Almost the entire video talks about the rear censor/blinking light. I could care less about the light, those cost $5 and don't need to be intelligent at all. The video definitely needs to be redone to showcase why exactly anyone would want to spend $200 on this.
Finally the video with some info.
But does it log the info? Is the log available and verifiable?
If the car still hits you, could you make a persuasive argument about the information you had available to you? Could you argue the vehicles speed, and that you thought the vehicle threatening?
You're given some info that may affect your riding behaviour. It seems to me this info needs to be available when the day comes that someone using this is in court trying to obtain damages from a driver that has hit them.
If the info is not available or verifiable (inc' source code for the radar), then I personally think it's better to not have this device and spend the money on brighter lights to begin with.
Activate a rear-mounted grenade launcher, of course. Well, in some of my violent daydreams regarding jerks in cars, at least.
What I imagined when I read "sixth sense" was something that you stick in your backpack close to your back where it vibrates stronger the closer the car behind you is.
Maybe I'm missing something by watching the video without sound (I'd wake people up if I did), but it just doesn't seem possible to me to help in any way. Detecting that there is a car behind me at all is something we commonly do with a utility called "ears".
I agree with an earlier comment about non-visual feedback. An audio queue would be good (thinking like the trackers in the Aliens movies)
Even then I'm not really sure what the point of this device is. If a car comes speeding up behind you what you are supposed to do? Pull over and stop? Drive on the edge and get covered in mud?
This looks like another techy boondoggle to reassure people. Cycling is littered with 'em.
Though it could be useful for touring cyclists - but they often have a review mirror.
I'm someone who has seen too many Go Pro videos on YouTube, here's an example of such a video, this is a scary video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i556e3qyt58
Where the fuck do these people come from? Which retarded part of the world has spawned such brain-dead idiots?
http://www.reddit.com/r/bicycling/comments/2bp2c8/handson_wi...
Wish they could also detect when they throw bottles and other garage at you and take a photo.
But at least knowing they are coming is great, especially with hybrids and electric cars being nearly silent.
How about a Google Glass-esque helmet indicator?
Also, holy shit, blinking backlights are a massive danger source. They may be nice when you're riding on a narrow country road with nothing at all for miles but you, your bike, and a psycho car driver; however when you're in a city, on a bike path, and there's a person behind you, your blinking light will rob them of the ability to effectively concentrate on the surroundings because your blinking light will keep drawing their attention. And don't try to tell me you'll switch it off/set it to no-blink when you switch from riding on the road to riding on a bike path. You'll be too lazy to. I'd be too lazy to.
In effect this project is badly marketing a thing that will increase traffic danger.
I'd actually like this if it wasn't for the latter point.
Any citation for this? I've never experienced this supposed effect.
It blinks more intensively when cars are approaching (road riding) and much less so when their are none nearby (bike path).
* In cities, I always expect cars to be behind me, and cars expect cyclists
* There is more protection from wind in cities, so the chance that I can hear those cars is higher. Outside the city it's more dangerous. When going downhill at more than 50 km/h, or on a flat stretch with side winds, the chance that I can hear cars behind me is close to zero.
* The speed limit in cities is lower
The opposite can also be true.
