Toyota Patents Winking, Laughing, Crying Car

theodp writes "If the patent system ain't broke, don't fix it: The NY Times/IHT reports that four inventors working for Toyota in Japan have won a patent for a car that they say can help drivers communicate better by glaring angrily at another car cutting through traffic, as well as appear to cry, laugh, wink or just look around." The article goes on to describe "...a car with an antenna that wags, an adjustable body height, headlights that vary in intensity and hood slits and ornamentation designed to look like eyebrows, eyelids and tears."

Patent critique?

[k98sven]

The patent system may be broken, but I don't really see how this would be an indication of it.

At least to me, this is not an obvious idea.

Unless of course, you have a Japanese sense of imagination. I'd trust the people who invented Domo-kun [corrupt.net] , Vending machines for 'used' underwear [photomann.com] and heated, self-deodorizing toilets [theplumber.com] to come up with just about anything.

Re:Prior art disclosure obligations and Benny

[Diamon]

Sorry, Speed Buggy [imdb.com] predates Benny by 15 years.

Re:Doesn't this increase the danger?

[Thing 1]

Actually, I never look at other drivers. I view other cars as just that, other cars, not really acknowledging the fact that there are other humans doing the piloting. I guess driver's ed worked well for me, as I don't experience (or express) road rage.

I'm not a robot, not yet at least ;-) but vehicles to me are entities in and of themselves. So if the vehicle itself gives me an expression, I'd give it some attention (and thus have less attention left for the rest of the driving experience), but even if a driver gives me the finger and falls halfway out of his window doing so, I wouldn't notice him -- unless his car happened to start swerving.

Re:What I want to know

[e2d2]

But let's be honest, how many people in this self-centered world really give a shit what other's around them think? I would wager about 1%.

This is a complete waste of time. But hey, what else do they have to do? It's not like there is an energy crisis going on...

Well this is Japan...

[cryptochrome]

...Therefore I wouldn't expect to see the middle finger much, but I would expect to see all the standard manga/anime visual icons.
There's a good list of them here [iit.edu], along with all the appropriate emoticons, although they left out a bunch of other less common stuff (bloody nose for sexual overstimulation, snot bubble for sleeping, escaping spirit for half dead, completely white from shock, puking looks kind of like a waterfall), and certain mouth patterns (aggressive fangs).

In particular, expect to see sweat drops, popping veins, and funny eyes. ^_^;

Excellent idea

[Frantactical Fruke]

Back in the 60s, linguists postulated that your vocabulary influences your character, claiming even that bilingual people act differently depending on the language they're speaking.

That would explain why drivers start acting like enraged apes as soon as they enter their cars: They are limited to honking, blinking, acceleration and hand signals.

Kreegah, bundolo!

Re:The adverts (or parodys) are gonna be great..

[shlaf]

You fucking moron change your stupid signature and go fuck your own fucking goverment yourself.

And ah, for your reading pleasure:
http://www.bbcwatch.com/july04.html

Re:What I want to know

[Coulson]

We could also go a long way by expanding the capabilities of the existing communications channels.

For instance, why not have brake lights shine brighter the harder you're braking? That would give people behind you an indication of how hard they need to brake, without waiting to judge your change in velocity.

Or brake lights that shine forward?
Or acceleration lights that shine green (brighter the faster you accelerate)?
Or turn signals that tick louder the farther you've traveled with them on (to remind you to turn them off)?

Lots of innovations in car UI just waiting to happen, but it's so fscking standardized that no one's going to make them. I'm glad to see Toyota's at least thinking about what it means to actually drive a car, rather than just trying to build the latest rendition of an old concept.

P.S. I get really incensed by the ads that are running right now -- I forget whose -- where the company claims to have 're-invented the wheel', 'rethought the car from the ground up', and 'come up with something completely revolutionary'. Then they show you a picture and it's... a sedan. Same as every other car on the road. Whoop-de-fucking-do.

Re:What I want to know

[tambo]

Do you spend your entire time as you're walking smiling, frowning, crying, etc?

Odds are, the answer is 'No'.

True. But that's even worse: now a car expressing emotion is an unusual occurrence, one that prompts you to pay attention to it.

Can you think of another visual event that might encourage people to be better drivers? How about a wreck by the side of the road? A small visual indicator of the consequences of bad driving might encourage people to be more careful.

But what is the real impact of that? It's a visual distraction - and it causes people to gawk, horrendously tying up traffic. Worse, people have follow-up accidents: they're so busy looking out the side window that they hit something. All visual distractors have the same impact - and the more interesting they are, the more adverse the result.

Even car horns are distracting. If someone behind you honks their horn, you always shift your eyes off the road to your rear-view mirror to see what's up. Many accidents have happened in that instant. And if the car isn't honking at you, then that accident was pointless.

- David Stein

Re:What I want to know

[Anonymous Coward]

Good lord. Talk about over-rationalization. Your logic is sloppy too, you offer a hypothetical of someone's horn causing an accident, but don't consider how many accidents are prevented by using the horn. By your logic we should eliminate turn signals and brake lights too, because some driver will be distracted by a turn signal on one side and not see an impending collision on the other. Turn signals and brake lights were also at one time an 'unusual occurence', but that does not mean that the signals should never have been implemented.

Better communication of the driver's intentions is a good thing, and will make driving safer not less safe.

Is This a Hoax???

[severoon]

Is this a hoax???

The patent number referred to is 6,575,593, but a quick search for that patent number at the US Patent Office yields a patent entitled: IEEE 1394 or USB powered computer light [uspto.gov].

Seriously, people. I think this might just be a hoax.

sev

Re:Don't laugh

[phliar]

Try doing a similar test with commercial airplanes.

Ok, compare the DH Comet (or B-707) to the current 777. Gas turbine engines (the "jet") have been absolutely revolutionized from the 60s. Compare thrust and fuel consumption -- "orders of magnitude" would not be an exaggeration. Look at airfoil deisgn and cruising speeds -- going from Mach 0.68 or so to today's Mach 0.8. Consider design and construction techniques. No, airliners are a bad example of static technology.

I'm hoping ... sub-orbital ...

Unlikely. Consider this: if air travel were instantaneous -- runway to runway -- your travel time will still be many hours. Ground transport to/from airport, check-in, baggage handling, security, aircraft taxi -- a significant proportion of travel time. Travelling faster than Mach 0.8 in the atmosphere takes a huge amount of energy (civilian supersonic travel is unlikely to come back). Escaping the atmosphere will require hugely more. Add to that the cost of life support -- passengers do not want to don space suits to visit grandma, and decompression would be rather more serious than at 35,000 feet. More likely: turbine manufacturing advances? Modern gas turbine engines are ridiculously expensive. Different source of energy? It would be nice to not have to carry large quantities of explosives (chemical fuel) on passenger-carrying craft.

I'm with you

[bezuwork's friend]

I like your ideas, have had similar ones (as I imagine many drivers have had) for decades.

I always thought that there should be bar lights, red for breaking; blue, green, white, or whatever for acceleration. And have them keyed to a standard applicable to all makes - e.g. three lights of red would mean a certain standard amount of deceleration.

The other thing I always wish for is that trucks and such have a screen on the back showing their view of what's in front of them. Then when you get behind an idiot who is going slow and has no one in front, you know you should/can pass. For those who think this would be dangerous for some reason, remember that most drivers do this already with cars in front, as you can see through them from back to front.

Heh, heh. Maybe the screen could be incorporated into the Toyota idea - if you're pissed off at the person behind you, you could switch to a shot of your face and mouth "fuck off" rather than having the car mimic the emotion.

One last thing that I always wanted were "excuse me" lights. You know, for when you're the dick who cut someone else off (for a good reason, of course!).