[HN Gopher] The origins of 'horn ok please,' India's most ubiqui...
___________________________________________________________________
The origins of 'horn ok please,' India's most ubiquitous phrase
(2016)
Author : tontonius
Score : 322 points
Date : 2021-11-29 09:59 UTC (13 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.atlasobscura.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.atlasobscura.com)
| ramraj07 wrote:
| A reminder that pretty much no lorry driver in india knows
| English. Vehicles here have inane phrases like this and it's for
| the most part almost protocol to paint them when you get a
| vehicle of that class. The guy who paints Lorry backs with the
| company name probably asks "you want the horn ok please phrase
| right" and the drivers probably like yeah whatever.
|
| Not like the drivers here expect courtesy from anyone around
| them. If anything they expect (and return in kind) douchebaggery.
| It's like playing gta. Of course you expect every passerby to
| steal your car and you act accordingly.
|
| Similarly auto rickshaws all over Tamil Nadu used to ubiquitously
| have the phrase "the age for a woman to get married is 21".
| Similar bullshit reason (though in this case the govt might have
| mandated it at some point, memory unclear). Thankfully it's
| disappeared nowadays.
| ben_w wrote:
| That seems very plausible, along the same lines as western
| tourists getting a tattoo which says "Qing Xin You Ke " and
| thinking it's a profound quote.
| Aeolun wrote:
| It _is_ profound. Just not in the way they're thinking.
| setum wrote:
| Qing Xin You Ke means 'gullible tourists'. That's funny.
| chris_st wrote:
| Tried taking a picture of this, and using iOS 15's "Live
| Text" to recognize the characters and translate them. It
| translates this phrase as "Lightly believe tourists". Anyone
| care to comment on whether that's an accurate translation,
| and "lightly believe" is an idiom meaning "gullible"?
| monkpit wrote:
| FYI: You can highlight text and use "translate" for a much
| simpler workflow on iOS.
| chris_st wrote:
| Thanks! I was reading this on my computer, though; I did
| that, and chose Google Translate, and they translate it
| as "Gullible Tourist", so I think it's likely an idiom.
| srini_reddy wrote:
| Considering the HDI parameters of Tamilnadu, I would say that
| auto campaign worked very well too.
| hungryforcodes wrote:
| > A reminder that pretty much no lorry driver in india knows
| English.
|
| They live in India -- why would they need to know English
| exactly?
| orblivion wrote:
| Among the other answers don't forget the British Empire.
| manojlds wrote:
| "Horn Ok Please" is Hindi, right?
| paulgb wrote:
| They don't, but it seems like relevant context on an article
| about an English phrase that's ubiquitous there.
| emteycz wrote:
| English is one of _only two_ recognized official languages
| (in addition to Hindi) of the Republic of India [the
| federation]. It is widely used when native languages can 't
| bridge the gap between two Indians.
|
| edit: s/Indian state/Republic of India
| WeekSpeller wrote:
| By Indian state you mean the federal govt. States have
| their own official languages.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_with_official_statu
| s...
| umanwizard wrote:
| They meant "state" in the general sense, not the
| particular sense of the federated entities of India, USA,
| Australia etc.
| umanwizard wrote:
| Also there are some Indians with English as one of their
| native languages. Not sure how common that is, but enough
| that I know multiple of them despite not being from India
| myself.
| DonHopkins wrote:
| To read the phrase "Horn OK Please" perhaps?
| sumedh wrote:
| > why would they need to know English exactly?
|
| because if they know English, they can get higher paying jobs
| JulianMorrison wrote:
| IIRC English - Indian English, not British or American - is
| the second language of the most people in India. Otherwise,
| they have so many local languages they would be mutually
| incomprehensible. But everyone learns English, and so they
| can talk and do business.
| orblivion wrote:
| And IIRC Hindi is _supposed_ to do that but it doesn 't
| always work out in the south (local nationalism among other
| things?).
| bettysdiagnose wrote:
| Well Hindi is just as alien linguistically to the south
| as English is. English and Hindi have more in common with
| each other. I guess English is a neutral second langauge.
| mindcrime wrote:
| I had two Indian co-workers once, and we got into talking
| about languages. I was a bit surprised at the time to find
| out that the only language they shared in common was
| English. One spoke English, Tamil, and a regional dialect,
| and the other spoke English, Hindi, and a (different)
| regional dialect.
|
| I later came to find that this is actually quite common in
| India. And I understand English is still widely taught
| there, as a legacy of British colonialism, and so many
| (most?) Indian people - especially in urban areas - do
| speak English to some extent.
| Aloha wrote:
| English is the lingua franca in India for a reason, one
| of the things I found interesting about the British Raj,
| is, the english sowed the seeds of tools of their own
| exit - Railways, English and Civil Society (specifically
| the Indian Civil Service and some vague ideals of
| Democracy).
|
| Those three things took the area that comprised British
| India, from a bunch of loosely connected nation-states,
| each with their own cultures, languages, and religions -
| while still having much in common, but not something that
| was easily unifiable, to something much more cohesive, to
| something that _could_ be united.
|
| Then leaders came along who were educated in Britain,
| filled with British democratic ideals who learned how to
| subvert to colonial system from within. Who then did so,
| they wrestled what was considered the crown jewel of the
| empire from the British, with the tools the British gave
| them. It's still a brilliant feat, because it used
| colonialism to subvert and ultimately defeat colonialism.
|
| None of this should be construed as a defense of the Raj,
| or to imply that India could not have unified itself
| without those tools, but it turned an impossibly
| gargantuan task into a merely very hard one, because
| those tools allowed (at least temporarily) for people to
| overcome sectarian differences, and work together as one
| people towards a common goal with a common understanding.
|
| I wish people knew more about partition however,
| partition is the greatest humanitarian crisis the world
| knows nearly nothing about, it rivals even the holocaust
| in size, and it didn't have to happen, but for a lack of
| trust between the Indian National Congress and the Muslim
| League. I believe that India, Pakistan and Bangladesh
| would be stronger today if it was one nation rather than
| three.
| u801e wrote:
| > I believe that India, Pakistan and Bangladesh would be
| stronger today if it was one nation rather than three.
|
| There are many culteral differences and even different
| languages that are not mutually intelligible between
| different states and provinces. Europe is a union, but
| not a single country. Perhaps India, Pakistan,
| Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and other nations in South Asia
| could be part of a union, but I don't really think that
| it would work out as a single country.
|
| In fact, present day Myanmar/Burma was also governed by
| the British prior to World War II, but it didn't become
| part of India (mainly due to the British separating it
| from India in the late 1930s).
|
| Would Nepal want to be part of the single country, given
| that it was never colonized by the British?
| Aloha wrote:
| I think it would have worked out as a federal structure,
| yes, a high degree of regional autonomy, with a shared
| economy, military and foreign policy.
| Arnavion wrote:
| >And I understand English is still widely taught there,
| as a legacy of British colonialism, and so many (most?)
| Indian people - especially in urban areas - do speak
| English to some extent.
|
| "English is still widely taught here" is an
| understatement. Upper- and middle-upper-class children
| usually go to "English medium" schools, where all classes
| are taught in English (except for the local language
| class, eg the Hindi class is taught in Hindi), and you're
| expected to speak only English when talking to other kids
| and teachers as long as you're on school grounds.
|
| And yes, the only common language you can expect to find
| when talking to someone who could be from any other part
| of India is English. If you were talking to shopkeepers,
| laborers, etc, you'd likely need to use the local
| language, though they'll have a bare understanding of
| English words for things like the items they sell.
|
| Even when speaking to people who do understand the local
| language, most people will speak in a blend of English
| and the local language, eg Hinglish (English + Hindi)
| where many nouns will be from English and connecting
| words will be from Hindi. People who speak in pure Hindi
| tend to be of the "old-fashioned" stereotype - Sanskrit /
| Hindi teachers or religious teachers / saints or
| nationalist extremists.
| mindcrime wrote:
| _" English is still widely taught here" is an
| understatement. Upper- and middle-upper-class children
| usually go to "English medium" schools, where all classes
| are taught in English (except for the local language
| class, eg the Hindi class is taught in Hindi), and you're
| expected to speak only English when talking to other kids
| and teachers as long as you're on school grounds._
|
| Wow. I didn't realize that English was that deeply
| embedded into Indian society. Fascinating how these
| things play out over time.
| 1-more wrote:
| To add: the Dravidian languages of South India
| (Malayalam, Telugu, Tamil, etc) have no common ancestor
| with the Indic/Indo-Aryan languages of the North (Hindi,
| Gujurati, Punjabi, etc) which are part of the Indo-
| European family. So while they may have some loanwords
| across them, the grammar and the majority of the
| vocabulary is totally foreign.
| koyote wrote:
| Many years ago while travelling in Kerala I got chatting
| to an Indian guy on the bus. It turned out that he was
| from northern India and he mentioned that he too was a
| tourist in Kerala because he did not speak the local
| language.
|
| He had to speak English to everyone and would have had
| the same communication challenges that I had. His skin
| colour was also quite a bit lighter so even though he did
| not stand out quite as much as me, he was still quite
| recognisable as an outsider.
|
| Now this sounds quite obvious if you have ever read up
| about India and its languages/cultures/ethnicities, but
| even though I technically knew this I was still baffled
| that you could be such an outsider in your own country.
| alex_smart wrote:
| >IIRC English - Indian English, not British or American -
| is the second language of the most people in India
|
| It isn't. According to 2011 census, 11% people in India can
| speak English (I suspect that the actual number is much
| lower). Hindi on the other hand is spoken by 57%.
|
| English is the language of elitism in India.
| Taniwha wrote:
| I think the important idea is that with the British gone
| English is a neutral language not owned by any one group
| within India
| alex_smart wrote:
| Except it is absolutely owned by people who can send
| their children to the very few good, usually private,
| usually expensive schools.
| guiltygods wrote:
| > English is the language of elitism in India.
|
| English is lingua franca regardless of social or economic
| status.
|
| _Every_ child gets to learn 3 languages : one local
| language, One regional elective (or Hindi), and English.
|
| English is now pervasive enough that transliterated words
| are common in all languages and are being used natively.
| People use English words and idioms without even
| realizing they are speaking English. You will find even
| in remotest corners someone who will understand and
| converse in rudimentary English (especially the
| youngsters).
| alex_smart wrote:
| >regardless of social or economic status
|
| Absolute nonsense. Only 11% of Indians spoke English
| according to 2011 census. The ability to speak fluent
| English is the biggest marker of social and economic
| status after caste in India.
|
| This is not really some deep insight. Everybody in India
| knows this, _especially_ the 89% who don 't speak
| English. There are even bollywood movies even based on
| the concept (see Hindi Medium, English Vinglish).
|
| >Every child gets to learn 3 languages
|
| The quality of teaching of English in government schools
| especially state boards is abysmal.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_KVFZPofQU [Govt school
| teachers fail to identify nouns in a sentence]
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42xxu5HdJzc [Govt school
| teacher fails to read a primary school textbook]
|
| I also technically got to "learn" Sanskrit as my 3rd
| language in school. How many sentences of Sanskrit do you
| think I can utter now?
| selimthegrim wrote:
| Apparently West Bengal state transport company paints "Safe
| Drive, Save Life" on its buses, except for one year where they
| decided "Save Drive, Safe Life" was the optimal way to express
| the sentiment. Maybe CO2 or pollution was high on the agenda
| that year.
| alisonkisk wrote:
| What's wrong with promoting girls' freedom from forced
| marriages?
| llampx wrote:
| > "the age for a woman to get married is 21"
|
| Worth adding here, that this phrase was meant to make families
| wait to get their girls married, aka "as opposed to 15" and not
| as in the current day, where this would be taken as implying
| that they should get married at such a young age.
| prateek_mir wrote:
| I think similar messages used to be printed on the back of
| government owned buses in the state of Rajasthan !
| junoper wrote:
| > A reminder that pretty much no lorry driver in india knows
| English.
|
| It would be rare to find a lorry driver who can converse in
| English but most of them would know the words "Horn, OK,
| Please". Thye aren't obscure words and phone/smartphone is
| widespread in India with mostly latin script interface. So,
| while I agree that it has become kind of a protocol/decoration,
| drivers while knowing the meaning, wouldn't care much about it
| given that it doesn't hurt to write that and can potentially
| help.
|
| > Of course you expect every passerby to steal your car and you
| act accordingly.
|
| That would be an exaggeration. There hasn't been any vehicle
| theft in my wider social circle ever. I read news about capture
| vehice thieves and I wouldn't be careless about the vehicle but
| I wouldn't expect everyone around me as potential thief. May be
| things are different in TN.
| 1-more wrote:
| I think the car stealing example was referring to the in-game
| behavior in GTA online. You expect car theft in GTA the same
| way you expect unsafe overtaking when driving in India.
| zem wrote:
| another interesting thing is that in parts of the south it's
| "sound ok horn" instead.
| kelvin0 wrote:
| No where in the article do they even try to ask the people who
| own or paint these words on the vehicles? Speculation throughout
| and not a shred of input from any of the people actually involved
| (Drivers, Lettering painters, police..).
|
| Conclusion: none! We don't know and didn't ask either.
|
| Really weird article.
| aniforprez wrote:
| I've asked and they don't know for the most part either. It's
| become tradition at this point and it's not known by the
| drivers or the painters why. It's just cute
| gumby wrote:
| Most of them don't speak English either -- this is merely
| something that has to go on your lorry.
| aatharuv wrote:
| Not speaking English, doesn't imply they don't understand
| English words or phrases that have gotten into what
| languages they do speak.
| gumby wrote:
| Why I mean is you can't ask them "why is OK in the middle
| of the phrase" because the answer is "that's how it
| goes".
|
| No different from asking an English speaker how some
| foreign loan word entered their usage or why, say, only
| the accusative. "Agenda" is singular in English and if
| you asked a random person on the street why they would
| shrug.
| appleiigs wrote:
| OK Please ask them in whatever language they speak.
| webkike wrote:
| Lol, I don't think the parent was suggesting that they
| can't answer because the interviewer was only asking them
| in English, but rather they don't know what the English
| phrase means precisely most of the time
| [deleted]
| DwnVoteHoneyPot wrote:
| The author should "do the needful" as my Indian colleagues
| would say.
| teawrecks wrote:
| Especially considering the title is "the origins of...". Should
| probably instead be "the unknown origins of".
| hdesh wrote:
| Unfortunately this is similar to how most of the western press
| covers India.
| Wolfenstein98k wrote:
| God, the poor wildlife.
| jzwinck wrote:
| In Rajasthan I saw "Horn Please" everywhere, usually without
| "OK". And that's the title of a book about the colourful trucks
| of the subcontinent: http://www.hornpleaseindia.com/
| ghoomketu wrote:
| Man the amount of honking is insane in India.
|
| I was visiting a relative in Patna and it's like everybody just
| honks for the sake on honking. I mean I thought delhi was bad,
| but this place just takes honking to a whole new level. It's so
| bad that I had to go inside a random shop to wait for my Ola as
| the sound levels were literally unbearable.
|
| The only place where I haven't seen so much honking is Goa. Maybe
| the traffic is less or people are different but that's like the
| only place where the roads are somewhat quiet.
| carlmr wrote:
| Had the same experience, Goa was the only oasis of sanity we
| found. Also they didn't seem to create these toxic plastic
| fires that were otherwise ubiquitous.
| situationista wrote:
| I've always observed that in India honking the horn is not just
| about overtaking - it's an acoustic indicator of your position,
| making it possible for those in front of you to plot your
| presence without taking their eyes off the road in front (which
| usually requires their absolute and undivied attention).
| Additionally, as the article points out, many vehicles don't
| possess funtional rear-view mirrors, and are therefore
| dependent on acoustic signals to know what's going on around
| them.
| 1_player wrote:
| > it's an acoustic indicator of your position, making it
| possible for those in front of you to plot your presence
| without taking their eyes off the road in front
|
| So you're saying Indian drivers have developed echo-location.
| jacobolus wrote:
| Echo-location is about using reflected sound to detect the
| position of silent barriers/objects in the vicinity. This
| is about detecting the position of sound sources, which is
| something nearly everyone does all the time.
| unscaled wrote:
| Until you get inside a city traffic jam, and then it becomes
| an acoustic indicator of something you already know: every
| square centimeter around you is covered by a car or a
| motorbike.
|
| I'm a skeptical horns help with anything in modern Indian
| city traffic, but on the highway they can be quite useful, if
| annoying, especially on mountainous road when you don't have
| a good line of sight, but even just on a normal road with
| drivers who don't look on their rear-view mirrors.
| missedthecue wrote:
| It's like a group sonar.
| pitspotter2 wrote:
| I wonder what are the implications for the automated cars.
| aww_dang wrote:
| There's a totally different regard for noise and public spaces
| generally. Add temple loudspeakers and other events to the
| list.
| sokoloff wrote:
| Video conferencing with our colleagues in India during Diwali
| is an incredible experience.
| dec0dedab0de wrote:
| This was interesting, and I normally love atlas Obscura, but it
| seems like quite a bit of the article was lifted from this quora
| question that shows up early in google
|
| https://www.quora.com/Why-is-Horn-OK-Please-painted-on-the-b...
| catchmeifyoucan wrote:
| Can OK it not just mean, "it's OK to honk"
| SideburnsOfDoom wrote:
| It seems fairly clear to me how it could come about.
|
| Someone writes a sign "Honking the horn at me is OK, please warn
| me as I don't have mirrors", which is clearly too wordy. And so
| it evolves over time, is shortened, newspaper headline style, via
| e.g. "horn is OK, please warn" to the final product.
|
| "doesn't seem to make grammatical sense" well yes, but neither do
| many headlines e.g. "Diana Dead" that drop implied words such as
| "is" for similar reasons.
| 1024core wrote:
| I didn't read the article (and from the comments here, it seems
| to be a waste of time), but there are 2 phrases in there: "Horn
| Please" and "OK"; it's not "Horn OK Please", even though it's
| written that way.
|
| "Horn Please" is to tell the vehicle behind that they can sound
| the horn if they want to pass.
|
| "OK", I think, comes from "OK Tata" (as in "OK, bye bye").
| carabiner wrote:
| om telolet om
| u801e wrote:
| I've never been to India, but I don't ever recall seeing this
| phrase on the back of trucks in Pakistan (even being relatively
| close to the border in Lahore).
| sdfjkl wrote:
| Different cultures have different unwritten behaviours on roads.
|
| In the mountains of Italy, drivers give a short honk before
| entering a turn on a serpentine road, which usually can't be seen
| around. If there is no responding honk, they will take the full
| width of the road (making the very tight turn easier and faster).
| Tourist drivers have to pick up on this :)
|
| In much of Europe oncoming cars flash their lights to warn others
| about dangers and (especially) speed traps or police checks, so
| they can slow down in time.
|
| Here in Lithuania, flashing your warning lights (the four orange
| ones on the corners of the car) means thanks, for example if you
| let someone merge from one of the very short onramps. I've never
| seen this in Germany, where onramps are however much longer.
|
| And amongst truck drivers it's pretty wide-spread to blink right
| to tell a following car you think it's safe for them to overtake
| you and blink left when you think it no longer is. At least on
| long roads where there are no obvious right turns. I flash them a
| grateful hand sign when passing their mirror.
| vollmond wrote:
| I always hear/read about the speed trap warning. In motorcycle
| circles, IIRC tapping the top of your helmet is that same
| warning. I haven't ever actually seen either of those in
| practice, though.
|
| Motorcyclists do usually wave at each other, or sometimes point
| at the road with a foot or two fingers, just as a greeting.
|
| The one I do see (in the USA anyway) is flashing your high
| beams to let a semi truck know they have space to merge in
| front of you (eg after passing). They usually tap their brake
| lights a couple times to signal thanks after merging.
| ballenf wrote:
| I feel like Waze has killed the high beams flashing warning,
| although I miss it. It sounds crazy as a say it out loud, but
| the signals between drivers always gave me warm feelings of
| some kind of community with other drivers. Now everyone on
| the road seems much more internally absorbed or focused. Cars
| are quieter, podcasts instead of radio, etc. While they were
| never very common, CB radios were also less rare in cars (we
| always had one for road trips and both my grandparents had
| one in on all the time in their cars).
| pomian wrote:
| what's waze?
| gnicholas wrote:
| A navigation app owned by Google, which is popular
| largely for its police and hazard notification system.
| Apple has recently copied this feature in Maps, and you
| can use Siri to report hazards/etc. (which I believe
| cannot be done in Waze, at least on iOS).
| isoskeles wrote:
| Some app that a small minority of people use which
| includes warnings about traffic, hazards, speed traps,
| etc.
| Daneel_ wrote:
| There's two common motorcyclist signals for police: Either
| tapping the top of the helmet, or pointing up at the sky
| while moving your arm in a circle (to mime spinning police
| lights).
|
| Other motorcyclist signs are sticking the left leg out to say
| thanks, holding your hand out and rapidly opening/closing it
| to say "you've left your indicator on", and pointing at
| dangerous spots on the ground like potholes, gravel, or other
| unseen hazards.
| VBprogrammer wrote:
| Flapping your arm like a child pretending to be a bird is
| another I've seen warning of a speed trap (it's actually
| the hand signal for "I'm slowing down" back in the days
| that was relevant).
| LegitShady wrote:
| >In the mountains of Italy, drivers give a short honk before
| entering a turn on a serpentine road, which usually can't be
| seen around. If there is no responding honk, they will take the
| full width of the road (making the very tight turn easier and
| faster). Tourist drivers have to pick up on this :)
|
| It seems like it should be illegal (and also partly suicidal)
| to go into the opposing lane in a situation where you cannot
| see if there is an approaching car. You're relying on someone
| in an opposing lane hearing and understanding your horn, for
| relatively little gain, and potentially fatal results.
|
| Any situation where you can do everything 'perfectly' and you
| have a significant chance of dying or killing someone because
| someone else doesn't notice is a good situation to avoid.
|
| If you hit someone's car under these circumstances it would be
| criminally negligent in my opinion.
| sdfjkl wrote:
| Visit Italy! Just don't drive there.
|
| These roads don't really have "lanes", it's more of a squeeze
| past each other kind of thing if you hear a returned honk:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjPZhLiozAg
|
| Being Italy, of course they do race cars down these roads :)
| rozab wrote:
| I've seen people flashing their hazards to say thank you in
| London, but never in Scotland. I suppose non-verbal, everyday
| communication like this can still remain very localised since
| the usual vectors for cultural transmission (social media,
| television, film, etc.) don't include such mundane things.
| sdeframond wrote:
| Trucks travel far though. I wouldn't be surprised that they
| would be a significant vector of road etiquette.
| aosaigh wrote:
| Interesting, I live in Glasgow and commonly see people do
| this (and do it myself)
| Daneel_ wrote:
| Trucks and some cars use their hazards as thanks here in
| Australia too (two blinks).
| hornokpleas wrote:
| When I lived in one part of South London, I never saw this,
| or at least so rarely that I never figured out what it was
| supposed to mean. After moving to another, more suburban,
| part of South London, I see it all the time. _shrug_
| davchana wrote:
| In India if we are ahead, and road is not straight, means a
| driver behind me can't see far, I will blink the directional
| blinker one or twice to tell him that its safe to overtake me
| now, from this direction.
|
| A headlight flashes to incoming driver is saying, I see you
| want to overtake, don't, let me pass first.
|
| A honk at sharp turns on going uphill, telling opposite traffic
| that I am heavy, cant afford to stop & then start, you give me
| way if required. There, there is a text painted (officially or
| informally) "Honk" or "Horn Please"
| avh02 wrote:
| apparently there was a time where there was an indicator on
| mostly larger vehicles for indicating takeover safety [0] (make
| sure you view the linked section).
|
| I remember seeing a few of these (though never in use) when
| traveling in a country that still had a lot of old ladas - so
| i'm not sure it was only on trucks.
|
| [0]:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automotive_lighting#Rear_overt...
| calahad wrote:
| Flashing the high-beams to warn of police is a thing in the US
| also, although you can get ticketed for it.
|
| (Apparently this has been successfully challenged in court as
| free speech though lol https://www.myimprov.com/flashing-
| headlights-in-florida-prot... )
| icambron wrote:
| I remember reading through some of the judicial rulings on
| this. IIRC, the logic is that not only is it speech, but the
| government case for regulating this kind of speech is
| unusually poor: the function of flashing the lights is to
| suggest that you obey the traffic laws. That can't reasonably
| be in the government's interest to prevent.
| matt-attack wrote:
| Now that is an interesting point I never considered. That
| the message being conveyed is simply "Obey the law".
|
| Not that the contents of the message should be germane (in
| my opinion) when considering whether a specific act of
| speech should be considered legal or not.
| icambron wrote:
| IANAL, but my understanding is that there are different
| levels of "scrutiny" that can be applied to a statute
| when analyzing its First Amendment compatibility, and
| which one is appropriate depends on several factors.
| Typically a judicial opinion walks through the logic of
| which one it applies before applying it. And the level of
| scrutiny determines how strongly the law is constrained.
|
| Under the strictest scrutiny--applied when the law is
| restricting the expression of a viewpoint or opinion--it
| doesn't matter why the law is there; free speech wins.
| Under lower scrutiny, as seems applicable here, the
| government must show it has a "rational basis". That's
| what allows them to, say, require you to communicate your
| intention to turn via a turn signal. I believe that
| rational basis test is what's failing here.
| ghayes wrote:
| This comes from Footnote Number 4 [0], which was
| literally a footnote in a case where a Justice
| articulated what the Court was already doing in analyzing
| its cases. The Court generally applies one of three
| levels of scrutiny [1]:
|
| * Strict scrutiny - The Government must prove there is a
| compelling state interest behind the challenged policy,
| and the law or regulation is narrowly tailored to achieve
| its result.
|
| * Intermediate scrutiny - The law must serve an important
| government objective, and be substantially related to
| achieving the objective.
|
| * Rational basis review - A challenger must prove the
| government has no legitimate interest in the law or
| policy; or there is no reasonable, rational link between
| that interest and the challenged law.
|
| While I don't believe the Supreme Court has taken up a
| case of light signaling, it is likely that the Court
| would apply strict scrutiny due to the clear First
| Amendment considerations. If so, thus the government
| would need to prove that it's narrowly tailored solution
| to a compelling state interest. It would need to answer
| questions such as: is it okay to say flash your
| headlights for road hazard? Would the state prohibit the
| defendant from telling others at a gas station about the
| police officer? Etc. I'd suspect that it would be a hard
| case to win for the Government.
|
| [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Carole
| ne_Prod....
|
| [1] https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/law-and-
| life/challenging-...
| sjg007 wrote:
| Most people these days drive with their LED high beams on all
| the time.
| foolfoolz wrote:
| in zanzibar they all have their brights on at night.
| everyone is blinded
| genewitch wrote:
| I don't understand how a car with detectors that dim
| mirrors can't also turn your high beams off when they
| detect another car in front of you.
|
| Easily 5/8ths or more of every vehicle I pass at night has
| their high beams on, and in areas without fog lines it gets
| old in a hurry - and dangerous.
| hermitdev wrote:
| > I don't understand how a car with detectors that dim
| mirrors can't also turn your high beams off when they
| detect another car in front of you.
|
| Some can, though I have no idea on how common it is. My
| 2013 Dodge can do this. Unfortunately, it's also pretty
| terrible at it, resulting in a lot of on, off, on again,
| not quite flashing. e.g., a slight bend in the road, it
| doesn't seen anyone if front, turns high beams on, only
| for the road to bend back and all of a sudden your
| brights are shining in someone's face as the road bends
| back again. Sometimes, I've seen even changing lanes be
| enough for it to turn brights back on again. It also
| doesn't seem to give as much consideration when following
| someone as leaves them on way too close for me.
|
| I live in an urban enough area with plenty of street
| lighting anyway, so I tend to use the auto high beam
| feature almost never (it can be toggled with a position
| of the turn signal lever). I do, however, use the auto-on
| lights in general, though. Nice to just not have to worry
| about turning lights on (or off).
|
| I've also been pulled over before for flashing my brights
| at a police officer. It was entirely unintentional,
| though. I was a relatively new and young driver (17 or 18
| yrs old at the time) and I was driving an older vehicle
| that still had a foot operated switch for the high beams
| that tended to stick.
| wwalexander wrote:
| This feature is present in at least a couple of Toyota's
| newer models that I've had the chance to drive
| (specifically a Prius Prime and RAV4 Prime).
| nereye wrote:
| Ford Edge (US market) has this too when in 'automatic'
| mode for the lights. It seems to work reasonably well
| though it sometimes lags a bit so other drivers probably
| find it somewhat annoying.
| progman32 wrote:
| Where do y'all live? That doesn't seem to be the case
| here in the Seattle area. I've noticed modern cars'
| headlight look like high beams sometimes, even on the low
| beam setting.
| t0mas88 wrote:
| BMW does "automatic high beams" in Europe, they turn on
| when there are no cars ahead or opposite and off when it
| detects a car through the cameras. I've had it since
| 2006, so it probably existed a few years before that.
| hadlock wrote:
| This technology exists in Europe, it's not allowed in the
| US due to very specific wording about headlight laws
| here, but very recently regulations were changed to allow
| for it. Not sure if it was in the infrastructure bill
| that already passed, or the follow-up one they're
| currently trying to pass. Most BMW (and probably
| Mercedes, Audi etc) with adaptive LED lights built after
| ~2017 have the hardware for this for use in international
| markets, and could probably be retrofitted with a
| firmware update unlocking it for use in the US market.
| stronglikedan wrote:
| > it's not allowed in the US
|
| My MDX does it, and they have had that capability since
| at least 2017.
| sbradford26 wrote:
| I believe the tech that is not allowed in the US is
| something that literally dims sections of the lights that
| would shine line into the eyes of an oncoming driver.
| This is different than the auto dimming lights feature in
| US cars that just shuts off the high beams when an
| oncoming car is detected. Most of the tech is made by a
| company called Gentex. If you have an auto dimming rear
| view mirror in your car they most likely made it.
|
| Press release about the feature I am referring to:
| https://ir.gentex.com/news-releases/news-release-
| details/new...
| Symbiote wrote:
| This article has pictures; perhaps easier for a quick
| overview: https://www.manufacturer.lighting/info/162/
| kube-system wrote:
| Auto high-beams is absolutely allowed in the US and
| common on new cars. I've had a couple cars with this
| feature.
| hadlock wrote:
| My current car has auto high beams. Beam shaping is
| different technology, rather than a boolean operation, it
| allows the computer to turn off specific LEDs that are
| pointed at oncoming traffic, leaving the road ahead of
| you fully illuminated without blinding oncomming traffic
| kube-system wrote:
| The GP specifically referred to a vehicle that would
| "turn your high beams off"
| clort wrote:
| This technology is not great on a windy[1] european road
| though. I rented a car recently and noticed that it was
| auto-dipping but the problem is it dips once it has
| detected the oncoming vehicle. That is fractionally too
| late as the driver has already been dazzled. Manually, I
| would dip the headlights just before the car came into
| view because I could see the headlights looming.
|
| [1] a road with lots of turns, not one where the wind is
| blowing
| jagger27 wrote:
| "Winding road" is a nice way to disambiguate from gusty.
| cryptonector wrote:
| I hate this. It's incredibly dangerous and annoying.
| ddingus wrote:
| A switch to low and back will still be seen as a flash.
|
| Edit: I do actually see this on the road all the time where
| I live. Just saying.
| oxfeed65261 wrote:
| I see the opposite problem more often (Bay Area): cars with
| always-on daytime running lights that don't turn on their
| headlights (and the corresponding taillights) at night. I
| flash my lights at them but this rarely seems to help.
| wcunning wrote:
| This is a huge problem here in Michigan, too. Many cars
| come with automatic headlights, but many do not,
| particularly of a certain age, and the LED DRLs seem to
| be bright enough that people do not realize that they
| don't have their full lights on. I find this particularly
| infuriating in ugly snowstorms and the part of the year
| where the sun sets before 5:00pm... _sigh_
| kube-system wrote:
| My theory is that these cars have multiple drivers.
|
| Driver A is used to vehicles with manual headlights and
| always turns their lights off when they get out.
|
| Driver B is used to "everything is automatic" and touches
| nothing when they get in.
| kube-system wrote:
| Cars have too many features.
|
| And I don't mean this in a, "I'm a luddite and wish cars
| were simple" type of way. I seriously think the number of
| controls on a vehicle (and burden of the owners manual)
| is so great that it is causing safety issues.
|
| My car has more controls for the lights alone than my
| first vehicle had for everything. Literally.
|
| "Automatic" features like headlights were supposed to
| make us safer, but I think that is backfiring as it is
| causing cognitive overload and making people complacent.
| [deleted]
| nawgz wrote:
| > My car has more controls for the lights alone than my
| first vehicle had for everything. Literally.
|
| As someone driving a 2021 Subaru who grew up in a 99
| Integra and an 01 Civic. I don't see this at all? The
| controls are extremely familiar for the lighting, except
| my new car has a no-friction option: I turn on the "Auto"
| setting and it automatically puts on DRLs or full lights
| for me given the lighting conditions. It even turns on my
| lights for me when I pull into my parking garage at
| midday.
|
| How exactly could this be made less complex?
| gkop wrote:
| The Subaru auto headlights work great indeed. Other
| Subaru smart functionality is crap though. For example,
| the touchscreen and gauges auto-dimming: literally every
| time it auto-dims or auto-undims, I have to tweak the
| dimming level. It would be an objectively better car
| without the auto-dimming.
| nawgz wrote:
| > For example, the touchscreen and gauges auto-dimming:
| literally every time it auto-dims or auto-undims, I have
| to tweak the dimming level
|
| I have never noticed this, fingers crossed you didn't
| Baader-Meinhof me. The feature to aim the lights where
| you steer and auto-dim high beams when traffic is
| approaching and re-activate them works quite nicely for
| me as well, so I would consider the headlights to be a
| great strength of this vehicle. It is crazy to get into
| my partner's mid-2010s sedan and laugh at how bad the
| lights are at nighttime compared to the perfectly aimed
| and calibrated Subaru lights
| idiotsecant wrote:
| >It is crazy to get into my partner's mid-2010s sedan and
| laugh at how bad the lights are at nighttime compared to
| the perfectly aimed and calibrated Subaru lights
|
| On the other hand, that mid 2010s sedan's headlight
| system will age gracefully - there are no aiming servos
| to fail or autodim relay output to stop working or such
| thing. It's just lights with a switch to turn them on or
| off.
|
| Increased complexity also implies increased maintenance
| and often more troublesome failure modes when something
| does fail.
| kube-system wrote:
| I'm not sure what the solution is, or whether it is even
| a design problem at all, rather than a
| societal/political/licensing problem.
|
| My older vehicles had 3 controls for exterior lighting:
| parking lights, headlights, high beam. They were simple
| on-offs with feedback that indicated their current state.
| If people couldn't see your car, you couldn't see your
| gauges.
|
| My 2021 Honda has SEVEN pages in the owners manual
| dedicated just to the headlight operation -- not counting
| the several other sections it calls out for related
| information. Some sections are called out as US specific
| and some called out as Canadian model specific.
|
| Let's take just the high-beams for instance:
|
| Flashing the high beams is a different physical control
| than turning them on. Activating the auto-high beam
| functionality is somehow not a separate control, but is
| done flashing your high beams, and there is a not-very-
| clear symbol in the instrument panel that indicates the
| current state. This means that when you flash your high
| beams, you are also changing the current state of the
| auto headlights. If you flash it an even number of times
| you will keep the same state, if you flash them an odd
| number of times, you change the state. Furthermore if you
| hold the stick in for 40 seconds, you disable the auto
| headlight feature entirely. If you hold it in for 30
| seconds, you turn it back on. Yes, there are _two_
| independent levels of "on" and "off" respectively just
| for the auto-high beams.
|
| It works perfectly fine when you know what it's doing,
| but it isn't something that a person would automatically
| know if they were someone who started driving when you
| turned on headlights by pulling a knob on the dash.
|
| Besides that one specific gripe, there's 160+ pages
| dedicated to just to controls and the instrument panel
| alone.
|
| Anyone who reads a modern 600+ page owners manual will
| learn something. The problem is that people don't, and
| sometimes the thing they didn't learn is important.
| nawgz wrote:
| What you describe here is clearly insanity, although I am
| slightly unconvinced owner's manual page count is very
| relevant.
|
| I read nothing and intuitively understood my car's
| controls, this is what I also agree should be the clear
| state, and it seems to me in some sense it should be
| legislated to prevent what you describe. It is an
| interesting point though, should each vehicle
| manufacturer be obligated to put a light stick with some
| exact set of controls for the headlights in?
| kube-system wrote:
| I don't think it is insanity. It's part of the complexity
| inherent to managing state with auto high beams. My
| Toyota worked differently but had other complexities. I
| just looked up a 2021 Legacy manual and it sounds like
| Subaru High Beam Assist works about the same way as my
| Toyota did.
|
| The annoying thing about that design is, if I want to
| turn my high beams on manually, and the car decides that
| a street light in the distance is a vehicle, it will
| ignore my request to turn on my high beams when I push
| the stick forward. I then also have to set my primary
| headlights to manual mode in order to override the car.
| This requires turning the knob at the end of the stalk
| which is not backlit and therefore not legible while
| driving at night. This is one area where I like the Honda
| design better: I can always turn my high beams with one
| operation.
|
| I think the page count is relevant because it is
| indicative of complexity and is likely inversely related
| to the number of people who read it.
|
| While I am sure you probably do understand the controls
| on your vehicle -- I think it is important to note that
| the people driving around with lights in an improper
| state at night are _also_ under the impression that they
| understand their vehicle 's controls. They're just
| mistaken.
|
| I personally wish licensing and enforcement was more
| stringent. But this is not politically possible in the
| US.
| toss1 wrote:
| Yup, I discovered that I have an automatic headlight
| dimming feature. It works well most of the time, often
| surprisingly well.
|
| BUT, and this is a BIG BUT, it sometimes fails, and at
| the worst times - like when it is drizzly & foggy at
| night, in a tight bit of road and a lot of wet pavement
| glare from the oncoming car -- so the workload is already
| high with bad visibility & grip, and now I have to _ALSO_
| flick the lever and move my eyes to the dashboard display
| to check whether or not I got the lights to the correct
| state (it may unpredictably finally work and my action
| goes back to high beams a half second later).
|
| I keep being lulled into giving it a few more chances,
| but I'm pretty sure it'll get turned off for good. I
| already reliably switch the hi/lo beams at a subconscious
| level with near-zero mental workload, so I'm better off
| just letting that instinct work by feel, rather than
| _randomly_ having to engage another higher-level
| attention task at particularly high-workload moments.
|
| This is a Ford and I read that they had this same feature
| about a decade ago and had to remove it because it just
| wasn't good enough. It seems that they're a lot closer,
| but not enough.
|
| Something like the uncanny valley of tech features -
| almost good enough makes it really bad?
| cptskippy wrote:
| I've never understood why DRL are only in the front.
| jaywalk wrote:
| One feature I really like about my car that I'd never
| seen before (2020 Explorer) is that the headlights will
| always return to automatic mode every time you start the
| car. It doesn't matter what they were set to when you
| turned it off, and there's nothing you can do to disable
| that behavior. When you turn it on, the headlights will
| be on automatic mode no matter what. It's a small but
| helpful feature.
| whymauri wrote:
| This is why rural Arizonan drivers were my favorite during a
| cross-country roadtrip. Everyone drove fast, but competently,
| and gave you a heads up for speed traps. By the time I
| crossed into CO I was flashing my lights to warn of police,
| too.
| cptskippy wrote:
| I've seen flashing lights to warn of speed traps used all
| over the south east and mid west.
|
| Oddly though, no one in Southern California holds Arizona
| drivers in high regard. Quite the opposite. Best I can tell
| they're the western equivalent of Florida drivers.
| barbs wrote:
| A few years ago in Sydney Australia there was a couple of
| cops catching jaywalkers at a traffic light. My friend warned
| passengers at the other side about them, and then the cops
| came up to her and told her to move along because she was
| "obstructing justice".
| p_l wrote:
| When riding in a car with a long trailer (glider transport
| trailer) from Poland to Spain and back in ~2002, we quickly
| found out that LTV truckers would use indicators to point out
| when we gained enough distance when overtaking to safely merge
| back into the lane.
|
| Flashing warning lights for thanks is also common in Poland.
| JackFr wrote:
| In France they seem to use the horn, frantic (and frankly very
| rude) hand gestures and occasionally screeching tires to let
| you know that you did NOT in fact have the right of way
| entering the traffic circle.
| kergonath wrote:
| And just about as often to mean that you did have the right
| of way but they don't care. Not limited to roundabouts,
| though.
| hornokpleas wrote:
| In France drivers will flash their lights to warn you of
| police speed traps or other checks. (It's quite common for
| French police to stop and breathalyse all drivers on some
| rural road, especially on Sunday afternoons.)
|
| I have driven in France loads and have literally never
| reached a police roadblock or radar trap without being warned
| by a vehicle coming the other way.
| hereforphone wrote:
| "Tourists have to pick up on it" seems like a strange thing to
| bet one's life on.
|
| Does making the very tight turn faster get one home much
| quicker? Why not just slow down?
| tasuki wrote:
| > "Tourists have to pick up on it" seems like a strange thing
| to bet one's life on.
|
| Tourists are generally advised to pick up on local customs. I
| used to live in Amsterdam. Cyclists expect pedestrians to
| hear the bell ring once and get the hell out of the fietspad.
| If you don't, you _will_ get hit.
|
| > Does making the very tight turn faster get one home much
| quicker?
|
| In Italian Alps where you spend half the time turning? You
| bet!
|
| > Why not just slow down?
|
| Have you met many Italians? :)
| rimliu wrote:
| Also in Lithuania: it is forbidden to use hong in urban areas
| unless it is to prevent an accident.
| CraigJPerry wrote:
| >> In the mountains of Italy, drivers give a short honk before
| entering a turn on a serpentine road
|
| At night i was on an airport transfer bus heading down the
| Amalfi coast and the driver was flashing his headlights before
| barrelling into a hairpin turn giving no room for oncoming
| traffic. I stopped stamping on the imaginary brake pedal quite
| so hard when i realised this signal must mean I'm coming
| through which is the opposite from here in the UK where it
| means I'm giving way to you.
| mnw21cam wrote:
| The highway code disagrees with you. Flashing your headlights
| or sounding the horn should only be used to draw someone's
| attention to the fact that you are there.
| VBprogrammer wrote:
| Oh please. That's like citing the dictionary definition of
| a word which has come to mean something else.
|
| The actual uses of flashing headlights are much more varied
| than the official version. For example "you are driving
| with your headlights off and it's dark", "you are blinding
| me with your main beams" and "a tree has fallen in the road
| ahead". I would wager that the unofficial version outweighs
| the official 10 to 1.
|
| The only danger with flashing someone to give way is when
| there is potential for it to cause a conflict with other
| vehicles, for example a cyclist on your left. For that
| reason I always check my mirrors and slow to allow someone
| to cross in front of me rather than flashing them. Most
| people figure it out but don't completely disengage their
| own perception.
| hr0m wrote:
| I can confirm all of it for Germany as well (except the Italian
| serpentine road synchronization hack).
|
| I flash lights for oncoming traffics because of danger or
| police checks.
|
| I flash warning lights (or raise right hand) for thank you.
| Others do as well (especially buses, when you let them out of
| the bus stop, since in Germany they don't have the right of
| passage leaving a bus stop)
|
| I learned that truck drivers (and buses) flash left, when it's
| not safe to overtake.
|
| There are also some official rules regarding bus flashing at a
| bus stop (right, warning). But most of drivers ignore that.
| kriro wrote:
| I'm pretty sure I learned that if a bus has the blinker on
| when leaving the bus stop you are supposed to let them into
| traffic. A quick check seems to confirm it (SS20/5 StVO).
| fho wrote:
| It's somewhat common among truck drivers in Germany to flash
| the turn signals left-right-left-right to say "thank you"
| after overtaking (another truck).
| sva_ wrote:
| I think it's usually right-left-right-left.
| matja wrote:
| Maybe it's the other way when driving on the left? :)
| hengheng wrote:
| Is that saying thanks? I thought they were just fumbling
| with the blinker control.
| londons_explore wrote:
| yes, that's saying thanks. It's equivalent to the hazard
| lights, but in some vehicles the hazard lights button
| isn't very accessible.
| YeahThisIsMe wrote:
| It's saying thanks as a response to the slower truck
| flashing its high beams to let the faster truck know it's
| now safe to move back over to the slower lane.
| Aissen wrote:
| Somewhat tangentially related, but the french government did
| an interesting ad on this (very entrenched in France too)
| habit of flashing lights after police checks:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNsVZu-2IaA
| alisonkisk wrote:
| "Think of the children!" The first refuge of the scoundrel.
| [deleted]
| matsemann wrote:
| > I flash lights for oncoming traffics because of danger or
| /police checks/.
|
| Why? Do you want dangerous drivers on the roads?
| throwaway0a5e wrote:
| Attitudes like yours are what embolden governments to
| engage in revenue enforcement the proliferation of which
| leads to people tipping each other off about said revenue
| enforcement (e.g. flashing their lights to warn of speed
| traps). People wouldn't be warning each other about the
| cops if "people the cops shake down" and "people who were
| doing dangerous things just prior to being shook down" had
| more overlap.
| Dayshine wrote:
| I'm not sure I understand your point, unless you're
| arguing that national speed limits are deliberately low
| so that police can fine people driving at the "correct"
| speed? Or that police lie about your speed and fine you
| anyway?
| Firehawke wrote:
| The former is definitely true. There are towns out there
| in the United States that are on an interstate and play
| games with their speed limits. You'll see a speed limit
| of 60-70 up until you hit city limits then it suddenly
| drops to 30-40, with enforcement lined up at the city
| limits waiting to nab people.
|
| They're making good money off of these fines.
| Dma54rhs wrote:
| But why wouldn't you want lower speed inside the city?
| [deleted]
| johnflan wrote:
| >In much of Europe oncoming cars flash their lights to warn
| others about dangers and (especially) speed traps or police
| checks, so they can slow down in time. >Here in Lithuania,
| flashing your warning lights (the four orange ones on the
| corners of the car) means thanks,
|
| Those behaviours are common in Ireland too
| [deleted]
| rootsudo wrote:
| The same applies in southeast Asia/China/Japan, for both. It
| isn't exactly ubiquitous just in Europe.
|
| Not in USA though.
| omoikane wrote:
| I don't see those signage on cars in the USA, but there are a
| few places where cars are explicitly told to blow their horn,
| example: https://goo.gl/maps/WWC4ACVRdeyUQnZ57
| PretzelPirate wrote:
| Other than trucks blinking left or right, all of these are
| pretty common in the US.
|
| As someone who grew up in a rural area, honking before going
| around turns on small roads or crossing single-lane bridges
| you couldn't see the other side of was something we did
| regularly to avoid being hit.
|
| I don't experience this as much in larger cities though.
| macintux wrote:
| > As someone who grew up in a rural area, honking before
| going around turns on small roads or crossing single-lane
| bridges you couldn't see the other side of was something we
| did regularly to avoid being hit.
|
| I've never found this in rural Indiana, but I wish it were
| common practice. I've found people often simply assume no
| one is coming because there are so few cars on the back
| roads; very nearly experienced a head-on collision
| approaching one curve a few years ago.
| obiwan14 wrote:
| It all depends on where you're in the US, though in
| general, especially in smaller cities, honking at another
| driver is taken as an insult. When I first moved to Baton
| Rouge, it took almost 3 months before I heard a car's honk,
| which surprised me, because in NYC, honking is a mode of
| communication.
| kaybe wrote:
| In Sicily in narrow crossings where you don't have the
| right of way but cannot see you can slowly inch forward,
| and if someone is around the corner they will honk at you
| to let you know to wait.
| code_duck wrote:
| My father said honking is common going around corners on
| small roads in the mountains in Columbia.
| mjlawson wrote:
| In Upstate New York where snow drifts can sometimes completely
| block visibility at intersections, honking is pretty common as
| if to say "ready or not, here I come!"
| tomxor wrote:
| > In the mountains of Italy, drivers give a short honk before
| entering a turn on a serpentine road, which usually can't be
| seen around. If there is no responding honk, they will take the
| full width of the road (making the very tight turn easier and
| faster).
|
| I do this in the UK for the narrow lanes where there is only
| room enough for one car, because my Grandad used to do it, and
| because it makes a lot of sense... although the "take up the
| whole road" part is kind of unavoidable, which is the whole
| reason to beep ur horn. There are just a huge number of country
| lanes here that are so narrow only one small vehicle will fit,
| and when you get to a blind corner you have to go slow enough
| to be able to quickly stop... a couple taps of the horn help to
| warn other drivers that something is coming regardless of your
| actions, and just reduce the chances of a collision.
|
| To be fair I rarely hear other drivers do this any more, so it
| might be more of an old fashioned thing.
| ganeshkrishnan wrote:
| >And amongst truck drivers it's pretty wide-spread to blink
| right to tell a following car you think it's safe for them to
| overtake you and blink left when you think it no longer is
|
| In India, the truck drivers blink right to tell you its safe
| (or want you) to overtake from right and they blink left if
| it's safe (or they want you) to overtake from the left.
|
| Makes highway driving very confusing since a blinking left
| truck on highway means the exact opposite of city driving (YOU
| can go left vs I am going left).
|
| yeah, self driving car is not coming anytime soon to India.
| esaym wrote:
| A person know that spent time in Japan (I think, back in the
| 70's) mentioned while stopped at a traffic light, everyone
| would turn off their headlights.
| bane wrote:
| > Here in Lithuania, flashing your warning lights (the four
| orange ones on the corners of the car) means thanks, for
| example if you let someone merge from one of the very short
| onramps.
|
| There's a similar custom in South Korea, where the warning
| lights are often used as a "thank you" if somebody lets you cut
| in front of them.
| Xevi wrote:
| > Here in Lithuania, flashing your warning lights (the four
| orange ones on the corners of the car) means thanks, for
| example if you let someone merge from one of the very short
| onramps. I've never seen this in Germany, where onramps are
| however much longer.
|
| In Sweden it's common to do this by using your blinkers. You
| blink once in each direction. So first left, then right. Or the
| other way around.
| RankingMember wrote:
| I think this is originally a trucker thing, and I've seen it
| many times from truckers in the US. I've used it myself when
| someone is courteous and lets me in.
| a_bonobo wrote:
| > You blink once in each direction. So first left, then
| right. Or the other way around.
|
| I've had this a few times from truckers driving through
| Germany, too, when I let them merge. Truckers in Germany are
| from all over Europe so it's hard to tell how European this
| gesture is
| null_object wrote:
| > In Sweden it's common to do this by using your blinkers.
|
| I wouldn't say it's common here in Sweden, at all. I've
| driven all over Europe and the US, and nowhere is as
| uncommunicative as Sweden on the roads. People barely use
| their blinkers even when turning or changing lanes on the
| motorway, let alone 'thanking' each other - which in the 25
| years I've lived here, I've seen maybe two or three times.
| Jolter wrote:
| I've seen it all over the place, starting with my parents.
|
| I guess using the warning lights as a "thanks" would be
| uncommon though, since it's actually illegal. ;-)
| jrochkind1 wrote:
| In the USA, I at some point picked up flashing headlights as
| "thanks", I don't know how common it is, I don't _see_ it
| that often (anymore?), but USA drivers may be unlikely to
| give thanks on the road. :|
|
| (Flashing headlights is also "i see you trying to merge in
| front of me and i'll give you space." Which I also
| occasionally do but don't see that often).
| datameta wrote:
| The only way I've seen flashing high-beams used is on the
| highway to signal from behind "you're going too slow for my
| liking" or from a distance away "watch out I'm serpentining
| through traffic 15-20mph faster than the next fastest car"
| cjaybo wrote:
| I think GP is talking about flashing the headlights by
| turning them off and back on quickly, rather than
| flashing the high-beams. This is what I've usually seen
| in the US when drivers want to say "thank you" or "you
| can merge in front of me" on the highway.
| bane wrote:
| I usually see the flashing headlights for "go ahead in
| front of me" around entrance ramps in busy traffic.
|
| Not common, but maybe I see it 3 or 4 times a year.
| residentcoder wrote:
| >Flashing headlights is also "i see you trying to merge in
| front of me and i'll give you space."
|
| I do this for the same reason - or more generalized - 'I
| see you are about to do _x_, and I acknowledge - go ahead'.
| r00f wrote:
| A friend from Syria once told me that in their country flashing
| warning lights means "f* you", and when he saw it for the first
| time when going abroad, he was really angry when someone
| thanked him. Like "I've just let him merge and that is how he
| acts to me?!"
|
| But I personally haven't heard of any other cases when this
| isn't considered a thank you gesture
| bee_rider wrote:
| I'm surprised at the thank you gesture. The intended use of
| warning lights is to... warn people, right? I've always
| understood them to mean "something weird has happened, and so
| I may do something unpredictable." I can't see how that could
| have morphed to "thank you."
| Jolter wrote:
| Pretty sure the intended use is when stationary, to warn
| that you have broken down and are positioned badly.
|
| At least, that used to be the only time it was legal to use
| them here (Sweden). They recently added a rule that it's
| legal to use warning lights while being towed, too. Either
| way, it's certainly a traffic offense to use them while
| driving.
| unscaled wrote:
| In Israel the most common meaning is "Get off my lane, RIGHT
| NOW!", so I wouldn't be surprised if it's not just Syria but
| a big chunk of the Middle East that follows that rule.
|
| It could also be used to call another driver's attention
| (e.g. if you have a broken taillight and did not notice), or
| to warn against a police trap (in the pre-Waze era) and maybe
| a few other things, but it never means "thank you".
| throwaway0a5e wrote:
| Its contextual.
|
| Car coming the other way flashes and it means hazard ahead.
|
| If it's at night and your DRLs are the only thing on it
| means "turn on your lights moron"
|
| At an intersection it usually means "go" to whichever party
| should be yielding to the flashing party.
|
| Of course if you're in the left land and flash your brights
| at someone who's clogging up the left lane there's a good
| chance they won't understand it because if they could
| understand the context they wouldn't be clogging up the
| left lane in the first place.
| ChuckNorris89 wrote:
| _> If there is no responding honk, they will take the full
| width of the road (making the very tight turn easier and
| faster). Tourist drivers have to pick up on this :)_
|
| And self driving cars too, if they wish to reach full autonomy
| everywhere. But since currently they can barely keep themselves
| from crashing into obvious obstacles on the highway without
| human intervention, I think their prime-time is further into
| the distant future than pioneers like Elon would like to admit
| as I can't imagine they'd be able to handle the roads in
| Italy/Paris by themselves without an accident any time soon.
| pdpi wrote:
| Signalling your presence for safety is pretty much the only
| legitimate use for a car horn, so that makes sense. Of course,
| the part where they take up the whole width of the road kind of
| then causes a bunch of added risk...
| johannes1234321 wrote:
| > In the mountains of Italy, drivers give a short honk before
| entering a turn on a serpentine road, which usually can't be
| seen around.
|
| Swiss busses even have a special horn playing a piece (three
| tones) of Rossini's, Wilhelm Tell Opera Overture
| https://youtu.be/wMWEQdxMhdA
| martin_a wrote:
| > I flash them a grateful hand sign when passing their mirror.
|
| You'd probably use the warning lights for this in Germany. At
| least with truck drivers this is a common thing.
| dzhiurgis wrote:
| Friend from Canada (who cycled from Vilnius to Warsaw) would
| give short honks to cyclists as some sort of appreciation or
| something. I thought it's kinda annoying for cyclists!
|
| Here in NZ will honk (or even call police) if you drive middle
| of the road - visibility behind corners isn't great and
| tourists often confuse where they should drive. Whereas it's
| fairly common to drive in the middle in Lithuania - sometimes
| it has better road surface.
| silon42 wrote:
| They must not have cyclists in Italy...
|
| I drive on a twisty road like that often, and I'd collect a
| cyclist every month if I did that.
| LeonM wrote:
| Even on racetracks indicators and high-beams are used in their
| own way (that is: if the race car is equipped with such
| lights).
|
| Hazard lights (both indicators): Used in yellow zone, both to
| confirm to the marshals that the driver has seen the yellow
| flag. For drivers behind it is extra indication that yellow
| zone is ahead.
|
| Indicate to the right: Acknowledge the faster driver behind
| you, indicating it is safe to pass. Also to acknowledge to
| marshal that the blue flag was observed.
|
| Indicate to the left: Indicate to car in front that you are
| faster, please let me pass (same as blue flag by marshal).
| Obviously not used in competitive racing, but very useful
| recreational for track driving.
|
| High-beams are sometimes flashed to thank/acknowledge marshal
| on a flag signal.
| JshWright wrote:
| > Obviously not used in competitive racing, but very useful
| recreational for track driving.
|
| While actual race cars don't have turn indicators, actual
| headlights are common in some racing classes (especially for
| endurance racing), and multi-class races are common (where
| multiple different categories of cars are racing on the same
| track, often with _very_ different top speeds). Flashing
| headlights is a common way for a faster car behind to
| indicate to the slower class of car ahead that they're
| coming.
| rubans wrote:
| I've seen this sort of comment many times, implying that
| indicators, flashing lights, use of the horn is unique to
| certain countries or regions. Yet every time, there's replies
| saying "hey I'm from <region not mentioned> and we also do
| this".
|
| It seems to me people haven't realised the behaviour displayed
| in their part of the world isn't as unique or quaint as they
| think it is!
| keraf wrote:
| I'm in Zanzibar, TZ at the moment. Honking is also used when
| overtaking or in general to make others aware of your presence
| on the road (especially for pedestrians and cyclists). The
| interesting part though is with indicators. They use the right
| indicator (driving in on the left) to signal incoming cars to
| the vehicles behind you, meaning it is unsafe to overtake.
| pomian wrote:
| haha! we have to add a note in this thread, for which
| countries drive on the left and right. So your warning for
| passing signals are the same using the same logic.
| Cthulhu_ wrote:
| We've taken to ringing our bicycle bells if we're approaching a
| corner or intersection we can't quite see past.
| dvirsky wrote:
| In Israel, flashing the warning lights or hazard lights or
| whatever they're called when driving, means "hey car behind me,
| you're on high beams and blinding me, please stop". Since
| moving to the US I haven't found an effective way to signal
| people about this, they certainly don't understand this signal.
|
| Flashing high beams quickly is either a warning about police
| ahead, or "turn on your damn lights" (there is also a hand
| gesture for this, spreading and closing your fingers towards
| them to illustrate a light beam). If someone is blinding you
| coming in front of you, you just turn on high beams and blind
| them back.
| t0mas88 wrote:
| You can flash the rear fog lights for that. It's annoying
| enough for those behind you to at some point start looking at
| their own dashboard.
| boomboomsubban wrote:
| >there is also a hand gesture for this, spreading and closing
| your fingers towards them to illustrate a light beam
|
| I try to use this in the US, though my success rate is rather
| low. And I wonder if the distraction just makes things less
| safe every time I do it.
| dzhiurgis wrote:
| How about when someone leaves their rear fog light on and you
| are behind them...
| kelseyfrog wrote:
| Repositioning your review mirror to reflect their headlights
| directly back into the driver's eyes is not a solution
| (tested empirically).
| vasco wrote:
| > If someone is blinding you coming in front of you, you just
| turn on high beams and blind them back.
|
| I do this too and would die a peaceful death if we crashed
| into each other with the feeling of fairness restored to the
| world.
| TylerE wrote:
| > Since moving to the US I haven't found an effective way to
| signal people about this, they certainly don't understand
| this signal.
|
| Between lifted pickup trucks and shoddy, poorly-aligned
| aftermarket HID lights, it's probably that a high percentage
| of them AREN'T using brights, even if it feels like it.
| kube-system wrote:
| Or even poorly aligned OEM lights. Most US states don't
| have vehicle inspections, and the ones that do usually
| aren't checking headlight alignment.
| dvirsky wrote:
| You have to have your headlights alignment tested every
| year in Israel. And being caught with badly aligned
| lights can lead to a ticket if a police car is on the
| receiving end.
| kube-system wrote:
| A number of US states have inspections that cover proper
| operation of lights, but often in practice it isn't
| anything more than checking to make sure they aren't
| burnt out. Having improperly aimed headlights is also
| ticketable in the US but it isn't often enforced.
| albrewer wrote:
| > In the mountains of Italy, drivers give a short honk before
| entering a turn on a serpentine road,
|
| This was common in Puerto Rico when I visited.
| prateek_mir wrote:
| I do not buy the "No side mirrors" argument, because what you'll
| also see written on the back of these trucks is "Use dipper at
| night", that is, do not use high beam cause the when reflected
| from the side mirrors, it blocks your vision.
| newsbinator wrote:
| This isn't the only "ungrammatical" expression (relative to
| global standard English) you will encounter in India.
|
| Could it be that some person or some company simply put this
| expression on their trucks (thinking it's grammatical), and
| because it seemed useful other trucks followed, until it became
| the standard?
|
| Edit: this isn't to be proscriptive about what's
| correct/incorrect in a given country.
|
| My definition of "global standard English" is in a comment below.
| marginalia_nu wrote:
| Eh, sometimes you just gotta do the needful.
| riteshpatel wrote:
| You win the internet today! Coming from a British-born
| Indian, I hate that phrase so much.
| OJFord wrote:
| What is 'global standard English'? If you're American, consider
| that I (British) can find plenty that's 'wrong' with your
| English, judged by mine.
|
| Indian English has as much right to its own standard of correct
| as American English. (It's possibly a more widely spoken
| dialect! Depending probably on whether we say e.g. Europeans
| learning with heavy US film/tv influence are AmE speakers.)
| AussieWog93 wrote:
| >What is 'global standard English'?
|
| I don't think it's formally defined, but there are some
| phrases that are widely accepted as "normal" by English
| speakers regardless of geography and others that are peculiar
| to a certain dialect.
|
| I'd be very surprised to hear someone outside of Australia
| say they were "fanging for a dart", for example.
| newsbinator wrote:
| It's hard for me to understand why both you and I are
| getting downvoted for recognizing that people default to a
| subset of a language they have in common.
|
| I suspect if we were talking about "standard Russian" this
| wouldn't be so contentious.
|
| Every region has its own way of speaking, its own idioms
| and acceptable grammatical constructions. That doesn't mean
| the regions can't speak a unified generic version of the
| language.
|
| That generic version will still have grammar rules to obey
| or break.
| OJFord wrote:
| Because it was a rhetorical question, I wasn't actually
| asking what people consider to be a 'global standard
| English', I was asserting that that's nonsense. There are
| many dialects of English across the globe, the Indian
| dialect as valid as the American; the fact that there's
| enough common ground between them that we can understand
| each other doesn't change that (it's surely prerequisite
| for calling it a dialect and not a different language).
|
| I certainly don't switch to 'global standard English' or
| AmE when I'm talking to someone who isn't British, and I
| doubt anybody thinks I'm speaking incorrect 'global
| standard English' as a result.
| AussieWog93 wrote:
| >I certainly don't switch to 'global standard English' or
| AmE when I'm talking to someone who isn't British, and I
| doubt anybody thinks I'm speaking incorrect 'global
| standard English' as a result.
|
| Nobody is saying that global English is American English.
| We are simply pointing out that there is a subset of the
| language that is standard globally in addition to the
| regional dialects.
|
| I'm sure you wouldn't use words like "chav" or "bell end"
| around a group of foreigners, because they are not
| globally understood.
| newsbinator wrote:
| You're reading a lot into what I've said (e.g. hearing
| that some versions of English that are in use can be
| invalid). One way to tell that I'm not invalidating any
| particular version is that I put "ungrammatical" in
| quotes.
|
| Whether we like it or not, when non-natives from 5
| different countries get together in a room in
| Petropavlovsk-Kamchatka, the subset of English they're
| speaking is largely the same as when non-natives from 5
| other different countries get together in a room in Lima
| or in Gaborone.
|
| The language they're speaking has grammar rules. It can
| be thought of as "standard Global English" because it's
| identifiable, distributed, and distinguishable from
| American English, British English, Singlish, etc.
| newsbinator wrote:
| Global standard English is the English that a mixed
| international group of non-native but competent English
| speakers defaults to in an important meeting.
|
| I.e. a simpler subset of grammar: only 3 basic tenses,
| minimal and explicit use of conditionals to differentiate
| hypotheticals from reality/expectations, avoiding idiomatic
| or slang expressions, preferring regular and frequent
| conjugations over irregular / infrequent ones, preferring
| simple verbs over phrasal verbs, minimal reliance on
| definite/indefinite Articles as modifiers/counters, etc
|
| It's still a subject-verb-object language that includes the
| Be-copula though.
| elzbardico wrote:
| For me who am neither American or British, Global Standard
| English means American English in practice. I may find
| British pronunciation more logical and easier to understand,
| I may even prefer the spelling of some words in British
| English, but English is the world second's language, in a
| remote team where half of us are not native speakers, it is
| easier to adopt the most influential version of the language
| as the canonical one.
| lngnmn2 wrote:
| It is either "Blow Horn" or "Horn Please" and it is a signal for
| request for overtaking. Acknowledgment is usually a sign by hand
| from a driver's window. Nowadays it is a blink of a turn signal.
|
| BTW, hill are drivers in India and Nepal are much more skilled
| and civilized, especially Nepalese.
| rahoulb wrote:
| As someone who has grown up (and learnt to drive) in England - I
| had a moment of sudden realisation in India.
|
| For me, the horn is a warning sign - "get out of my way" or
| "watch out!" - only to be used in emergencies.
|
| In India, the horn means "I'm over here", to be used whenever
| you're near another vehicle. Which fits with the statements on
| the back of the lorries perfectly.
| OJFord wrote:
| > [in England ...] For me, the horn is a warning sign - "get
| out of my way" or "watch out!" - only to be used in
| emergencies.
|
| That is not the correct use in England, especially not 'get out
| of my way' (emergency services' vehicles aside) - and it
| needn't be an emergency (uh, again!).
|
| It's only supposed to be used to alert other drivers to your
| (non-stationary) presence, when it appears they haven't seen
| you or may not be afforded the opportunity - on a winding
| country road for example, less than two cars wide, it's common
| to sound it before a blind corner so that if you get one back
| you can both negotiate a careful passing, or the other car can
| pull over for you if they have the chance.
|
| Which is pretty similar to what you describe in India really,
| just quite a different bar for when you need to warn of your
| presence!
| cesaref wrote:
| Indeed. As a driver in the UK, I use the horn so rarely that
| i've forgotten how to make it work when I need it.
| hnlmorg wrote:
| As someone who lives in the countryside and have multiple
| roads like you describe, I can comfortably say nobody honks
| the horn on blind corners nor narrow roads. Maybe it is like
| this on other English counties but I've not seen that to be
| the case when travelling either.
|
| Official or correct usages aside, the more typical usage for
| horns in England are:
|
| + impatience. eg a car going to slow and the driver behind is
| a dick. Though more often you'll see drivers flash their full
| beams instead.
|
| + as a way of alerting another driver in an emergency. eg
| your pulling into a lane where another car exists because you
| didn't see that other car. This is basically what the GP was
| saying,
|
| + or a sign of unhappiness. eg if you cut someone up on the
| road, you'll likely get honked at. It's basically used as a
| gesture, like swearing at the other driver.
| ericbarrett wrote:
| Indeed, I've seen the horn-on-corners thing mentioned a few
| times in this thread and I think it's dangerous:
|
| - If the road is hilly, there is a significant amount of
| rock and soil between you and an opposing car and the sound
| will be quite muted as it has to diffuse around the corner.
|
| - If the other driver has their window up and/or their
| radio on then they won't hear it at all.
|
| - People who are hard of hearing can and do still drive.
|
| I used to live on top of a 4200'/1300m mountain, and
| occasionally people would do this and then think it was OK
| to cut the line. Please just don't, you're only disturbing
| the countryside and residents/hikers and giving yourself a
| false sense of security.
| hnlmorg wrote:
| It also runs on the assumption that the only people on
| the road are car drivers. But you might get tractors,
| cyclists, hikers / runners, horse riders etc. Even people
| just casually out for a walk with their family. And a lot
| of these types of roads might not have footpaths either.
| mrsuprawsm wrote:
| I have seen horns being commonly used on (extremely) rural
| Staffordshire roads at blind corners. It's definitely a
| thing.
|
| The other usages you describe are indeed more typical,
| though.
| arethuza wrote:
| I drive quite a lot on single track roads in Scotland (i.e.
| entire road width can only handle one vehicle at a time) and
| I don't think I've ever encountered anyone using their horn
| like that.
|
| At a blind corner, you just drive slowly - no uncivilised
| horn usage.
| jcul wrote:
| I found it shocking at first in India.
|
| But then I spent a month riding a motorcycle in Vietnam, where
| they have the same practice, maybe not quite as intense.
|
| I realised it is more like a radar system so you know what is
| around you.
|
| Also the larger vehicles have right of way.
|
| Once you realise this the system starts to make more sense.
|
| After I remember riding a motorcycle in Thailand and getting
| the shock of my life as a big jeep zoomed past me without
| beeping.
|
| I really missed that extra auditory information source once it
| was gone.
| gpmcadam wrote:
| In the Highway Code, letting someone know that you're there is
| the only proposed use for both beeping the horn and flashing
| your lights at another driver.
| thrwyoilarticle wrote:
| For flashing headlights, the highway code is so far out of
| alignment with the real world that it would be more pragmatic
| to change the highway code to accommodate it and properly
| define liability. Being predictable is the most important
| thing for safety and you can't be predictable while treating
| all flashing headlights as a warning.
| hnlmorg wrote:
| That maybe so but common usage isn't aligned with what the
| Highway Code defines as correct usage.
|
| Take lights for example:
|
| + flashing headlights on a dual carriageway or motorway is a
| way of telling a driver to pull across so they can pass
|
| + flashing headlights near an obstruction is a way of telling
| another driver that you're giving them priority
|
| + following on from the previous point, flashing back is a
| way of saying thank you to the other driver for letting you
| take priority (this is done after you've already started
| moving to make it clear that you're not trying to hand
| priority back)
|
| + flashing hazards briefly is also used to say thank you,
| albeit typically if a vehicle is behind you rather than in
| front
|
| + flashing hazards on a duel carriageway or motorway is a way
| of warning other drivers that you're breaking _heavily_ (as
| break lights don 't inform the spectrum of difference between
| soft breaking and emergency stops). At least in this scenario
| you are actually informing others of an oncoming hazard
|
| I'm sure there'll be other colloquialism I've forgotten too
| jkhdigital wrote:
| Yes, it's a bit ironic that the only reasonable use of a horn
| is often the least likely justification for honking by
| Western (or at least American) drivers.
|
| As an aside, Japanese drivers flash their lights (both
| headlights and taillights) as acknowledgement for letting
| them merge or pass--like the dual behavior of honking a horn
| as an expletive.
| OJFord wrote:
| That's common in the UK too. Rear warning lights that is,
| can't imagine when headlights would be in the right place
| for it; they're more often used by the other person in that
| scenario - 'after you'.
| skhr0680 wrote:
| Beware that flashing your highs in Japan can mean "GTFO out
| of my lane", and some drivers get really mad about it
| claviska wrote:
| Here in the somewhat rural U.S., we tend to use the horn
| only when a driver isn't paying attention when the light
| turns green and we're behind them.
| sokoloff wrote:
| I'm in a city and over 90% of my horn usage amounts to
| "put down your damn phone; your light is green!"
| NamTaf wrote:
| Same from my limited experience in China. You use the horn as
| you approach to overtake someone, change lanes into traffic,
| etc. to say 'I am here'. It in effect replaces the indicators
| in many situations.
| solohan wrote:
| This. I couldn't imagine driving in South East Asia without the
| horn.
|
| Scary story: My cousin almost killed a cyclist once after
| moving back to Europe after living in Asia for years. She used
| the horn as a friendly message (or so she thought) before
| passing. The cyclist, not being used to ever hearing horns on
| the road, got scared, looked over their shoulder and swerved
| out in front of the car.
| rhn_mk1 wrote:
| Car horns seem to be calibrated to be heard by someone
| wrapped in a car, and are too loud for unprotected listening.
| Bicycle bells are closer to that range. No wonder the cyclist
| got freaked out.
| thrwyoilarticle wrote:
| The Ineos Grenadier 4x4 has a button specifically for this
| purpose (& because it's made by a cycling team & makes for
| good PR). I don't know how useable it really would be.
|
| I don't think I'd ever use my horn to let a cyclist know
| I'm there. It's hard to do a friendly, quick double-toot
| consistently and, as you said, it's just too loud. It's
| more likely to cause an accident than just waiting longer
| to overtake. Horns are usually a rude thing, so they're
| scary to hear.
|
| Similarly, on a bike, I don't really use the bell to go
| around pedestrians on shared paths. Pedestrians aren't
| usually in the mindset of being aware of what's behind
| them, so the bell just makes them jump. You also can't
| express the difference between a friendly warning and a
| request to move with just a bell. Again, it's easier and
| more consistent to slow down and take responsibility for
| moving around them.
|
| (obviously, local cultures will vary)
| unicornfinder wrote:
| As a cyclist, I find it hard. I tend to avoid using the
| bell for the reason you've stated (i.e. it tends to just
| make them jump), but equally I've found not using it gets
| responses along the lines of "Use your f**ing bell".
| city41 wrote:
| I've found most everyone responds well to "on your left!"
| Many will wave and thank you, largely because most
| bicyclists provide no alert at all and instead just fly
| by (which is dangerous and rude).
| 0x737368 wrote:
| Poor cyclist but the anecdote is hilarious
| technothrasher wrote:
| > For me, the horn is a warning sign
|
| Here in Massachusetts, it seems the horn has only three
| functions. The first, a quick "beep beep" signals that you
| recognize another driver or pedestrian and are saying hello.
| The second, a one to three second beep means that the traffic
| light has switched to green and car in front of you has not
| begun moving within 20ms. And the third, a five to sixty second
| "beeeeeeeeep" means that you consider the other driver to have
| made a mistake and needs to understand their very, very low
| place in the social hierarchy. This third one is the most used.
| pif wrote:
| Same stuff in Italy.
| gwbas1c wrote:
| Around 1995 the Massachusetts driver's manual said something
| like "Only use the horn in an emergency" or "Only use the
| horn to avoid an accident."
|
| I've found that most Massachusetts drivers abide by that.
|
| > and car in front of you has not begun moving within 20ms
|
| No... It's more like 2-3 seconds. But you THINK it's 20ms
| because you're not paying attention.
| amalcon wrote:
| Worth noting that a "mistake" in Massachusetts includes not
| just things that are dangerous, but also such grave
| misconduct as stopping for a yellow light, going at only the
| speed limit, or riding a bicycle.
| brirec wrote:
| There's something about being a motor vehicle driver that
| just makes bicycle riders very bad people
| Sohcahtoa82 wrote:
| There's a lot of confirmation bias at work, IMO.
|
| Some bicycle riders are indeed very bad people. They
| think they have the right-of-way in every scenario and
| will run red lights and act like the car drivers are the
| assholes when they almost get hit by cross-traffic that
| has the green. Drivers usually only notice the asshole
| bicyclists.
|
| But in some cases, drivers need to get over the fact that
| bicyclists exist and understand that sometimes the
| actions of a bicyclists, while inconvenient for the
| driver, are the safest. For example, bicyclists do not
| belong on sidewalks. In areas with a lot of pedestrians
| (like downtown city blocks), a bicyclist is going to be
| incredibly limited in their speed on the sidewalk. In
| suburbs, a bicyclist on the sidewalk is less likely to be
| seen by a driver and is more likely to get hit by a car
| making a turn, especially if there are cars parked on the
| curb. In some states, it's actually illegal for
| bicyclists to ride on the sidewalk.
|
| When they ride in the middle of the lane, it's not to be
| a dick. It's because there are dick drivers that will
| pass them and give them only a couple inches of space,
| which is dangerous. By riding in the middle, when a
| driver passes, it gives them a lot of room to move to the
| right if they feel the driver isn't giving them adequate
| space.
| bettysdiagnose wrote:
| I think even to describe them as "very bad people" is
| quite the stretch. They may be a little bit obnoxious but
| running a red light as a car vs running a red light as a
| cyclist is completely and utterly different. Firstly the
| implications of running a red as a bicycle are typically
| just that other road users tut, it's very rare that
| anybody gets hurt, and if they do nobody dies except
| maybe the cyclist. Secondly it's that the entire traffic
| light system makes perfect sense for cars and other
| motorised transport, but only makes some sense for
| bicycles some of the time. There are a huge number of
| crossings where you go "it makes perfect sense for cars
| to stop here, but I as a cyclist basically only have to
| stop here to not upset drivers". IMO to reject and
| protest against the utter domination of our cities and
| public spaces by cars necessarily involves skipping
| traffic light systems that only make sense for cars. But
| doing it safely and with respect for pedestrians and
| other road users.
| [deleted]
| rahoulb wrote:
| We have a fourth one - you're a woman or a non-white person
| and I'm going to lean out of the window and yell obscenities
| at you.
| slingnow wrote:
| No, we don't.
| davchana wrote:
| Also, there is a vehicle company Tata, making many vehicles
| including trucks. Then same word is also used when we waive
| goodbye with hands, like Tata. Parents usually usee to say to
| their own kids when leaving friend's house, Ok Do Tata (means
| waive your arms in goodbye and say tata). Trucks also write OK
| TATA BYE on back of them.
| narag wrote:
| Horn, OK? Please!
| gattilorenz wrote:
| It's only three examples (but Google will provide way more:
| https://live.staticflickr.com/7392/16171222650_b5b5e0ffc6_b....)
| , but in two of those the font of "ok" and "horn please" is
| different, suggesting that "horn ok please" is not the
| correct/intended interpretation, and that the Indian designers
| that started this trend were not big fan of Gestalt rules.
| OJFord wrote:
| Yeah, the article seems to painfully ignore it, but the common
| theme in all its theories (and the way it's painted in its
| photos) seems to be that 'OK' should be parsed separately,
| whatever its meaning.
| TazeTSchnitzel wrote:
| "it doesn't seem to make grammatical sense"
|
| To people familiar with standard American and British English,
| perhaps, but it's written by Indian English speakers for an
| Indian audience. Perhaps it's not ungrammatical in that language
| variety?
| mattbee wrote:
| Indian English is definitely a language with its own grammar
| and word forms. My favourite phrase from Indian customers
| confirming they wanted something done - "please do the
| needful".
| selimthegrim wrote:
| I think do the needful is old UK argot? Not sure about
| condole though
| unmole wrote:
| > Perhaps it's not ungrammatical in that language variety?
|
| Indian English rarely differs in grammatical constructs from
| other varieties. It makes no sense in Indian English either.
| OJFord wrote:
| As a native BrE speaker learning Hindi, what I notice most
| (if not entirely) is phrases/styles/devices borrowed from
| Hindi (and probably other Indo-Aryan languages), translated
| and applied in English.
|
| For example: 'I _myself_ have noticed this ' (likely
| translating hii emphatic particle - a BrE speaker would
| almost certainly not say 'myself' at all, unless responding
| to someone saying they had noticed something perhaps, and
| then it would be at the end of the sentence) similarly 'I/me
| only' & 'even I'.
|
| Or 'slowly-slowly' (dhiire-dhiire) and other adverbs - while
| BrE does use repetition for emphasis I'd say it's not nearly
| as common, and typically not adverbs.
| phillc73 wrote:
| I noticed this repetition for the first time in South
| African English. The phrase "just now" means sort of now-
| ish, maybe in the next 30 minutes, maybe even tomorrow.
| Whereas the phrase "now now" means immediately.
| OJFord wrote:
| Ha, interesting. (From comments I gather you're in the
| UK, but for the benefit of others 'just now' here would
| be a very short time ago; in the past: phillc commented
| _just now_.)
|
| I've struggled to explain the nuanced variations in
| meaning of 'quite' in BrE to a Canadian, depending on
| tone and other words that really have no right to make
| any difference. (Think 'quite nice' vs. 'really quite
| nice'; 'a bit' vs. 'quite a bit'. "That makes no sense",
| she said. Well _quite_.)
| phillc73 wrote:
| I might still use "just now" in future tense. "I'll do
| that just now." However, to me, this would mean very
| soon. Not necessarily in South Africa. "I'll be there
| just now" - you might be waiting for a while! It took me
| quite some time to adapt my expectations.
| OJFord wrote:
| Ah yes I can just about hear that - probably regional
| variation, I wouldn't use it that way myself.
| selimthegrim wrote:
| >For example: 'I myself have noticed this'
|
| More likely 'main khud' - 'main hi' would be explicitly
| comparative
| koliber wrote:
| This is interesting. I see where you are going with this.
|
| I had the good fortune of spending a month travelling in India
| in 2011. A phrase that came to mind immediately when I read
| your comment was:
|
| photo OK mister
|
| The way it was spoken was not quite a question, and not quite a
| statement. It was clear what the speak meant though: "May I
| take a photo of/with you?"
|
| I wonder if this is indeed a way of phrasing "Honk when
| passing" using a type of pidgin.
| albert_e wrote:
| I am arguably an expert in Indian English and I can assure you
| the phrase "Horn OK Please" does not have any meaning nor is it
| grammatically correct.
| yutijke wrote:
| As a cyclist, the shortest bit of advice I can give to anyone not
| accustomed to busy Indian roads would be to assume that everyone
| around you are actively looking to murder you.
|
| At best, you are an ant that they may step on by mistake.
| Pxtl wrote:
| I've been to Trivandrum a couple of times - Trivandrum's roads
| are less lethal than most in India per-collision, but they make
| up for it on volume.
|
| Having visited Buenos Aires, with similarly infamous roads, I
| thought I knew what I was in for. No. I've never been so
| terrified to ride in "normal traffic" in my life. High speed
| mayhem with everything millimeters apart and constantly pushing
| for position aggressively.
|
| I cannot even begin to imagine engaging with those roads as a
| cyclist.
| shmde wrote:
| Audi makes extra-durable horns for cars sold in India.
|
| https://theworld.org/stories/2012-03-26/indiainc-audi-makes-...
| jspash wrote:
| Is this the "PC LOAD LETTER" of motor vehicles?
| wirrbel wrote:
| In driver's school in Germany about 2004, I learned that one
| _can_ use the horn to announce overtaking esp. of agr. tractors
| or harvesters, etc. I think I never did so but I am fairly
| certain if I'd dig into the law, there would still be a paragraph
| allowing it.
| neerajk wrote:
| All my life I've read it as "Horn Please, OK!"
| yardstick wrote:
| Anyone with local insight on how safe/unsafe the roads are and if
| things like side mirrors would help?
|
| I once drove around Sicily for a few days and the main city area
| roads were constant traffic jams, many more car lanes than actual
| road lanes (faded or non-existent lane markings), and people
| switching lanes and turning without any notice/indicators. For
| all the chaos it kinda worked and people just went very slowly
| moving lanes, cutting across intersections, etc. Seemed like the
| lack of safety made everyone more cautious (although I haven't
| bothered looking at road accident stats). Though I was glad to be
| done with it at the end of my trip!
| prateek_mir wrote:
| I have had similar observations about chaotic driving, people
| are cautious. At place where I live in India at present, one
| can actually cross roads walking slowly ( The traffic will just
| go around you )
|
| I do not think there's much truth in "No side mirrors" argument
| though, I have seen some _very_ old trucks and buses here in
| India, and cannot recall any missing mirrors.
|
| Infact, the general convention in India for overtaking a truck
| is to flash highbeam light, turn on the indicator to highlight
| the edge of your car and overtake.
| derbOac wrote:
| Several years ago I read an article (I don't remember where)
| explaining and arguing for a libertarian approach to traffic
| rules (in the US). The argument was if you get rid of stop
| signs, people will tend to stop at intersections more, not
| less, because they don't know what to expect. I don't really
| agree with it but it was an article that I started reading with
| astonishment for how silly it was and by the end became
| convinced it was very reasonable even if you disagreed.
|
| Part of my skepticism about libertarian traffic control is that
| I was once in an area where there was a sort of legislative
| experiment with certain kinds of traffic lights. The
| legislature made the argument that they were unnecessary, the
| DoT pointed to studies that they improved traffic, and after
| awhile of this the DoT said "fine, we'll shut them off for
| awhile and see what happens." The result wasn't bad accidents,
| but it _was_ absolutely horrible traffic congestion, and people
| begged the DoT to turn them back on. So they did and no one
| argued about it again.
|
| Now that I argue about it, the libertarian argument article was
| focused on safety, not traffic flow, so maybe they'd say their
| arguments still stand. But for me getting rid of the lights was
| a very negative thing.
| datavirtue wrote:
| I had a group of guys in from India to help on a project. I
| loved driving to lunch with them. If they saw someone
| approaching a stop sign on a side street they would slam on
| the brakes, expecting the driver of some SUV to just blow the
| stopsign and jet in front of them. I would laugh every time.
| They were clearly used to India where they said that all
| traffic laws are optional.
|
| Over the last few years though, as traffic has worsened, I am
| starting to use their approach.
| ramraj07 wrote:
| You are mostly right, you can pretty much not drive vehicles in
| india (especially large ones) without side mirrors and
| everyone's super cautious because of the rashness.
|
| Importantly, one expects rashness. You expect tho wheelers to
| zip around you from both sides. No one's surprised so pretty
| much everyone behaves predictably. If someone starts crossing
| the middle of the highway you can be mostly sure that they're
| going to walk at the same speed so no one actually stops,
| everyone adjusts their speed to miss them just so and keep
| going. For someone who likes thrills this is good. Someone who
| gets anxiety will have a very tough time.
|
| I'm gonna miss driving in Indian roads.
| causi wrote:
| Whenever I visit a large city, the sound of car horns is what
| takes the most getting used to. It is deeply unpleasant, and
| happens so often it isn't even useful. I'm convinced these people
| are using their horns as an expression of emotion, rather than an
| attempt to communicate with a specific car. For someone from the
| suburbs it's a very alien and disturbing experience.
| aww_dang wrote:
| There's plenty of rationalization for noise pollution on this
| thread. In my view you're closer to the mark. Drivers honk at
| red lights, which is completely irrational.
|
| "Honk more, wait more - Mumbai"
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q358fIosAsU
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_effects_from_noise
| albert_e wrote:
| I am pretty sure "OK" is a separate phrase - not sure about
| origins, could be a Quality Check OK by manufacturer or a
| transport authority certifying it is fit for use maybe.
|
| "Horn Please" / "Sound Horn" is the other phrase with a clear
| purpose and meaning.
|
| They just got mixed in due to usage. I saw/see many examples
| where OK is painted in a distinct font from other words.
| benrapscallion wrote:
| This is correct
| nsenifty wrote:
| You can often tell if a truck is from the South or North (other
| than the license plates of course). Sound Horn is more common
| in the South whereas Blow Horn makes it likely it is from the
| North.
| qart wrote:
| Seconded. "Horn Please" / "Sound Horn" / "Blow Horn" is the
| actual message. OK is often painted on a separate line.
| Sometimes above, sometimes below the "Horn Please" message.
|
| I don't think any of these have a meaning though. I think they
| are just memes (in the Dawkins sense). Also a meme on truck
| art: some sappy line about lost love. Also, "We Two Ours Two",
| which became "We Two Ours One" (usually in Hindi)
| statictype wrote:
| "We two ours one" always puzzled me. I assume this is about
| overpopulation and encouraging families to have a single
| child?
| qart wrote:
| Exactly that. There used to be government ads between TV
| shows about various circumstances for casually inquiring
| about the protagonist's family. The response would be the
| catchphrase "hum do, humare do" (we two, ours two). The
| message changed a few years later to encourage a three-
| member family. The protagonist would always beam when
| saying the catchphrase.
|
| Edit: I think I remember... the early ads were for getting
| condoms for free at government run hospitals and clinics.
| Later on, the ads were for encouraging vasectomy.
| ryzvonusef wrote:
| reminds me of the random "R" "A" "K" stickers on the back of
| taxis in Pakistan. No one is sure how or why this trend started,
| or what the letters signify.
|
| https://pakistantruckart.com/2010/05/01/taxi-motifs-in-islam...
| gumby wrote:
| > It is unclear whether the ubiquitous sign actually contributes
| to drivers honking their horns more, _though the government of
| Maharashtra certainly seems to think there is a connection._
|
| Whether the signs do or don't contribute is irrelevant. They are
| ubiquitous and banning them causes discussion which calls
| attention to the city's attempt to reduce the racket.
|
| And I am annoyed that, despite the title, the article does not
| explain the origin.
| OneTimePetes wrote:
| This goes the other way too. In china, several trucks had
| colourful lane-change-lights and a voice-speaker
| informing/warning the other vehicles that they were turning in
| addition to the blinker.
|
| Was pretty futuristic
| penguin_booze wrote:
| It's funny that, in the UK, flashing head lamps means 'you go
| first'. In India, it's the other way around: 'I--and only I--
| drive around here!'.
| DonHopkins wrote:
| So it's not because it's an anagram for "Parolees Honk"? Or
| "Penal Hookers"? Or "Arsehole Knop"?
| suvo wrote:
| My theory has been a little different. IIRC Horn and Please are
| written on the two sides asking the tailing vehicle to blow the
| Horn. And the OK comes from the OK word written on the bumper (in
| the middle) by the manufacturer. This was a requirement as far as
| back in the 80s (may be even earlier) to stamp the OK (on the
| lines of OK TESTED) I guess. People got habituated into reading
| Horn OK Please and the integrated with the culture.
| jnmandal wrote:
| This is mentioned in the article but it's strange to me because
| I've been in heavy truck factories in India and 80% of the
| vehicles are produced without a truck bed or cabin. They are
| simply sold frame-only. Apparently the trucking companies
| prefer to build their own wooden beds/bays and cabins, which is
| cheaper anyways. I have to assume this is also true in the past
| but maybe not?
| suvo wrote:
| The OK part is stamped on the back endmost part of the
| chassis itself.
| Pxtl wrote:
| That seems much more reasonable that the strange "on kerosene"
| theorised in the article.
| tectonicfury wrote:
| My father told me the reason some years ago. As a rough sketch,
| it was because decades ago many highways used to be 'single
| lane', so if you had a truck in front of you, you needed to
| overtake it as you wouldn't want to be stuck tailing it the
| entire length of the road.
|
| He said that above the "OK" there used to be a bulb. So if
| someone wanted to overtake the truck, they were required to sound
| their vehicle's horn to signal their intent/desire to do so,
| that's what the "Horn Please" was for. If all was clear, the
| truck driver used to turn on the bulb to tell that it was "OK" to
| do so.
|
| Apparently, with time, the bulb went into oblivion (perhaps due
| to becoming redundant because of the widening of the roads) but
| the words remain.
| tdeck wrote:
| I love this explanation, and went looking for some photos of
| the rear of trucks in 1940s India. But I couldn't find any good
| ones. Is anyone able to find evidence of whether such a signal
| light existed?
| d13 wrote:
| No, but I've heard this story repeated many times in India
| commonalitydev wrote:
| Wait, I think they misspelled "Porn ..."
| newswasboring wrote:
| Ok, time to throw in the explanation I grew up with. I always
| thought it was definitive, but turns out its not. Unfortunately I
| have already passed on this urban legend :P.
|
| On foggy roads in north India, it is difficult to see vehicles on
| the road. So lights were used to indicate the status of big
| vehicles like trucks. Two lit bulbs on left and right corners
| (illuminating Horn Please) meant honk to get a pass. And to
| indicate you can overtake, the driver could light one bulb in the
| middle (illuminating a OK) to indicate its ok to take over.
| Eventually this system was scrapped but the tradition to paint
| "Horn OK please" remained.
|
| (my god the theory is falling apart in my own head as I retell
| it).
| sva_ wrote:
| I presumed it is because almost no trucks there have side-
| mirrors. Or if they have any, probably not for long.
| alkonaut wrote:
| Seems like a pretty infuriating state of affairs when India
| has a horrible rate of accidents and a government that wants
| to address it. Is there no talk of (for example) mandating
| mirrors, lights and other important equipment on all
| vehicles, and ticketing offenders? The next step would be
| overloaded trucks, (especially if the load is human).
| jfk13 wrote:
| Or if they do have side-mirrors, the bulging load may well
| obscure them anyhow.
|
| https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-overloaded-truck-
| carrying-...
| aitchnyu wrote:
| Even today truck drivers use their right blinkers to show its
| ok to overtake. Atleast in Kerala. Yes, its ambiguous.
| d13 wrote:
| This is ineed the real reason, I also learnt about this when I
| lived in India. The article is totally clueless.
| nodelessness wrote:
| That's what I heard as well. Your recollection is good.
| captn3m0 wrote:
| Additional Usage
|
| - A restaurant name in Belgium (https://www.hornokplease.space/)
|
| - An indian TV series (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt10055722/)
|
| - A bollywood romcom
| (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horn_%27Ok%27_Pleassss) (Mentioned
| in the article)
|
| - A food festival in Delhi (https://hornokpleasefest.com/)
|
| - Multiple restaurants in India
| (https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=horn+ok+please+site%3A...)
|
| A few random books as well.
| alexwebb2 wrote:
| The immediate interpretation I have from the placement of the
| words is:
|
| - Directly behind me? OK, that's fine.
|
| - Passing on the left or right? Horn, please.
| rob74 wrote:
| > _Trucks, in particular, are often not even equipped with side
| mirrors in the first place._
|
| Maybe mandating side mirrors (or rather enforcing this mandate -
| I can't quite believe that side mirrors are optional for
| roadworthiness, even in India) would be a better point to start
| with, rather than outlawing the phrase "Horn OK Please"?
| Pxtl wrote:
| The lack of side mirrors is because of hyper-narrow roads and
| gateways and terrifying traffic. Last time I was in India our
| driver kept his side mirrors folded down... and the man was
| capable of manoeuvring his car with micrometer-level accuracy.
| I can think of dozens of times I cringed expecting a scrape but
| of course he knew his car perfectly.
|
| There are many situations where those mirrors would have been
| lost if they'd been open.
|
| Manoeuvring a larger truck would require amazing driving
| skills, and the width of that truck would make adding side
| mirrors pointless - you'd lose them the first day out.
| treeman79 wrote:
| In many places no cars have mirrors. They get smashed off by
| other cars promptly. Driving is more akin to number cars
| somedude895 wrote:
| I spent a month in Cuba in 2008 and though I didn't see any
| signs telling people to honk when overtaking, everyone was
| doing it on the highway.
|
| A lot of cars in Cuba are in terrible shape, but it might
| also have to do with the fact that the Autopista 1 is in very
| bad condition. You really have to focus on avoiding the
| massive potholes, so you have less time to pay attention to
| your surroundings. Honking helps the driver in front to make
| sure to swerve away from you while you're overtaking on the
| next pothole.
| iso1631 wrote:
| "Indian drivers rarely use their side mirrors"
|
| Doesn't matter if the mirrors are there or not if culturally
| people don't use them.
| alex_smart wrote:
| Yup, the rough heuristic that most drivers follow in India
| is: if I see empty road ahead of me, I am going in.
| Etheryte wrote:
| I experienced confusion about this when I travelled to
| Indonesia some years ago, but a local taxi driver made it
| easy to understand: "What's in front of you is your
| responsibility." It's an unwritten local driving rule and
| once you know it, the local traffic is considerably easier to
| grok. No one looks behind them because everyone's agreed that
| they only worry about things in front of them. If you want to
| pass a car in front of you then it's up to you to make it
| work. Likewise with driving a car in the sea of scooters that
| Indonesian traffic oftentimes is. Worry about the scooters in
| front of you, the ones behind you and on your sides will do
| their best to look out for themselves and don't expect much
| from you.
| renewiltord wrote:
| Also, it's easier to understand when you see the relative
| speeds of traffic and the relative lack of safety.
| thrwyoilarticle wrote:
| Grokked or not, there are more road fatalities.
| Etheryte wrote:
| More or less is relative. In 2019, Indonesia had 15.3
| road deaths per 100.000 inhabitants per year [0]. For
| context, Norway had 2.0, United States had 12.4, and
| Liberia (the worst on the list) had 35.9, to pick a few
| random data points. While I definitely agree that the
| traffic in Indonesia is chaotic and that can lead to more
| accidents, that doesn't tell the whole story.
|
| [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tr
| affic-r...
| flerchin wrote:
| To me, the Fatalities per mile is the most meaningful
| metric, but that's very sparsely populated on the chart.
| The next most meaningful metric on that chart is
| Fatalities per 100k vehicles.
|
| Somali car owners have a 6.5% chance of dying in their
| vehicles, annually.
| Etheryte wrote:
| I'm not sure if I see how fatalities per 100k vehicles is
| a better metric than per 100k inhabitants: the
| composition of vehicles is very different from country to
| country. Given the example above, in Indonesia I would
| expect a very considerable portion to be scooters which
| while more dangerous for the driver themselves are safer
| for others. Meanwhile in the United States, cars are the
| big majority, being safer for the driver but more
| dangerous to others.
| w-m wrote:
| A large percentage of road deaths are pedestrians and
| cyclists. Especially in countries with fewer cars and
| more pedestrians. So it's more that as a Somali car
| owner, you have a 6.5% chance of killing somebody with
| your vehicle, annually.
|
| Still the number seems incredibly high. Maybe the number
| of registered vehicles is underreported, with many
| vehicles just not getting officially registered?
| dilipdasilva wrote:
| This is how skiing works. You worry about what is in front
| of you. People behind you have to worry about themselves.
| rhn_mk1 wrote:
| How do people back out into a street there?
| skhr0680 wrote:
| My guess is that they back into parking spots to avoid
| that scenario
| pmontra wrote:
| I look at the rear mirror all the time, especially before
| stopping. Is that car behind me too fast and will crash
| into me? A taxi decided that didn't like me stopping at a
| pedestrian crossing a few nights ago and overtook me. I
| honked and both the people crossing the street and the taxi
| stopped. I think the danger trumped the rule of never
| honking at night in a city.
| iso1631 wrote:
| Was this in Jakarta or a smaller city?
| pmontra wrote:
| It was in Milan, Italy. Horns are uncommon but there are
| some random crazy drivers in hurry to get somewhere :-)
| dirtyid wrote:
| Great explanation, also astonishing at how relatively well
| this system works in response to lax training. All things
| considered.
| dluga93 wrote:
| I guess the hearing impaired can't drive in India.
| lvass wrote:
| And you can't drive too long before becoming hearing
| impaired.
| alex_smart wrote:
| Indian driving is like ant colony, but it's humans.
| masklinn wrote:
| Way my colleagues told me, circulation is such a mess there's
| no way you can check all around you (plus what's that going
| to change, defensive driving in bumper-to-bumper traffic
| means complete paralysis) so the only things you look at are
| in front, and the people following have to be ready.
|
| Needless to say I opted out of driving, crossing roads is as
| far as I took the challenge of directly interacting with
| indian circulation.
| alex_smart wrote:
| >Way my colleagues told me, circulation is such a mess
| there's no way you can check all around you
|
| It's not so much that you can't, but that most people don't
| and with no driver education and no enforcement of traffic
| rules, you are stuck in a shitty nash equilibrium. I learnt
| driving in Canada, and I have tried to continue the same
| driving habits in India - because that is the only way I
| feel safe while driving. I simply can not change lanes
| without checking the rear-view mirrors and a shoulder-check
| because I am utterly terrified of what could happen if I
| don't.
|
| At the same time, I am also completely aware about how
| 99.9% of drivers on the road are operating. So, I have to
| be cautious that any car could try to nose their way into
| the road in front of me even when I have right-of-way
| because that's just how things work here. It is stressful
| and horrible.
| oblio wrote:
| It's probably going to change as they get more cars, more
| highways and better driver educations. It's probably
| going to take decades.
| alex_smart wrote:
| No change is automatic. Why will it change just because
| there are more cars and more highways? And where is the
| push for better driver education? There is none.
| oblio wrote:
| It comes naturally as you start wanting to move faster
| and get better cars.
|
| You can't go 130kmph honking your way through mopeds and
| rickshaws.
| gameswithgo wrote:
| first have to solve the problem of efficient and effective
| regulation of anything in a country of a billion people that
| doesn't currently do that
| rk06 wrote:
| Side mirrors are used by vehicle in front and horns by vehicle
| behind. they are not the same.
|
| Moreover, large trucks and busses have a large blindspot, and
| can't check behind them. So, vehicles behind them, can only
| honk to make them aware that they are there.
| elzbardico wrote:
| If everybody follow simple traffic rules there's absolutely
| no need for the vehicle behind a truck to have the need to
| make the truck aware they are there.
|
| 1. Vehicle behind must keep distance, no tailgating.
|
| 2. Vehicle ahead should not change lanes before
| a) Making sure the marking on the road says it is permitted.
| b) Signaling the maneuver with directional lights.
| c) Checking the side mirror before actually starting the
| maneuver.
|
| That's basically how it works in the rest of the world.
| Trucks have large blind spots everywhere else, but by
| signalling their maneuvers in advance and with the other
| drivers following some simple rules, lots of places in the
| world (including a lot of poor countries in Latin America)
| get by with reserving the use of honks only for true urgent
| situations.
|
| edit: line-breaks
| junoper wrote:
| I agree and people are exeggerating the usage of horns more
| than it actually is.
|
| > there's absolutely no need
|
| But one use of horn that I found useful in India was to
| overtake on 2-lane hilly road. Now theoretically you should
| be able to see, may be hundred metres, ahead of you before
| you start the overtake or if you are not too keen to reach
| your destination, not overtake at all till you reach
| straight road with longer view. In practice though, trucks
| are slow moving and roads sometimes don't provide clear
| view of the road with twists and turns so it helps if you
| let the truck ahead of you know of your presence. Then
| truck dirver signals you with his hand when it is safe to
| overtake with his longer FOV. Apart from that, truck driver
| knowing of your presence can help him slow down his vehicle
| in case oncoming vehicle is cutting it too close for you to
| overtake the truck.
|
| Is there a better way of doing this? Probably, by just
| avoiding any risky overtake by road markings etc. but as I
| said above, that could mean following the truck for few
| hours in the worst case. And does that mean you honk
| everytime you are behind a truck? Not at all.
| rodelrod wrote:
| > Is there a better way of doing this?
|
| Yes, you don't overtake if you don't have visibility
| because of a hill or a bend. That is enforced by traffic
| regulation and road markings in Europe and most of the
| places I've driven. And yes, that means that sometimes
| you get stuck behind trucks for a long time but it also
| means that nobody gets killed.
| elzbardico wrote:
| Modern trucks in the western world have plenty of power
| to be surprisingly nimble negotiating ascents, it is
| downhill that things get more complicated for modern
| trucks.
| junoper wrote:
| If you read my comment carefully, I understand that and I
| know how it happens around the world. But I personally
| would prefer to sometimes hear a horn rather than having
| to drive behind a slowest moving truck for hours because
| the hilly road has road marking catering for the worst
| case.
| rodelrod wrote:
| What I say above makes it sound like I think that it's
| sole responsibility of the drivers to keep to the rules
| but I do understand that the rules are much easier to
| follow when the vehicles are in good condition and the
| roads have amenities like escape routes for trucks and
| occasional third lanes to allow overtake, both of which
| require wealth and strong institutions that are not
| present everywhere in the world.
|
| Still, from my experience in India (mostly in and around
| Delhi) what you get is not an occasional honk, it is a
| permanent infernal cacophony that pierces through your
| skull day and night.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-11-29 23:01 UTC)