Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

As a casual slow cyclist myself I already find it impossible to rely on audio too Mich, visuals are always needed. I have had several near collisions with other cyclists in the past who silently sneak up from behind or around corners. Afterwards I made sure to always look around before changing direction and treat every obscured corner as potential "devil puppet on a spring box" (no idea what they are called :) ).

I would love car traffic to be more silent but AFAIK the tires actually make most of the noise.



You're entirely right that we shouldn't rely on sensory input from our ears to drive or cycle. However, the fact of the matter is that many people use their hearing to supplement their other senses.

When I worked with deaf people as relay operator, a question asked by a coworker during our orientation session on deaf culture was 'How do deaf people drive if they can't hear sirens from emergency vehicles?' The answer is that they rely on their other input to and have learned to compensate for their lack of hearing. In effect they may be aware of these possibilities and check their rearviews more frequently to account for not being able to depend on auditory updates.

If all vehicles were completely silent, it would remove the benefit those of us with hearing gain from the additional input, even though this input isn't strictly speaking necessary. We could and would adapt, sure, but I think that additional factor when cycling does help in some situations. I can see engines making some noise to be advantageous, even if it only makes the difference of one fatality a year, because there is very little drawback.


"devil puppet on a spring box" (no idea what they are called :) ).

I believe this is what you mean: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack-in-the-box


> I would love car traffic to be more silent

A minor nitpick, but you can't get more silent than silent since silence is the absence of any noise.


Sure, but absolutes are rarely used in their literal meaning.

"Silence" doesn't refer to the absence of any noise, it refers to a very low level of noise. The absence of any noise at all is very difficult to achieve (although you can come close: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mXVGIb3bzHI). The same goes for other absolutes like "black" (e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vantablack is arguably "blacker" than other "black" materials).

You're technically correct (the best kind of correct), but your point is moot. Very few words that describe absolutes can be used "correctly" in practice. The logical conclusion is that these words (despite their dictionary definition) don't refer to actual absolutes but rather extremes: silence is not the absence of noise, it's just the presence of a significantly smaller amount of noise.

Heck, even words like "pregnant" aren't absolute in practice. With "pregnant" the implication commonly is "will give birth" (which is why we have euphemisms like "expecting"), so someone who is nearly due can be said to be "more pregnant" simply because they are closer to giving birth (and therefore also have a higher chance of delivering successfully) whereas someone within their first months of pregnancy may often not even want to disclose their state because so many things can still go wrong.

In practice "silent" or "black" is no more absolute than "cold" -- and it would be silly to expect people to refer to zero kelvin when they say "cold", don't you think?

Disclosure: I spent way too much time around linguists as a student.


> silence is not the absence of noise, it's just the presence of a significantly smaller amount of noise.

Thanks for your explanation.

Considering that other animals can produce or hear sounds that humans can't, I guess I shouldn't have used the word 'any'? :)

When I think of silence I tend to think of passively cooled heatsinks or cases for PCs that do not produce any noise that I can hear (even up close). Compare that to a slow-spinning fan that can be effectively silent at a certain distance, but still produces an audible sound if you get really close.

> In practice "silent" or "black" is no more absolute than "cold" -- and it would be silly to expect people to refer to zero kelvin when they say "cold", don't you think?

You're right, although what one person thinks of as cold may not be what another person thinks of as cold. e.g. temperatures in winter in the UK vs Russia or the North Pole. It's all relative.


Thank you both very much for your comments. With English as a second language it is easy to never learn the true meaning of words. I feel quite stuck with my current level for several years already and tiny bits like these are great improvements. Cheers!


On the other hand, logic has little to do with how language works. There are absolute and relative adjectives in English in the same way that there are count and non-count nouns, regardless of whether those semantic categories make any sense.


Damn, you couldn't have been any more on with that.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2026 batch! Applications are open till July 27.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: