the patent process, etc.).

    Still, I think it would be popular to wirelessly download a CruiseTone into your Nissan Leaf and make it sound just like a Porsche 911, or perhaps a stampeding elephant.

  153. Very old news. Early 1900s: by Hartree · · Score: 1

    My father used to talk about this. There were still a few electrics around in the 1920s when he was a kid. He said you had to be a little careful of them, as they were so quiet they could start moving without you realizing it.

    The trick is coming up with a sound that pedestrians will notice, but doesn't become terribly annoying compared to the good it does.

    (Vibration activated car alarms are a good example of being quite annoying while doing little worthwhile.)

  154. Great. More sound pollution. by SilverJets · · Score: 1

    One opportunity for automotive marketers and startups is the emerging business of supplying drivetones, the automotive equivalent of cell-phone ringtones. Want your green car to rev like a Ferrari or BMW? Just buy the right drivetone and crank up the exterior volume.

    Wonderful. Not only do we currently have morons that think they need to put those large, echoing mufflers on their crappy little Nissan's even more morons are going to go out and buy these things and crank them up to 11.

    How about instead of legislating more noise, they legislate an automatic system be built into the vehicle that brings it to a safe stop when it detects something in front of it? That or we keep the cars quiet and allow Darwin to do his job and cull the herd.

  155. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by moonbender · · Score: 1

    Yes, I suppose that would be the lesson to take home. :)

    --
    Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
  156. Natural selection by Rohobian · · Score: 1

    I wish there was a law against interfering with natural selection...

  157. steam cars and horse carriages too ! by DrYak · · Score: 1

    yeah ! They don't make noises so their are dangerous ! We need to force them to make noise like fuel cars. And we need to force them to emit smoke and steam, like even older cars,so they can be seen approching from afar. And we need to make it mandatory that they regularly drop some artificial poop like a real horse, to make it easy for law enforcement to trace them~

    --

    seriously, I think we have a good contender for the most stupid law of the year. Come on ! Get on with your times : as technology change, so change it carracteristics.

    and as far of security is concerned "look both ways" has always worked with past technology and will still work with silebt cars.
    instead of getting distracted by your latest shiny smartphone/mediaplayer hybrid.

    --
    "Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
  158. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Duradin · · Score: 1

    I won't go as far as a [Citation Needed] but I will ask how the hell being able to see cars better increases motorcycle deaths.

    I definitely prefer meeting (aside from those damned blue headlights, they can die in a fire (not involving my motorcycle)) cars with headlights on when riding. And I really appreciate cars with good headlights when following them.

  159. Re: It's the lack of starter noise that sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The problem with the Prius is that it doesn't announce that it has been started, like say a standard gas car does. It makes a click when it moves. The gas car makes a starter noise. I'm not that concerned about noise from a car while it's rolling down the road (there's tire noise), but when you're on a bike riding in the bike lane with parallel parked cars to your right, it's nice to have an audible warning.

    I had a Prius try to hit me once while I was walking. The driver took off, but unlike a gas car, there was no starter or running motor noise. I heard the click, but by then the car is actually moving. With gas starter and engine noises, there's communication from the vehicle.

    Donald Norman notes in at least one of his books that electronic devices tend to be rude compared to their mechanical counterparts which give more visual and audio clues as to what they are doing. Electric cars (which is what the Prius starting from the curb with no gas motor running effectively is) vs. gas exhibit the same problems. The gas car notifies with the starter "Hey, I'm starting" and then with the motor "I'm running and could move at any time". The Prius is quiet, and when the click of the electric drive engage is heard, it may already be coming for you.

  160. Shaft by srobert · · Score: 1

    I think it might be cool if your car played the theme from Shaft, cause he's a bad mutha... ... shut yo' mouth ... ... but I'm just talkin' 'bout Shaft.

  161. Just as long as... by rnturn · · Score: 1

    ... I can set the sound that my electric car makes be the one that the Jetson's car made. I can live with that level of government intrusion into my life. What I expect to happen is that some "standard" sound will be mandated resulting in city dwellers having a loss in hearing at the frequencies contained in the standard car noise after being subjected to it for a time. (Rather like folks who spent too much time in noisy work environments like factories, data centers, etc.)

    One has to wonder, though, if a mandated minimum noise level is even necessary. Much of the noise that the cars make is a result of tire contact with the road (with the exception of the car with the busted muffler that the teenager down the street drives home after getting off the late shift; everybody's got one of those living on their block). With most of the roads in the US being more pothole than road there's already plenty of noise so I'm not sure that a minimum sound is really even necessary. What's next? All cyclists must put playing cards in the spokes of their bikes like we did as kids? That actually makes more sense than a mandated sound for cars. I can be very stealthy on my bike while in my car... not so much.

    --
    CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
  162. How about... by Phics · · Score: 1

    ...introducing intelligent car noise. Have electric cars make a 'beep beep' sound as they are backing, similar to the way a larger truck might. Whilst driving forwards, change the volume and/or pitch of the audio produced at various speeds to reduce noise pollution but maintain awareness of the vehicle. Also, make the noise directional! If you focus the sound forwards, it will reduce automobile noise in neighbourhoods, (you tend to drive forwards, not sideways, so focusing the audio in the direction you are driving should help reduce noise pollution as well).

    Just some thoughts.

    --
    There are two types of people in the world; those who believe there are two types of people, and those who don't.
  163. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We do; but people will start their car, in reverse, and hold down their brakes. They'll put on their seat belt, etc., maybe sit there for a little while to make sure things are clear behind them. The reverse lights AND the brake lights are on, and the only signal that the car is beginning to move is the break lights going off. A pedestrian walking down a lane, happening on the car, either has to stand until the car begins backing up, or move past it and hope it doesn't back up over them.

  164. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In the long term we can fix blind people too, don't forget

  165. Not just for blind people by Blakflag · · Score: 1

    I just learned that around 800 pedestrians per year are hit in San Francisco alone. Forgetting jokes about bums and jaywalkers, I'm guessing a significant percentage of those people were doing exactly what they were supposed to and the car just didn't stop for the red light, or didn't yield, or they didn't see that car coming from behind in the six-way intersection. If there were no audio cues I am sure these unfortunate rates would just go up. If you're thinking in binary and believe we ONLY need one sense (sight) to protect us from accidents... give me some of what you're smoking, please...

    --
    *** DRINK MORE COFFEE ***
    1. Re:Not just for blind people by DragonWriter · · Score: 1

      I just learned that around 800 pedestrians per year are hit in San Francisco alone. Forgetting jokes about bums and jaywalkers, I'm guessing a significant percentage of those people were doing exactly what they were supposed to and the car just didn't stop for the red light, or didn't yield, or they didn't see that car coming from behind in the six-way intersection.

      And mostly not hit by electric or hybrid vehicles, so they wouldn't be helped by this law at all. And many hit by vehicles moving at speeds at which the noise level from tires, etc., even from an electric or hybrid vehicle would exceed any minimum likely to be adopted under this law (which specifically is directed at the "problem" that electrics and hybrids are too quiet at low speeds) and so wouldn't be helped by this law.

      It seems to me that the study that spurred the drive for this legislation is really inadequate to conclude that the likely safety benefit, if any, of this law is really worth the massive increase in sound pollution this is going to produce -- and the disincentive to purchase electric and hybrid vehicles, since the quiteness is part fo the appeal of such vehicles.

      OTOH, if it doesn't require retrofitting (which I haven't seen anything indicating it does), it may stimulate the purchase of electric and hybrid vehicles in the period between adoption of the law and its implementation.

  166. Meg Ryan's orgasm scene by edawstwin · · Score: 1

    Meg Ryan's orgasm scene in When Harry met Sally will be the sound my electric car makes.

    --
    I don't want to achieve immortality through my work. I want to achieve it by not dying. - Woody Allen
  167. Good grief! by mark-t · · Score: 1

    Cars making a noise to alert people to their presence is only really an issue in cities and other areas where there are likely to be pedestrians. In practice, however, the engine noise is not really that loud, unless the car muffler is broken, and in my experience, the only places that engines generally really do make more noise than just the sound of moving tires on the road is on freeways, where the engines are running fast enough that they can get quite loud, and you aren't liable to be dealing with pedestrians. Even there, however, the sound of the car tires on the road is fairly loud, and may still be something you hear before you hear the engine as a vehicle approaches... particularly if it is a newer vehicle and the muffler is working very well.

    The only argument that then remains IMO is that electric cars don't make any noise while stopped, and blind people may not be aware of them. But consider also that horses came before automobiles, and they didn't necessarily make any noise when stopped either... by the same reasoning that requires noisemakers in electric cars, in hindsight should it also have been required by law to have noisemakers installed on horses as well, which operate whenever the horse is at a standstill? Never mind the technological issues that may have existed... does that requirement not just sound totally absurd?

    What studies can they point to that show that cars whose engine doesn't make noise are more dangerous than cars that do? Is it not even remotely possible that the creators of this idea are seeing problems where none actually exist?

    Hey, if they want cars to make noise, then shouldn't car mufflers also be outlawed? After all... you wouldn't want somebody making their car more silent than it should be... [/sarcasm]

  168. Nothing scarier by J05H · · Score: 1

    ...than a Prius sliding silently past while you are cycling at speed. The first time this happened I only knew the car was there because the road vibrated differently as it approached.

    --
    gigantino.tv - Heavy but weighs nothing.
    1. Re:Nothing scarier by SilverJets · · Score: 1

      Put mirrors on your bike and use them.

  169. Famous last words... by leuk_he · · Score: 1

    I LEGALLY HAVE THE RIGHT OF WAY.

    Careful son, that gun is loaded.

    This looks like a safe place to camp."

    "I NEVER need to use a condom."

    Trust me. I know what I'm doing.

    OK

  170. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What happened to looking both ways before crossing anything? Trains could be whisper quiet, but there's still no excuse for getting hit by one. I mean really, they can only come from one of TWO directions, the tracks never move, and if you move 5 feet to either side of them you're in the clear. They also tend to make these real loud honking noises that you can hear for miles. If you're crossing tracks, why would you not take the 2 seconds to turn your head 90 degrees to the left, then 180 degrees to the right? Is that so much to ask in this day and age? Getting hit by a train is about as stupid as the steamroller scene in Austin Powers.

  171. Too many people just don't look where they walk by JimMcc · · Score: 1

    I installed a back alarm in my service van after I almost hit a pedestrian that walked out behind me because they were to busy talking on their cell phone. You know what? A month later another person walking out behind me as I was backing up! My backup alarm is not a polite sound and I am self conscious about it. So if people still walk out behind me when I backing, they'll still step out in front of a moving car regardless of the noise it makes.

  172. facts, we don't need no stinkin' facts! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Always good to create legislation from pseudo-research. "Future analysis using larger sample size would provide better estimate of the problem size." Also, the Prius - at least mine anyway - makes a REALLY LOUD beep when in reverse. This is by design.

    [url]http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811204.PDF

  173. Tesla on Top Gear by spaceyhackerlady · · Score: 1

    I remember when Top Gear tested the Tesla on their track, and the loudest sound it made was the whir of its tires. It was a bit spooky, but I suppose people will get used to it eventually. As others have mentioned, the makers of gasoline-engined cars used this as marketing FUD to discredit electric vehicles (which were viewed as quiet and civilized, as well as reliable) in the early part of the 20th century.

    There is an active electric vehicle club here in Vancouver, and their vehicles are all very nearly silent. Again, the loudest sound they usually make is their tires.

    The new electric trolley buses here are actually quite noisy. Their chopper controllers make a distinctive groaning sound. The old Brill trolleys, once again, the only sound they made was their tires.

    ...laura

  174. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    In 2008, 69,000 pedestrians were injured in motor vehicle crashes in the United States, and 4,378 pedestrians were killed.

    That's terrible. Who can we bomb about this?

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  175. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    People have been struck here by freight trains. You can't miss a North American freight train; they're huge, they're diesel, they rumble like hell, and the engineer lays on the horn if he so much as thinks he sees something on the track. I put it down mostly to suicides and drunks.

  176. laws, laws and more laws... by radub · · Score: 1

    aren't you guys ever tired of these governments regulating everything for you?

  177. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think you vastly underestimate how many visually impaired people there are. We're not just talking about full on blind people, there's a huge range of legally blind people, including the elderly.

    Personally I think it would be better to just get rid of personal automobiles altogether.

  178. Finally i can have a soundtrack by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OMG someone needs to write one of those adaptive music players like games have that get more intense as things get exciting and can like play people out when they get out of your car..

    I want mine to be an ice cream truck sound and I'll have a big sign that says "c'mere little kids"

  179. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by joocemann · · Score: 1

    It takes common sense to know when you are overdoing things; it takes common sense to know where to direct your awareness. My point still stands, and with sless words, too. Sorry you wrote so much only to reaffirm my point in the end.

  180. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by joocemann · · Score: 1

    Still, the number is miniscule when next to "every car out there" (like I said, future thinking here).

  181. Full Text by beetle496 · · Score: 1
    --
    I paid the going retail price for a Windows screen reader and got a free Unix computer!
  182. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have you ever lived near an electric commuter rail line?

    Sure they might carry 150+ people and weigh several tons per car, multiplied by three or four cars per train, but holy crap, you literally can't hear those things until they're literally right on top of you.

    This is so dangerous that the transportation authority in my area (SEPTA) requires all their regional trains to honk their horns at every single road crossing they go across. Additionally, when they're doing track work, they need a guy standing a quarter mile down the track holding up a sign with a giant red W on it, warning train engineers to honk their horns to let the work crews know a train is coming.

    Despite their weight and size, they're surprisingly quiet, up until they're about 10 feet from where you are.

  183. Personal Responsibility..... by ThisIsNotMyHandel · · Score: 1

    Maybe pedesterians and cycleists should take personal responsibility for their actions and make sure they are aware of their environment. Sadly, I know that this is probably asking too much from the "y' generation.

  184. Ice cream truck! by mb-texas · · Score: 1

    Will drive the neighborhood kids crazy.

  185. Ghost Car by loimprevisto · · Score: 1

    People don't believe just how quiet hybrids are. A friend of mine had a Prius that we called the ghost car. He took delight in sneaking up on us in parking lots and blasting the horn; sort of a way of counting coup. We took to jamming small pebbles in the tire treads to give us some warning...

    --
    Much Madness is divinest Sense --
    To a discerning Eye --
    Much Sense -- the starkest Madness
  186. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sure they might carry 150+ people and weigh several tons per car, multiplied by three or four cars per train, but holy crap, you literally can't hear those things until they're literally right on top of you.

    I just want to provide a counter example. I can certainly hear electric passenger trains carrying over one-hundred-fifty people while I am next to, not under them. Bold applied to the quote above for clarity. Perhaps you meant virtually?

  187. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by xaxa · · Score: 1

    If you can't see whether it's safe to pull out to overtake don't overtake. If you can't look behind yourself when you're cycling practise off-road, or buy mirrors (I've never tried them, some people like them). Your ears are useful for alerting you to some things, but they can't replace your eyes. Ears are useless when there's a noisy car coming the other way, or an aircraft overhead.

    (Back in the summer I was on my way to a friend's house, there's a nice road through a big park which is closed to cars on Sundays. There was a parked car at the side. To check it was OK to move out, I turned to look behind me, and stuck my arm out to signal that I was overtaking at the same time. I almost pushed the "recreational cyclist" (lycra, age 40, 5kg bike, etc) guy slipstreaming me off his bike, he was following so close. Fortunately he got the idea very quickly and hit his brakes before I used mine (I hadn't been able to see if there were any cars following, so I didn't pull out). At the point I'd turned round his front wheel was adjacent to and centimetres from my back wheel. He apologised.)

  188. A loop of the drum intro to Hot For Teacher... by AmazingRuss · · Score: 1

    ...would be my choice if I had an electric car.

  189. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Have+Brain+Will+Rent · · Score: 1

    I agree with everything you said except that 10+ is way too old - children should have learned to look and not to step in front of moving objects by the time they are 5 and if they haven't and are not mentally impaired then the parent(s) are doing a pretty crappy job. I find it amazing how many times I'll see a parent with a small child just step off the curb in the middle of the block and jaywalk their little kid across a busy street with little or no effort to check for moving cars. It really is mind boggling.

    --
    The tyrant will always find a pretext for his tyranny - Aesop
  190. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by xaxa · · Score: 1

    I usually walk/cycle around trying to cause as little inconvenience as possible. If there's plenty of time to walk across the street I won't press the button for the lights to go red. If there's a car looking to pull out and it's clear behind me I'll let him out to save him overtaking 10 seconds later.

    My propensity to do this depends on the other vehicle. I'll avoid inconveniencing a bus. I don't care much either way about a normal/small car. I don't bother trying to be nice to SUV-like vehicles. I'll go out of my way to inconvenience a stretched Hummer. (This is based on what vehicles I consider appropriate for the area I'm in. SUVs and stretched Hummers aren't appropriate vehicles for cities.)

    Clearly this is a recipe for traffic gridlock.

    Not really -- not long-term, anyway. Once journeys become too inconvenient people change their route (or mode of transport). It should make walking more appealing.

    (I do this myself all the time. I'll cycle through a park or along the river to work, but I don't use that route at the weekend if I'm in a hurry. There are too many people, especially unpredictable children riding their bikes/scooters all over the place. I have a route across the city for normal times, one for night (for 3am on Monday, etc) and one to avoid swarms of drunk clubbers (for 3am on Saturday, etc). My dad will drive here on a Sunday, but on any other day of the week he'll take the train.)

  191. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by xaxa · · Score: 1

    Do trucks in Canada have railings along the sides at wheel level to stop things going underneath? They obviously don't prevent things like this, but they can make them less serious.

    Picture here (the one at the top, and sort-of on the road tanker near the bottom). American ones don't, in my limited experience.

  192. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 1

    I've seen electric car drivers write into the paper saying that they are constantly having to honk at pedestrians who get in their way even though they can see the car coming. Some pedestrians even look at the car coming straight towards them but carry on walking on a collision course. People have become so accustomed to cars making noise that apparently they don't connect the dots when we see a car coming towards us that isn't making any noise. Maybe they think that because there's no noise, the car is decelerating or something. I've been known to be startled by Priuses in parking lots. There's something about the combination of noise and visual warnings that we've gotten used to, and suddenly taking one of those away is going to have an impact. (Please, no lectures about how petrol-engined cars are just as quiet as electric cars. They're not. Shut up.)

    One of the things I like about certain neighbourhoods in San Francisco is the fact that you can sit outside a cafe and hear yourself think even though a bus is going past and labouring up those hills. That's because they're trolleybuses and they whisper along. I'd hate to imagine having to recreate the sound of a noisy diesel engine to make up for that.

    When they reintroduced trams in Manchester about 20 years ago they added these nice little horns that give off a soft hoot rather than an aggressive honk. It's like almost like a soft whistle. Very easy on the ear, not threatening, but enough to let you know that the tram is there (they're so quiet you wouldn't believe it), which is necessary in some of the more confusing street layouts where pedestrians and trams mingle.

    I think it's worth looking into rather than leaving it up to natural selection as many people are sure to be suggesting below. It wasn't so long ago that safety features on automobiles were a novelty and the know-all "I call bullshit" /. crowd's reaction in those days would probably have been "if they get killed in a car crash then it's their own tough shit". You wouldn't get away with that now. That's one thing I suppose we should thank Ralph Nader for.

    --
    Drill baby drill - on Mars
  193. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by GNious · · Score: 1

    You would not believe the number of pedestrians who dart out onto the street in front of me without looking. [..] I am capable of going from 20 to 0 in a ridiculously short distance.

    Sorry, you're doing this wrong - how are they going to learn?

  194. Someone in front of you and they didnt notice you? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Use your fucking horn. that's what it's for. Otherwise, let us live in our cities without constant bullshit noise.

    Make driving tests more stringent.. don't dumb down society, expect more from it. Bring people UP. Don't let people continue to slip into this pathetic world of perfectly quiet cars with a stupid fucking SPEAKER playing FAKE car noise...

  195. This is disingenuous feel-good nonsense by RapmasterT · · Score: 1

    30 years ago this might have been relevant, when cars sounded like heavy machinery, but modern gas engines make nearly zero noise on their own. Electric cars are not exactly silent either. The difference between the two is far, far less than people are pretending.

    combine that with the fact that cars are only dangerous when they're coming towards you, and that's where they make the least amount of relative noise. All this would do is cut down on stupid blind people from being hit by electric cars...and still getting hit by GAS cars.

    This is just another political agenda of a politician or two wanting to push easy feel good laws through to bolster their career, at the expense of rational and sensible legislation.

  196. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I always look".....well, even you sir, are a member of the human race and as inconceivable as it is to your young mind you too will forget to do routine activities like look both ways before crossing. There are also those odd situations where cars are in unexpected places sneaking up behind you, like unmarked roads, parking lots, a service vehicle driving on a sidewalk, airport vehicles, back alleys (where there may not be enough space for a person to walk and a car to pass safely).

    You may want to pass on parenting, BTW, if you expect kids to be controllable automatons like a computer...they just do random things. Make it safer for them, put sound on electric cars.

  197. WTF? by hesaigo999ca · · Score: 1

    What is the purpose of having some car noises, just to know that your car is coming along, so that someone can hear you instead of see you??? I am unsure, but if I had a choice, I would try to get the noise of the jetsons ship, sort of a bubbly noise....you know the one i am talking about!

  198. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by infinite9 · · Score: 1

    The thing that floors me is that people get hit by trains. TRAINS! We're talking like five-thousand plus tons of steel rumbling down a track, and people don't notice. How is this even possible? How self-absorbed do you have to be to notice a freaking TRAIN. I used to live not far from a freight line and the whole bloody ground shook when a train went by...

    I live in the chicago area. And people do indeed get hit by trains of a fairly regular basis. And I'll explain how it happens.

    It's very difficult to get hit by a train at my station. My station has only one track. Farther out in the suburbs, most of the trains are inbound in the morning and outbound in the evening. There's a few places with double tracks and points where trains going the other direction can let other trains pass. At most stations, there are parking lots on both sides of the track. When my train stops, people get out, then walk behind the train, crossing the tracks, so they can get to their car. They do this with the arms down and lights going. This is arguably safe because there's one train and one track, and the train is heading the other direction. So it's impossible to get hit by a train unless the train backs up. And trains aren't exactly known for their acceleration. Of course, this doesn't stop the local police from writing tickets for this behavior. :-/

    Closer in to downtown, the train stations have two or more tracks. Here's how people get hit. Their train stops and they get out. The arms are down and flashing. They cross both sets of tracks behind the train. They think it's safe because the train is stopped and will go the other way. What they don't see is the express training passing next to their train on the other track. They think it's their train causing the lights and arms to come down. Their view of the express train is blocked by their stopped train. And they can't hear the train horn because of the crossing arm bell, and the sound is blocked by the stopped train. In this way, people will step in to the path of a 50mph express train. The result is body parts scattered everywhere.

    There's also the occasional suicide which can be accomplished at any station where express trains don't stop.

    --
    Disconnect your television. Do your own research. Draw your own conclusions. They're probably lying. Don't be a sheep.
  199. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1. Maybe you should consider looking down the tracks to see if there's a massive, moving, double-story vehicle bearing down on you. I don't know, but I'd think the equivilant of a thin, 2-story house moving towards me might catch my eye. And if they're somehow notorious for being magically quiet, then yeah, I'd maybe glance down the track to make sure I'm not going to be hit by this massive thing!

    2. If you're trying to leap across the tracks in the 5 seconds before it reaches you, then maybe you deserve to be hit by it if you trip and fall. If it's 20 meters away, maybe, just maybe you should wait for it. ESPECIALLY if it's only 8 cars long. Oh no... leap in front of a moving train, or wait then 20 fucking seconds for it to pass! Hmm... THERE'S a tough choice.

    3. The whole topic of the thread is being hit by accident because of noise. Suicides are irrelevant, and can be discarded from the thread.

  200. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by StikyPad · · Score: 1

    We've always told our kids to look both ways AND listen when crossing. They're pretty good about it most of the time, but kids are prone to distraction and excitation.

    One day they were playing at a friend's house when an SUV came barreling down the (residential) street and ran over their friend's dog without even attempting to slow down, and without stopping after the fact. The guy must have been either drunk, highly distracted, or both, but as unfortunate as it was, they certainly learned a healthy fear of the street after that incident.

    In case there's any confusion, yes, I'm suggesting we start using dogs for live training exercises.

  201. Lawyers.. by Issarlk · · Score: 1

    ... must be happy. I can see an auto firm suing another because their sound his too similar to their trademarked copyrighted sound.

  202. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by R.Mo_Robert · · Score: 1

    Sorry, you're doing this wrong - how are they going to learn?

    I'm too nice to do anything more than a scowl (or, at intersections where they have a red hand and I a green light, an eye-roll or barely-passing-through-because-you-shouldn't-be-here now).

    However, I do so with great frequency. It is my home that they will learn ... sometime. (Note: I work on a university campus, so foot traffic--both at legal and illegal times--isn't all that uncommon.)

    --
    R.Mo
  203. Musical Composition by userw014 · · Score: 1

    Suppose that different actions of a car have different sound effects - turning right, left, or going straight. Forwards or backwards. Accelerating or braking. Then suppose that for IP/copyright reasons, different car manufacturers have different sounds - perhaps even down to the model.

    SOMEONE will take a bunch of these cars in a huge parking lot and make performance art out of it.

  204. Horns by aardwolf64 · · Score: 1

    "The Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act would require electric cars and hybrids to make noise"...

    And to facilitate this request, Toyota will be installing standard a special horn that plays when you press on the steering wheel... also known as "The Horn".

  205. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The problem is in the hindbrain. Our inner reptile expects that the car will step around or over us just like everything else did in the past 100MY.

  206. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by userw014 · · Score: 1

    I once heard that most car/train accidents involve local people - who have grown accustomed to the trains and the crossings and take chances that someone unfamiliar with the crossing wouldn't take.

    I suppose the same could be said of pedestrians using the tracks as a convenient path. I used train tracks in the winter as a kid as a route home after delivering newspapers. (The rails provided a snow free path that made the 1 1/2 mile trek back home significantly easier. I only had to jump off the tracks into the snow filled ditch once a month or so. More frequently, I only had to jump to the other set of tracks going the other direction.)

  207. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by noidentity · · Score: 1

    When I bicycle, I try to use the road, but given the idiot drivers (and I do drive occasionally, so I know that one can drive non-idiotically), it's often idiotic not to use the sidewalk. I generally ride on to the grass and allow pedestrians to come by, since in my mind they have the right-of-way.

  208. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by toddestan · · Score: 1

    My guess is that if motorcycles have their headlights on, and cars do not, then the motorcycles stand out more. If everyone has their headlights on, motorcycles blend back in. Not sure if it make a big difference, especially nowadays when many cars already have daytime running lights.

  209. Quieter city by LongearedBat · · Score: 1

    When you're on a country road (or in the suburbs at 2 o'clock on a Monday night) and a single car approaches from a distance, you usually hear the noise of the tyres, not the engines.
    From many (most?) cars, the noise that really carries, is the noise of the tyres.

    Now imagine the noise in a city where all vehicles are fully electric. You would actually hear the sound of tyres on the road so much better. In fact, you would hear everything else so much better too. Added noise from electric vehicles would not be necessary, as tyres might be the source of most noise anyway.

    That said, there will still be decades of overlap from now until a time of only electric vehicles.

    And as others here have already pointed out... look before you leap. (Applies to everyone involved in traffic.) As it is now, with all the noise, you can't rely on your ears to pick up the noise of that one car that is currently hurtling straight towards you. So I don't really see the need for added noise.

  210. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by Builder · · Score: 1

    Feel free to google for AA and RAC studies in the UK that show this.

    As of a few years ago, motorcycles have been manufactured with their lights on at all times that the engine is running. Even before that, it was advised that you run with your headlight on.

    This meant that you stood out more. And fatality stats generated showed that this made a big difference.

    New studies show that when cars have their lights on, motorcycles blend back in and are not noticed.

  211. New Bumper Stickers for Priuses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Loud Batteries Save Lives
    Save Your Life, Be Aware, Quiet Running Priuses are Everywhere
    I'd Be Quiet If You Had Paid Attention

  212. Re:Why trust your ears? Unless you're blind that i by GNious · · Score: 1

    Then just please don't do like me: I swerved on my bicycle, doing ca 55KPH (30MPH?), due to a pedestrian walking without looking or thinking, and ended up with a broken back :(

    I will guarantee that she did not understand that she caused the accident...