this post was submitted on 09 Oct 2024
10 points (100.0% liked)

Casual Conversation

2077 readers
210 users here now

Share a story, ask a question, or start a conversation about (almost) anything you desire. Maybe you'll make some friends in the process.


RULES (updated 01/22/25)

  1. Be respectful: no harassment, hate speech, bigotry, and/or trolling. To be concise, disrespect is defined by escalation.
  2. Encourage conversation in your OP. This means including heavily implicative subject matter when you can and also engaging in your thread when possible. You won't be punished for trying.
  3. Avoid controversial topics (politics or societal debates come to mind, though we are not saying not to talk about anything that resembles these). There's a guide in the protocol book offered as a mod model that can be used for that; it's vague until you realize it was made for things like the rule in question. At least four purple answers must apply to a "controversial" message for it to be allowed.
  4. Keep it clean and SFW: No illegal content or anything gross and inappropriate. A rule of thumb is if a recording of a conversation put on another platform would get someone a COPPA violation response, that exact exchange should be avoided when possible.
  5. No solicitation such as ads, promotional content, spam, surveys etc. The chart redirected to above applies to spam material as well, which is one of the reasons its wording is vague, as it applies to a few things. Again, a "spammy" message must be applicable to four purple answers before it's allowed.
  6. Respect privacy as well as truth: Don’t ask for or share any personal information or slander anyone. A rule of thumb is if something is enough info to go by that it "would be a copyright violation if the info was art" as another group put it, or that it alone can be used to narrow someone down to 150 physical humans (Dunbar's Number) or less, it's considered an excess breach of privacy. Slander is defined by intentional utilitarian misguidance at the expense (positive or negative) of a sentient entity. This often links back to or mixes with rule one, which implies, for example, that even something that is true can still amount to what slander is trying to achieve, and that will be looked down upon.

Casual conversation communities:

Related discussion-focused communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I've been holding on to this thought for quite some time and don't know where to share this. Too long and not random enough for a shower thought, so here it is I guess.

Car manufacturers really like their LEDs to be as fancy as possible lately, and more and more turn signals on cars have this "sequential lighting" show they do. Basically, the type of turn signal I have a problem with is the one that gradually fills up the turn signal light bar, then turns off everything when the bar is full, i.e. Audi cars in this video

IMO, not only does the animation feel clunky, I also think its a safety issue, albeit a relatively minor one. The point of indicator lights is to tell other drivers your intentions. They should be fully noticeable the moment you turn on your turn signals, and should not be halfway lit first. It probably would also introduce a delay in driver response, but I have no scientific evidence to back this claim up, so take this as just my opinion.

Instead, they should do it the opposite way where the light bar fully lights up first, then gradually shrinks. Or the Mazda way of turning on quickly then dimming down slowly like in this video. Or the combination of these two, where the light bar has a gradient end that tapers away when shrinking. (Seriously, having a gradient or a gradual dim is so much more elegant. Why don't more cars do this?)

Okay rant over. Thanks for coming to my ted talk.

top 1 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

Bunp! This idea is great! It would look soo awesome!