- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
Despite US dominance in so many different areas of technology, we’re sadly somewhat of a backwater when it comes to car headlamps. It’s been this way for many decades, a result of restrictive federal vehicle regulations that get updated rarely. The latest lights to try to work their way through red tape and onto the road are active-matrix LED lamps, which can shape their beams to avoid blinding oncoming drivers.
From the 1960s, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards allowed for only sealed high- and low-beam headlamps, and as a result, automakers like Mercedes-Benz would sell cars with less capable lighting in North America than it offered to European customers.
A decade ago, this was still the case. In 2014, Audi tried unsuccessfully to bring its new laser high-beam technology to US roads. Developed in the racing crucible that is the 24 Hours of Le Mans, the laser lights illuminate much farther down the road than the high beams of the time, but in this case, the lighting tech had to satisfy both the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the Food and Drug Administration, which has regulatory oversight for any laser products.
The good news is that by 2019, laser high beams were finally an available option on US roads, albeit once the power got turned down to reduce their range.
NHTSA’s opposition to advanced lighting tech is not entirely misplaced. Obviously, being able to see far down the road at night is a good thing for a driver. On the other hand, being dazzled or blinded by the bright headlights of an approaching driver is categorically not a good thing. Nor is losing your night vision to the glare of a car (it’s always a pickup) behind you with too-bright lights that fill your mirrors.
This is where active-matrix LED high beams come in, which use clusters of controllable LED pixels. Think of it like a more advanced version of the “auto high beam” function found on many newer cars, which uses a car’s forward-looking sensors to know when to dim the lights and when to leave the high beams on.
Here, sensor data is used much more granularly. Instead of turning off the entire high beam, the car only turns off individual pixels, so the roadway is still illuminated, but a car a few hundred feet up the road won’t be.
Rather than design entirely new headlight clusters for the US, most OEMs’ solution was to offer the hardware here but disable the beam-shaping function—easy to do when it’s just software. But in 2022, NHTSA relented—nine years after Toyota first asked the regulator to reconsider its stance.
You must log in or register to comment.
While my car was being repaired after a crash, the insurance company gave me a rental to use for the duration. The rental company only had a Land Rover Evoque (or something), and that car had the fancy led matrix lights. It was amazing! You could actually see the light being “shaped” on the road in front, going around incoming traffic, it was constantly moving. To me it was a bit distracting though…
Your low beams were fine 20 years ago. Don’t create this expectation in drivers that they have to turn night into day. That only adds to the problem of asshole drivers prioritizing their ability to see over other people’s ability to see. Matrix headlights are unnecessary and create orders of magnitude more light pollution
Blinding headlights are due to poorly aligned low beams, too bright LED headlights, bigger cars with their headlights mounted higher and higher. So the solutions are: low beam alignment that can’t be made to blind you by the driver, regulation on luminosity and color spectrum of lights, stop financial incentives to make vehicles large, heavier, deadlier.
Low beams were fine until idiots started putting them four feet above the ground. Now they’re in the eyes of anyone not driving a monster truck.
Except the lower ones are still there. There’s a set of lights every 18 inches. Why are there three sets of lights on some of these trucks?
I bike at night often. Very few turn off their blinders for me. It’s so bad that I have to come to a full stop until the car passes. If you have ever turned off your blinders for bikers at night: Thank you, seriously. We appreciate it more than you know.
And to all the cyclists who use a bright led lamp on their handlebar, remember to also point them down, not straight ahead. I’ve been blinded as a pedestrian and a driver by cyclists who don’t position their lights correctly.
My front light is cut off at the top like a car light. No blinding light but the road is VERY well lit ahead.
As a cyclist who really tries to point their light downward to not blind others: amen.
The light I use on my bike is on that I attach to the handle bar for each use, so it’s not super duper fixed - just meaning I can adjust it on the fly if I need to.
I 100% angle it up and point it right back at cats driving with their high beams on. Almost every time they turn theirs off and I lower my light back down.
I suspect a lot of them now are the automatic high beams that cars absolutely should not have.
- Install bringht LED lights which make your eyes audibly scream on your bike.
- Switch it on whenever such an idiot comes towards you.
- Avoid their sweering motion of sudden blindness when they loose control over their 4-Ton Monster truck.
- …
- Profit
Alternatively, use a welding mask when cycling at night and leave the light switched on. Avoid planes which try to land on you.
/s … just in case
That’s the reason I think matrix lights should be outlawed. They allow plausible deniability for the driver. “oh sorry, is my matrix broken?” No, it never worked to begin with; bikes and pedestrians are blinded. Drivers on the opposite lane are blinded if there’s a divider between sensor and lamp. You’re illuminating the town like breaking dawn because your matrix doesn’t care about sleep, either!
It seems to me like we didn’t have this problem twenty years ago. If blinding LEDs are the problem, why not just not allow them anymore for headlights? It takes 5 seconds to pop in a new incandescent headlight on cars that have them, and well made ones can last 20+ years depending on the construction. Visibility is good and equivalent to some LEDs with higher end lamps, and it doesn’t create a superbly unnatural light that impairs the other drivers, pedestrians, or nature. It would also reduce light pollution.
On very rare occasion, the progressive step forward, actually looks a lot like the road backwards. It would take a long time to implement, but anything worth doing is worth taking the time to do it right.
Auto sensing technology is going to be more of a glaring headache in 20 years, when you have half of the cars with failing sensors and everyone getting blinded even worse. Adaptive Driving Beams (ADB) are not a solution, it does not properly address the issues of glare, and it will likely only make the problem worse by further removing human interaction from headlight controls.
Visibility is good and equivalent to some LEDs with higher end lamps
No. Not even close. LEDs are blinding because they have such high output. That high output is what makes things visible.
That’s what high beams are for… Cars don’t need to light the dark side of the moon, drivers only need to see the roadway in front of them. Both provide ample illumination, it’s just one allows you to see the color of a zit on a mouse 3 miles away, which is entirely not necessary for safe night driving.
And I was saying that some higher end incandescent lamps are equivalent to some LEDs. I know there are LEDs that far exceed the lumens of traditional lamps.
Which LEDs have you seen that are equivalent to some incandescent lamps?
Last car with LEDs I had, made the road completely visible with the low beams, something which no car with halogens has done for me. It also had an extremely clear cutoff so as not to blind oncoming traffic, whereas many incandescent headlamps have no real cutoff line, so they can actually be more annoying for oncoming traffic.
When I turned on the high beams, they’d automatically black out the parts where there were other cars (both oncoming and ones driving in front of me), while still keeping the sides of the road illuminated much further than low beams would, so if a deer decided to commit sudoku, I’d at least get a heads up. But I was nearly never flashed to drop down to low beams. And I live in a country where everyone knows to flash when they’re being blinded - and to drop to low beams when being flashed.
I can tell you that good visibility has saved me from getting expensive venison more than once. I can also tell you that in any car I’ve had with good low beams, I’ve switched off my high beams exceptionally early when there’s oncoming traffic, so really, there’s LESS glare for other drivers.
More and more I am tempted to buy one of those 36,000 lumen flashlights and shine it at people who refuse to remove their high beams. You can tell when it’s just a tall truck and some asshole with high beams.
Can anyone explain this part to me, like I’m five?
From the 1960s, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards allowed for only sealed high- and low-beam headlamps, and as a result, automakers like Mercedes-Benz would sell cars with less capable lighting in North America than it offered to European customers.
Meaning it legally must be a sealed unit with only 2 states, high and low. In Europe and/or other places there may be multiple angle states and/or strip headlights or other stuff based on their specific regulations. The result is that the efficacy of US headlight systems have a hard upper bound for how effective they can be, based on what was practical to do in the 60s.
Sealed beam headlights are the whole thing, lens, reflector, bulb all in one assembly. You don’t replace the bulb with these, you replace the entire light. Think old cars/trucks when everything had standardized round glass headlights. Not unique designs per model.
Because Mercedes Benz couldn’t use their fancy euro headlights for cars in the US, they had to use the standardized sealed beam lights, which were not as powerful.
because few people in this society spend money on something that makes other people’s lives easier.
Honestly, while it does add more moving parts into the equation, I wonder how realistic it is to just take the plunge and go with driving a car via display rather than directly looking through glass.
Ever since we got cars with a pane of glass up front rather than goggles, that’s been kind of the standard way that motorists operated – look through a big sheet of glass.
But that was also a system that was developed based on technology from around 1900.
There have been displays that provide heads-up augmentation of stuff, projected on the windshield. But end of the day, maybe instead of augmenting vision, it’s time to just outright go with displays.
I mean, it’s more moving parts, but you’ve got a lot of moving parts, computers and such, already involved in controlling your car now.
Maybe shining really bright lights in front of a car as a way to see at night when traveling at high speed is getting obsolete.
-
As people get older, their eyes inevitably don’t adjust as quickly to darkness after being hit by a bright light. Can’t do much about that short of swapping out all headlights on older cars, even if you produce a new standard. It takes decades and decades to age that out. But this provides an immediate benefit to users of such displays.
-
We had an thread up the other day on !news@lemmy.world talking about how people driving tall vehicles that have poor visibility in front create some risks for kids. You can put cameras wherever you want.
-
If you’re looking out a window, you have some blind spots due to the roof support beams. Doesn’t need to exist with a display.
-
Other people in the car don’t need to obstruct one’s view
-
We’ve gotten increasingly-compelling systems that can process data from the outside world. Here’s a video clip from ENVG-B. That’s a US military system that can do things like do edge-detection and highlighting – I believe it aims to specifically detect and highlight humans – see into the infrared, prevents people from being blinded by flashes (which is a particular problem for the military, with muzzle flash and explosions and such).
-
While there is some competition with self-driving cars (if I never drive my car, if the computer drives it, then I don’t need to see to drive it) there’s a lot of overlap in the problems to solve. For self-driving cars, the car has to be able to generate a 3d model of the world around itself with sensors and such. That’s also the same data that you’d need to be obtaining, processing, and providing a human driver with if you wanted to provide an display of the world around oneself.
-
You can leverage sensor fusion, combining data from many different sensors. LIDAR, millimeter-wave radar, numerous cameras, hyperspectral imaging, light polarity-sensitive sensors.
-
While our eyes are pretty good, there are some environments that we run into, like dense fog or rapid transitions in brightness, that they just aren’t all that great at dealing with compared to the sensors that we have.
-
If you have the driver driving via display, a lot of constraints on where you place them in the vehicle go away. You don’t have the left-hand/right-hand split with vehicles, or even need to have the driver sitting at the front of the car. You can make a vehicle a lot shorter, and still potentially provide for pretty good visibility – and I understand that wanting more visibility is part of why people buy taller vehicles.
-
Windows aren’t great in terms of thermal insulation, especially single-pane car windows. If we didn’t have to have a lot of a car’s sides covered in glass, we wouldn’t need to spend as much energy on climate control.
-
Windows – though newer ones have improved on this – let in a fair amount of solar energy. Be nice to not have the “greenhouse effect” with a hot car that’s been parked in a parking lot in summer.
-
You can provide for more privacy if people can’t just see into cars. Some people tint vehicles for this reason, but tint comes with visibility drawbacks.
-
It’s not obvious that a parked car contains something valuable left in it, and you can make a car a lot more secure if someone can’t just smash in a window to get in.
-
Laminated car windshields are pretty safe and durable compared to their early forms, but they’re still a weak point in terms of safety; people have had rocks go through them and whack a driver.
-
One situation that I recall reading about that apparently has a nasty tendency to hit epileptics is driving down tree-shaded avenues; that can produce the regular flashing at about the right frequency to trigger seizures. If you’ve got a computer in the middle, it can filter that out.
One downside is that I’m not really happy with the present state of computer-integrated cars in terms of privacy. Like, it’s technically doable to build a system like this without privacy implications – a computer gathering data doesn’t need to mean that that data goes to anyone else – but the track record car manufacturers have here is not good. I don’t want to buy a car with sensors that can measure everything around me if what it’s going to do with that data is to then have the manufacturer try to figure out to make money from that data.
Another is that cars tend to have longer lives than do computers, as automotive technology hasn’t moved as quickly. As things stand today, you can’t really upgrade the computer in a car, much less sensors. A thirty-year-old car from 1994 might be perfectly driveable in 2024, but if we built a computer into it back in 1994, it’d have long-outdated electronics. My guess is that the kind of view of the world we could provide in 2054, thirty years from now, is gonna be a lot better than the view we can provide in 2024. I don’t really want to throw out a car in order to get a newer car computer and sensors. That’s not a fundamental problem – it’d be possible to make cars that have computer systems and sensors that can be replaced – but the economics would need to make sense.
What’s the backup for when the cams burn out or the screen goes kaput while you’re going 70mph? All those electronic systems in modern cars have backups. If power steering goes out, you can still turn the wheel with increased effort. If backup cam goes out, you have rear view mirrors. If the brakes fail, you have a manual cable-driven e-brake.
I don’t trust man-made technology as far as I can throw it. I want redundancy.
You wouldn’t like the cybertruck then, completely drive by wire steering, no physical connection.
Nope, never will set foot in one. If the Cybertruck and similar future vehicles were under strict regulations and maintenance schedules like what the FAA does for airliners, which are also fly by wire, then I might consider it. Right now all I have to go on is trusting Elon’s company and his engineers directly. And they seem to just be wanting to create a flashy cell phone on wheels full of gimmicks, not any sort of dependable vehicle.
I recently learned not all commercial craft are fly by wire when watching a mentor pilot video, I was amazed it was legal. ofc it was a crash video, but still the fact it was legal appalled me
It sounds like describing Ng’s tank from Snow Crash.
…I want to drive Ng’s tank from Snow Crash.
Ng drove his vehicle from a VR interface:
Ng himself, or at least, Ng’s avatar, is a small, very dapper Vietnamese man in his fifties, hair plastered to his head, wearing military-style khakis. At the time Y.T. comes into his office, he is leaning forward in his chair, getting his shoulders rubbed by a geisha.
But it is a very strange thing to do, for one reason: The geisha is just a picture on Ng’s goggles, and on Y.T.'s. And you can’t get a massage from a picture. So why bother?
Ng sits back down and the geisha goes right back to it. Ng’s desk is a nice French antique with a row of small television monitors along the back edge, facing toward him. He spends most of his time watching the monitors, even when he is talking.
Y.T. gets up and walks around behind his desk to look.
Each of the little TV monitors is showing a different view out his van: windshield, left window, right window, rearview. Another one has an electronic map showing his position: inbound on the San Bernardino, not far away.
“The van is under voice command,” he explains. “I removed the steering-wheel-and-pedal interface because I found verbal commands more convenient. This is why I will sometimes make unfamiliar sounds with my voice – I am controlling the vehicle’s systems.”
Recognizing his van is easy enough. It is enormous. It is eight feet high and wider than it is high, which would have made it a wide load in the old days when they had laws. The construction is boxy and angular. it has been welded together out of the type of flat, dimpled steel plate usually used to make manhole lids and stair treads. The tires are huge, like tractor tires with a more subtle tread, and there are six of them: two axles in back and one in front. The engine is so big that, like an evil spaceship in a movie, Y.T. feels its rumbling in her ribs before she can see it; it is kicking out diesel exhaust through a pair of squat vertical red smokestacks that project from the roof, toward the rear. The windshield is a perfectly flat rectangle of glass about three by eight feet, smoked so black that Y.T. can’t make out an outline of anything inside. The snout of the van is festooned with every type of high-powered light known to science, like this guy hit a New South Africa franchise on a Saturday night and stole every light off every roll bar, and a grille has been constructed across the front, welded together out of rails torn out of an abandoned railroad somewhere. The grille alone probably weighs more than a small car.
“I tried prostheses for a while – some of them are very good. But nothing is as good as a motorized wheelchair. And then I got to thinking, why do motorized wheelchairs always have to be tiny pathetic things that strain to go up a little teeny ramp? So I bought this – it is an airport firetruck from Germany – and converted it into my new motorized wheelchair.”
“America is wonderful because you can get anything on a drive-through basis. Oil change, liquor, banking, car wash, funerals, anything you want – drive through! So this vehicle is much better than a tiny pathetic wheelchair. It is an extension of my body.”
“When the geisha rubs your back?”
Ng mumbles something and his pouch begins to throb and undulate around his body. “She is a daemon, of course. As for the massage, my body is suspended in an electrocontractive gel that massages me when I need it. I also have a Swedish girl and an African woman, but those daemons are not as well rendered.”
“And the mint julep?”
“Through a feeding tube. Nonalcoholic, ha ha.”
That might be a bit of a jump past where we are today technologically, since he’s got a tactile-feedback rig for VR and the car driving under voice control. But, yeah, it’d be a pretty capable vehicle.
-
Removed by mod
That requires the driver to actually care
This, and the one facing the other side of the road needs to be angled lower than the other one, that’s it.
That would need proper training - meaning a drivers license that’s worth the plastic it occupies. Which it isn’t. Compared to the EU, a north American driver’s license is like letting a paper plane flyer in an A380 and saying “There’s the light switch, there’s the Autopilot, go fly”.
I fucking wish, we rarely get that here in North America. I had that on my old Mazda 3, and fucking loved it. I’d always keep them angled all the way down in the city with well-lit streets and only angle them up on the highway
Removed by mod
You’re right, it’s intended to compensate for extra sag of the rear suspension, but if I don’t need them aimed up then I might as well keep them down so as not to dazzle any oncoming drivers
I dint think they make those on BMWs, or at least not my neighbors bmw.
Modern BMWs auto-level, so they don’t need manual adjustment.
Nor is losing your night vision to the glare of a car (it’s always a pickup) behind you with too-bright lights that fill your mirrors.
It really fucking is. Nothing is a bigger red flag to me than a pickup. 98% of pickup drivers are assholes.
My catchphrase when driving has become “It’s always a fucking pickup”
My personal one is “Dumb fuck in a truck.”
This could be really simple to achieve with polarisation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polarizer
A polarised filter on the headlight with an other one on the windshield. Reflected light would be non polarised, thus not filtered.
I have my doubts about this being easy, since the other necessary function of headlights is being seen.
It’s a tuning applied to such cars. You can get it at any sporting goods store. Look for the Louisville Slugger, a fan favourite.
Fuck oncoming drivers, blind them more.
My problem is my state (MI) refuses to enact any kind of road worthy certification process. We have too many trucks and cars with illegal headlights and brake lights. I’ve seen green, blue, purple headlights (mostly modded jeeps) and taillights so tinted I couldn’t see them stopping during the day. And lifted trucks that never reposition their lights so you are blinded no matter what you drive.
We get laws that stop the new tech of active dimming but at the same time we have lazy chicken shit cops that just let these distracting things that are already illegal just slide on by. Might as well buy an import with the good lights or import the parts and install them yourself.
We have too many trucks and cars with illegal headlights
considers
You know, thinking about it…we have traffic speed cameras that automatically detect speeding and issue fines.
It’d probably actually be pretty easy to have a sensor or series of sensors that just sit by a road and detect improperly-mounted headlights. You’re just looking for a vehicle that’s putting out too much light too high up.
You need some poles with light sensors at the appropriate height by the side of the road and a speeding-camera-style thing to grab the license plate. Maybe wait for a series of them to trip as a vehicle is coming down the road, to avoid false positives.
Actually, thinking about it…it’d be even easier than speeding cameras, because you aren’t constrained to stick 'em where people are speeding. Can just put 'em at places like toll booths and such, where you already have someone stopping.
Or have the sensors mounted on the cop cars themselves. So driving by them can trigger an alert, it will give them the ability to confirm the readings or issue a fix it ticket that won’t be an automatic fine unless the person is caught again. Shouldn’t punish people that don’t know their lights are illegal on the first offense.
It’s because GM has deep pockets and doesn’t want to pay one of their competitors a licensing fee to stay competitive.
