Hacker News Reader

Comment by gst | Hacker News Reader

That's exactly the wrong approach.

Better approach: Install a small wireless sender in the car that broadcasts at a given frequency.

Then allow people who want a minimum noise level to buy a small receiver that broadcasts those signals (or another type of indication signal) to a headset.

This allows you to keep the noise level down and at the same time provides "notifications" to the visually impaired.

View on HN

Neat idea, but two significant problems.

1. Blind folks generally rely on directional sound. Knowing a car's nearby is better than nothing, but you can't tell how fast it's approaching you, from what direction.

2. In a city, it'd never stop beeping at you.

Also, by forcing the purchase of a receiver for something that in some cases is vital safety information, you'll by definition have more accidents than you would if it were a real sound.

And at the same time you have less people dying because of the noise: http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2007/aug/23/sciencenews.uk...

1. The directional information is perceived due to the stereo sound. If you manage to give the location information to the receiver somehow it can generate the stereo sound appropriately. Maybe by using an ultrasound sender and receivers that are located near one's ears.

2. Beeping was just an example. Just "encode" the information as motor noise and it will sound more "natural".

That puts the onus on the visually impaired and safety-conscious to protect themselves, and I don't think thats something you want to do.

Headsets would also decrease your ability to hear other things. You'd hear the prius with the transmitter but not the real cars or other pedestrians or bicycles.

Dumb idea.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com