Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

When Citi Bikes Are Faster Than Taxis in New York City

toddwschneider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 294 posts

Re: When Citi Bikes Are Faster Than Taxis in New York City

#181

Post by L_Rahman »

btbuildem wrote: post #103
dr_ wrote: post #4

As a pedestrian crossing the straw in NYC, you will typically wait for cars to stop, then walk about 2/3 of the way into the street, then peer into the bike lane to make sure no bikes are coming, then complete your crossing. Most of the bikers, from my experience, do not follow rules such as stopping at a Stop sign or for pedestrians or at their own bike designated stop lights. It may be nice to bike in the cities pa…

You cannot seriously expect the rules of the road to be the same for multi-ton vehicles capable of 50+ mph speeds and human-powered vehicles that weigh 200lbs tops / max out at 20 mph.

I appreciate the full throated defense of cyclists, but there are days when I max out above both 200lbs and 20mph with my bike :)

Re: When Citi Bikes Are Faster Than Taxis in New York City

#182

Post by T-hawk »

dokein wrote: post #28

I would love to bike, but the major issue is that every single person I know who's biked for more than 1 year has gotten into some type of accident (around 10 people), whether car, car door, or poorly maintained road. These are all 30s and work-at-the-office types so maybe they're not the most coordinated, but they are also not doing stupid shit.

Counter-anecdote here. I've biked to work on and off for a total of about 5 years worth over my career, at distances of about two miles each way, in a dense city. I've never had any accident with a car. My one collision ever was with a pedestrian who started into his crosswalk against his light (I had green), thinking he could cross ahead of me but I was already leaning to go ahead of him; we both fell over but no injuries or damage.

It's really not that hard to bike safely. Most accidents involve the cyclist putting themselves in a vulnerable position somehow. You can't get right-hooked by a car if you don't put yourself on its right side. Keep alert with your head up, not looking down at your phone or cycling computer or pedaling cadence. Watch all the traffic around you. You read drivers' minds when they're going to turn without signaling. Look an entire block ahead of you for any parked car showing signs of activity and potential dooring. Forget about trying to assert your right-of-way and ignore trying to make speed and time records; those don't matter; slow down and look everywhere at every questionable intersection or turn or when in a dooring zone. Keep alert and read your entire environment, and you can go years without any cycling accident. I've done it.

Re: When Citi Bikes Are Faster Than Taxis in New York City

#183

Post by Sir_Cmpwn »

kpmariner wrote: post #174
Sir_Cmpwn wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>most bikers observe the traffic laws Not in Philadelphia, at least. I walk everywhere, and racking my brain for bike encounters I can only recall one of maybe 20 instances in which a bike actually stopped at a red light. I can recall at least a third of those instances where bikes were travelling the wrong way on a one way street, and another third with bikes on the sidewalk. That being said, I still think biking is…

As a biker in Philly - I'll start following the rules of the road when the cars do. I've lived in other cities where I obeyed every traffic law, just like I was in a car. If you do that in Philly, you get run over by a car or hit a jay walking pedestrian.

This attitude is exactly why some people hate bikers. It's not productive, if everyone takes this attitude then nothing is going to get better. Step up and be a model for the behavior you want to see around you.

Re: When Citi Bikes Are Faster Than Taxis in New York City

#184

Post by justinator »

Ntrails wrote: post #172
dkhenry wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I have found is there is a tiny minority of people who _hate_ bikers. They tend to pop up and make wild claims about how dangerous bikers are, or how much they dislike how bikers use the streets since streets are for cars, and bikes are for children. What I have found in actually talking to people is most people support and encourage bikes, and would love to bike, but don't feel safe. Bikes make everything about…

> Bikes make everything about traffic better, and most bikers observe the traffic laws . Anecdata time. Practically every single day I'll see bikes casually going through red lights, usually moving between pedestrians crossing. Now, I'll freely grant that they're usually paying enough attention to be safe - but you can bet motorbikes (and even cars) could make those very same judgement calls - except they'd get done…

> but if I had to rate drivers vs cyclists in a "most likely to have a collision with as a pedestrian" I would easily go with the cyclist.

I don't want to start an argument, but I bet we could look up driver -> pedestrian accidents, and see how many were reported vs cyclists -> pedestrian accidents.

Personally, I would much rather get hit by a cyclist as a pedestrian, than a car, and that's simply physics. I've been hit as a pedestrian multiple times by cars (thankfully, at low speed), but never by a bike. I've been hit by a car while riding a bike.

You do not want to get hit by a car, while riding a bike. The car always wins. Thankfully, I survived.

Re: When Citi Bikes Are Faster Than Taxis in New York City

#185

Post by T-hawk »

francisofascii wrote: post #150
revelation wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You got 2 and 3 switched up. It's very simple: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C5j6rPlU4AEizP6.jpg:large

My reasoning was a bus can transport many more people than one bike, but sure, I am agreeable to switching 2 and 3.

It's not just the quantity; it's the overall efficiency, of quantity compared to the cost of infrastructure and operations. Buses hold more but cost a lot more to build and drive, including stations and maintenance facilities, and externalities like emissions and gridlock. Bike infrastructure is cheap and operations are free to a city.

Re: When Citi Bikes Are Faster Than Taxis in New York City

#186

Post by kazinator »

ChrisBland wrote: post #24
dr_ wrote: post #4

As a pedestrian crossing the straw in NYC, you will typically wait for cars to stop, then walk about 2/3 of the way into the street, then peer into the bike lane to make sure no bikes are coming, then complete your crossing. Most of the bikers, from my experience, do not follow rules such as stopping at a Stop sign or for pedestrians or at their own bike designated stop lights. It may be nice to bike in the cities pa…

A million times this! I live in Chicago and am an avid biker (been doored by a cab, right of passage i guess?) I am one of the few who stops at stop signs and slows down or stops at cross walks to watch for pedestrians. I attend my local alderman's meetings to push for more protected bike lanes which we are now getting, but my fellow bikers are making us all look bad wrt following the rules of the road. I can't tell…

Bicycles do not need to come to a full stop at most stop signs, due to their slow speed.

On a bicycle, by the time I'm at the stop line, I have already checked that everything is clear. My face is closer to the intersection than that of a driver. I'm still coasting and have plenty of time to come to a full stop, if necessary, before entering the intersection.

Why would I stop, other than to obey the law on paper?

[Edit: just saw mohn's sibling comment revealing that Idaho codified my above reasoning into law: cyclists can treat stops like yields.]

Re: When Citi Bikes Are Faster Than Taxis in New York City

#187

Post by andrewla »

imgabe wrote: post #137
e40 wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I have found is there is a tiny minority of people who _hate_ bikers. I walk 4 miles a day on city sidewalks. The number of times I have to yield to bikers on the sidewalk is disgusting[0]. And some of these bikers are going fast . I once saved a child that was about to run out of a store. I could see, from my vantage point, the biker and the child set for a collision course. I stepped in front of the biker, doi…

Better bike infrastructure keeps bikes off the sidewalk. As a biker you can't win. Drivers try to run you off the road, pedestrians don't want you on the sidewalk. Bike lanes are a solution, but the political will needs to be there. That being said, in places where bikers feel they have to use the sidewalk, they should absolutely yield to pedestrians.

In places where bikers feel they have to use the sidewalk, they should absolutely walk their bikes. It's what the law says and its very sensible all around. If you have to go the wrong way up a one-way street or if the road is blocked, you can just get off your bike and walk it for a block. It's not the end of the world to have to walk for a minute.

As both a biker and a pedestrian in NYC, this seems so glaringly obvious that it never fails to make me angry when I see a biker blithely biking down the sidewalk. In a city of impatient people riding your bike on the sidewalk is taking things to an anti-social extreme.

That said, I do find it frustrating (as both a biker and a pedestrian) when pedestrians fail to yield to bikers when the biker has the light -- New York pedestrians are opportunistic jaywalkers by nature, but so many people fail to look for bikes or yield to them, even when they have the light, if the street is clear of car traffic.

Re: When Citi Bikes Are Faster Than Taxis in New York City

#188

Post by 3JPLW »

maccard wrote: post #73
mohn wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a cyclist yourself, I'm sure you're familiar with intersections where the sensors controlling the lights do not sense bikes. I think the best way forward is for more states to adopt Idaho's policy: cyclists can treat stop signs like yield signs, and treat red lights like stop signs. [1] If I'm riding toward a stop sign at a clearly deserted intersection, I would very much like to roll through at 10~15 MPH without…

> If I'm riding toward a stop sign at a clearly deserted intersection, I would very much like to roll through at 10~15 MPH without risking a ticket Surely that should apply for cars then int his case. If the intersection is clearly deserted, cars should be able to clear the junction too.

Unlike bicycles, cars have significant blind spots with the A-pillar and such. Also unlike bicycles, cars are significantly more able to seriously injure other road users.

Re: When Citi Bikes Are Faster Than Taxis in New York City

#189

Post by kazinator »

maccard wrote: post #73
mohn wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a cyclist yourself, I'm sure you're familiar with intersections where the sensors controlling the lights do not sense bikes. I think the best way forward is for more states to adopt Idaho's policy: cyclists can treat stop signs like yield signs, and treat red lights like stop signs. [1] If I'm riding toward a stop sign at a clearly deserted intersection, I would very much like to roll through at 10~15 MPH without…

> If I'm riding toward a stop sign at a clearly deserted intersection, I would very much like to roll through at 10~15 MPH without risking a ticket Surely that should apply for cars then int his case. If the intersection is clearly deserted, cars should be able to clear the junction too.

If that were to apply to cars, drivers would interpret it as 25-35 mph being okay.

In many circumstances, drivers could easily defeat a failure to stop ticket in court based on lack of hard evidence that you were going over 15 mph.

Re: When Citi Bikes Are Faster Than Taxis in New York City

#190

Post by lettergram »

dkhenry wrote: post #59
verelo wrote: post #20

Not much love for biking here; You'd almost think that most of the people on Hacker News are from Californian suburbs... Seriously though, biking in cities is great. It's one of those critical mass problems where the more people that do it the better the infrastructure gets, the more aware drivers become and there is a herd mentality where bikers tend to flow together making them more predictable and therefore safer…

What I have found is there is a tiny minority of people who _hate_ bikers. They tend to pop up and make wild claims about how dangerous bikers are, or how much they dislike how bikers use the streets since streets are for cars, and bikes are for children. What I have found in actually talking to people is most people support and encourage bikes, and would love to bike, but don't feel safe. Bikes make everything about…

> Bikes make everything about traffic better, and most bikers observe the traffic laws.

In California, bikes seemed alright enough. Lane splitting is legal, most use bike lanes, etc.

That being said, bikes are supposed to act like a vehicle on the road. I.e. stop at stop signs, and go through the stop signs one at a time. Not once have I ever seen this happen. There's also stopping at lights, which happens usually, but typically they then try to act like pedestrians...

Now outside of California, lane splitting is very rarely legal, especially in the Midwest, South, and East. Which means a bike literally has to act 100% like a car, or motorcycle. They can't ride next to a car or pass a car (or line of cars), without moving to another lane. The only exception, is typically if there is a bike lane.

So no, most bikes don't follow the laws. The "minority" of poeple who make "wild claims" are the people who have to drive next to them.

For the record, I've had 5 bikers hit my car (one got a ticket), at least 2 bikers try to squize by and scratch my car, and 1 idiot try to pass me on the right while I made a right turn. That person got pissed, but cop agreed I was in the right. I've lived in Alameda and drove to SF and Oakland regularly, but half of this happened in Champaign IL (on a college campus, where the bikers don't know how to ride or the laws).

In regards to pedestrians, twice I've been hit by a bike where both of us fell down and we were at least shaken. My wife, while in college, was straight up laid out when crossing the street once. The biker needed to be hospitalized, and she was injured (urgent care worked).

Point being, i don't think my opinion are wild. Bikers need education, and currently, riding a bike (especially inappropriately) in many places is dangerous for everyone. I agree that bikes can be more effective. However, in practice I think people should get a biking license. Just a 2 hour class, and a simple test. Know the rules, before you kill yourself or hurt others.

Post reply on HN