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

How well do London buses match the timetables?

michalpaszkiewicz.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 60 posts

Re: How well do London buses match the timetables?

#11

Post by michaelt »

rocqua wrote: post #4
silvester23 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the very least, I would assume most bus time tables are written to reflect the worst case scenario regarding traffic lights. That alone should make the actual average waiting time lower than the theoretical one.

Where I live, buses have a few points where they 'synchronize'. That means they wait there long enough to be exactly on schedule. This to prevent people missing a bus that goes every hour because it was 5 minutes early.

Quite a few busses in London have timetables like https://imgur.com/a/XlSx68f saying "7am-11pm: About every 11-13 minutes"

(Obviously they don't tend to do that for hourly busses)

Re: How well do London buses match the timetables?

#12

Post by NullPrefix »

SamBam wrote: post #9

The conclusion of the article seems to be related to the general rule that if, say, a box of nails advertises 1000 nails, the manufacturer will have set the actual average to be higher than 1000 nails so that some large majority of buyers will always have at least 1000 nails in the box. (I seem to recall an A-Level stats question on my exam asking what the average should be, to ensure that 95% of buyers received at l…

>If I recall correctly, calorie values on nutrition boxes are the same, at least in the US: a 100 calorie snack bag will have at least 100 calories, because the FDA mandates that the seller should be at minimum providing what it claims.

Check out our new BigMac Zero. At least zero calories.

Re: How well do London buses match the timetables?

#13

Post by devy »

SamBam wrote: post #9

The conclusion of the article seems to be related to the general rule that if, say, a box of nails advertises 1000 nails, the manufacturer will have set the actual average to be higher than 1000 nails so that some large majority of buyers will always have at least 1000 nails in the box. (I seem to recall an A-Level stats question on my exam asking what the average should be, to ensure that 95% of buyers received at l…

> the general rule that if, say, a box of nails advertises 1000 nails, the manufacturer will have set the actual average to be higher than 1000 nails so that some large majority of buyers will always have at least 1000 nails in the box.

This is actually not a good analogy. These days nails are mass produced and quality controls are good to ensure each has the same rough shape and weight +/- by a few percentage points. And to ensure a quantity for a box is actually ensuring the weight - much easier to control.

Re: How well do London buses match the timetables?

#14

Post by SamBam »

NullPrefix wrote: post #12
SamBam wrote: post #9

The conclusion of the article seems to be related to the general rule that if, say, a box of nails advertises 1000 nails, the manufacturer will have set the actual average to be higher than 1000 nails so that some large majority of buyers will always have at least 1000 nails in the box. (I seem to recall an A-Level stats question on my exam asking what the average should be, to ensure that 95% of buyers received at l…

>If I recall correctly, calorie values on nutrition boxes are the same, at least in the US: a 100 calorie snack bag will have at least 100 calories, because the FDA mandates that the seller should be at minimum providing what it claims. Check out our new BigMac Zero. At least zero calories.

The FDA definitely has requirements for anything advertising "zero calories," "no calories," "reduced calories" etc: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/cfr...

As for the "minimum calories," I've searched and either I'm out of date or was never correct: it seems like the FDA used to have a "80/120 rule": "beneficial nutrients" (vitamin, mineral, protein, total carbohydrate, etc.) must be at least 80% of the label value and "nutrients to limit" (calories, sugars, fats, etc.) must no greater than 120% of the label value. So calories could theoretically be lower than advertised, but not significantly higher.

The FDA seems to no longer have this rule, but calories is still on the "nutrients to limit" side, so the FDA would be mandating maximums, not minimums. My mistake.

Re: How well do London buses match the timetables?

#15

Post by ben_w »

NullPrefix wrote: post #12
SamBam wrote: post #9

The conclusion of the article seems to be related to the general rule that if, say, a box of nails advertises 1000 nails, the manufacturer will have set the actual average to be higher than 1000 nails so that some large majority of buyers will always have at least 1000 nails in the box. (I seem to recall an A-Level stats question on my exam asking what the average should be, to ensure that 95% of buyers received at l…

>If I recall correctly, calorie values on nutrition boxes are the same, at least in the US: a 100 calorie snack bag will have at least 100 calories, because the FDA mandates that the seller should be at minimum providing what it claims. Check out our new BigMac Zero. At least zero calories.

You jest, but TicTacs are allowed to be labelled “sugar free” despite being 91.3% sugar because, to quote, “the amount of sugar per serving (1 mint) is less than 0.5 grams, FDA labeling requirements permit the Nutrition Facts to state that there are 0 grams of sugar per serving“ - https://www.tictacusa.com/en/faq

Re: How well do London buses match the timetables?

#16

Post by bluGill »

jnty wrote: post #6

On trains and planes, my main critieria is that I arrive by the stated arrival time and therefore am pretty unfussed by stories about padding time etc - that's more of a long term structural concern than something that will bother me on the day. I think operators have figured this is all most people really care about over time (perhaps excepting highly competitive routes.) You lose this ability to check timings with…

Planes and medium distance trains have the advantage of being a rare. You have already know that if you are late it will be a long time before the next one, so you take extra effort to be there early. With a bus if you miss on, being 10 minutes late by catching the next one isn't as big a deal: it is only 4-5 minutes if you hurry (getting the first bus would average getting you there 5 minutes early, a little running and you can take another minute off). That is all fine, but if the next bus is running late you cross the "magical" 5 minutes late mark and get into trouble for being late.

Re: How well do London buses match the timetables?

#18

Post by NeedMoreTea »

ben_w wrote: post #15
NullPrefix wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If I recall correctly, calorie values on nutrition boxes are the same, at least in the US: a 100 calorie snack bag will have at least 100 calories, because the FDA mandates that the seller should be at minimum providing what it claims. Check out our new BigMac Zero. At least zero calories.

You jest, but TicTacs are allowed to be labelled “sugar free” despite being 91.3% sugar because, to quote, “the amount of sugar per serving (1 mint) is less than 0.5 grams, FDA labeling requirements permit the Nutrition Facts to state that there are 0 grams of sugar per serving“ - https://www.tictacusa.com/en/faq

lol. I do love the way so many foods come up with a "serving" that almost no human customer has ever duplicated.

Re: How well do London buses match the timetables?

#20

Post by pbhjpbhj »

ben_w wrote: post #15
NullPrefix wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If I recall correctly, calorie values on nutrition boxes are the same, at least in the US: a 100 calorie snack bag will have at least 100 calories, because the FDA mandates that the seller should be at minimum providing what it claims. Check out our new BigMac Zero. At least zero calories.

You jest, but TicTacs are allowed to be labelled “sugar free” despite being 91.3% sugar because, to quote, “the amount of sugar per serving (1 mint) is less than 0.5 grams, FDA labeling requirements permit the Nutrition Facts to state that there are 0 grams of sugar per serving“ - https://www.tictacusa.com/en/faq

That's bad, but just because they're allowed doesn't mean they should do it.
Post reply on HN