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

Things people blamed on bicycles

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

701–710 of 852 posts

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#701

Post by johannes1234321 »

spaetzleesser wrote: post #376
DoubleFree wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem of dangerous interactions between drivers and cyclists is much smaller here in the Netherlands, mainly due to two reasons. The first reason is the infrastructure, both visible and invisible. Separated bicycle lanes are commonplace and in the few places where they intersect with car traffic, care is taken to make crossing safe and comfortable. This visible infrastructure is complemented by the concept of "…

"The second reason is that here, everyone is a cyclist. Going for groceries? Five minute bike ride, much easier and quicker than going by car. Kids cycle to school alone from a young age. Going out for drinks? Bike. Because everyone is a cyclist and there are cyclists everywhere, cyclists are equal participants in traffic and are treated with care and respect." that's how I felt in Munich. Bikes were everywhere and d…

As somebody living in Munich and visiting Amsterdam from time to time: Munich and Netherlands are very different.

From an American perspective Munich certainly is good, but Amsterdam is still a different league. If you got the chance go there for a while.

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#702

Post by anonporridge »

DubiousPusher wrote: post #695

This is why I cringe a bit at those bemoaning the horrible, awful, traumatic fate of journalism. Journalism is stupid. It always was stupid. It always will be stupid. That's not to say it has no value. But the reader has always been and always will be responsible to sift through the heaping mounds of dumb and find that value. I'm not exaggerating when I say, the New York Times, our paper of record has published some…

"I miss the time when we could trust the news to just give us the simple truth!"

Dude, that's a time that never existed. The news has always been at least as much propaganda as it is simple information sharing.

Perhaps the only reason we think it's especially bad now is that we're all aware of competing propaganda organizations pushing conflicting narratives. In the past, you might only have one local newspaper, so it was easier to believe that the local propaganda organization that controls your mind is telling the simple truth. But the modern world forces all of us to face the reality that the news has never been something we can naively trust.

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#703

Post by NegativeLatency »

batiudrami wrote: post #222
hulitu wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The worse are the one who ride drunk. There are a lot of people who consider that if you are drunk, driving a car is not ok (it is not), but riding a bike is ok (it is not).

The risk of severe injury to a third party by my choosing to cycle drunk is much lower though. Maybe I hit a pedestrian and they are knocked over - it's possible but very unlikely that they receive life changing injuries. If you hit a pedestrian while driving a car they probably die. Sure it's risky for me to ride drunk - but the risk is mostly on me. I've also had far more near misses sober in peak hour than drunk a…

Biking at night is generally very relaxing, as long as you have bright lights and keep an eye out for drunks it’s generally better than biking during the day IMO

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#704

Post by systemvoltage »

montebicyclelo wrote: post #114

Cycling is cheap, often faster than driving (in my city), healthy, less noisy, creates vastly less pollution, less dangerous to pedastrians... And I'd guess that about 95% of drivers that I come across are respectful of the danger they present - overtaking with enough space, and not at too high a speed (my city doesn't have great bike lanes). Unfortunately, a typical journey involves passing more than 20 cars, which…

I hate cycling (bicycling). Hate every aspect of it. There are ways for me to get healthy but I always prefer driving over cycling.

The benefits are tremendous and not even close:

- Faster for most of America, unless you're in places such as Manhattan.

- Can use normal clothes, no need to specially dress up for it

- Can enjoy beverages, music and audiobooks, you can do that on a bicycle but not as safe

- Better quality of air to breathe

- Not going to get stolen

- Not going to get robbed

- Much much safer, modern automobiles are riduculously safe

- Better for the knees

- No need to worry about weather. Flip of a switch and it is awesome, instant heat or cold

- Luxury vehicles are incredibly comfortable

- Cost of cars + insurance + fuel is not a problem for me

- I really don't care about energy consumption, I am not going to give up modern QoL for some ostensible collectivist goal like cycling or eating bugs. We have unlimited source of energy (Sun), we're going to be fine in the future

- Much more fun (subjective). I love driving, especially manual transmision cars and performance cars with great suspension

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#706

Post by happyopossum »

antihero wrote: post #654
badlucklottery wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If anyone has recommendations for stealth theft detection/tracking devices I’m all ears. If you have a bike lock/chain that can resist bolt cutters, you're probably fine for everything other than leaving it overnight. Casual bike thieves are looking for easy money and likely aren't going to bust out an angle grinder in the middle of the day unless your bike is obviously worth a grand+.

Here in the UK thieves just use portable angle grinders that go through any lock like butter. I have a hefty Abus “sold secure” (requirement of insurance) D lock that I lock through the frame, but I’ve watched enough lock picking lawyer to know this won’t stop thieves with angle grinders (most thieves now) or ones handy with a disc detainer pick.

What kind of society allows someone to use an incredibly noisy and obvious tool like an angle grinder in public, then ride off on a bike? Does everyone just walk by because they're afraid to get involved?

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#707

Post by jedberg »

DubiousPusher wrote: post #695

This is why I cringe a bit at those bemoaning the horrible, awful, traumatic fate of journalism. Journalism is stupid. It always was stupid. It always will be stupid. That's not to say it has no value. But the reader has always been and always will be responsible to sift through the heaping mounds of dumb and find that value. I'm not exaggerating when I say, the New York Times, our paper of record has published some…

I used to read articles about areas where I knew a lot and say to myself, "man, every detail in this article is wrong!".

Then I would read the other articles in the same paper assuming they got everything right about those subjects I knew nothing about!

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#708

Post by sleepybrett »

Kalium wrote: post #681
sirmarksalot wrote: post #674

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Living in a city, the idea of leaving anything of value on your bike, and expecting it to still be there when you get back is completely foreign to me. When I visited Amsterdam, I even had the seat stolen off my rental bike. Biking in the states means carrying a helmet inside with you everywhere you go, and it absolutely sucks.

There are helmets you can lock with your bike.

Some helmets from bern have special holes that are compatible with u-locks and similar. (https://www.bernhelmets.com/collections/bike-helmets/product... u-lock vents) I haven't done an exhaustive search but I imagine others do similar.

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#709

Post by uoaei »

kennend3 wrote: post #610
BlargMcLarg wrote: post #542

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a highly idealistic myth. Most drivers are not "cyclists a few hours earlier/later", and many definitely aren't empathetic. The split between bike lanes and car lanes, as well as the law favoring cyclists, should make that obvious. Cyclists even get away not showing their direction despite this being taught from early age.

This is how we can tell you are not a cyclist. It is very difficult to use the brakes and indicate a change in direction at the same time. While cyclists should indicate, the nature of the vehicle does make it hard under some conditions. Here's a question for you. If i am stopped at a red light on my bike in what is clearly a left turn lane, why do cars attempt to pull up in front of me anyhow? Cant be bothered waiti…

50% of my miles and 90% of my travel time is on a bike.

Signalling a change in direction should only be done with your left hand, per manuals.

Braking can be achieved with only the right hand (rear brake, typically).

Dismounting and signalling/braking is hard to do at once though. And you're right it should be obvious that a cyclist is turning left if they are in the left turn lane.

Re: Things people blamed on bicycles

#710

Post by sleepybrett »

antihero wrote: post #652
bedatadriven wrote: post #638

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are costs and benefits to requiring helmets. Requiring a helmet has apparently been shown to depress the use of bikes for every day activities. Going grocery shopping with a bike is less convenient if you have to juggle a helmet along with a liter of milk. Less biking means roughly more pollution, more obesity, bigger roads, more car accide ts. On the other side of this equation is the death and injury that hel…

I never used to wear a helmet, and I don’t think anyone should be forced to, but countless anecdotes about people being in comas and becoming permanently brain damaged due to no-fault accidents, combined with peer pressure from everyone I know, and finding one I don’t actively despise the look of, means that now I do. If I’m going grocery shopping I simply don’t take it off in the shop. I’ve incorporated it into my o…

If my city were more like amsterdam I'd be happy to forgo the helmet, but in hilly seattle between the chances of getting clipped by a suv or taking a tumble on a steep grade.. I'll stick with the helmet. I don't find it too much of an inconvenience. I just clip it to my bag after I lock up.
Post reply on HN