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

Waymo says can't avoid bike lanes because riders want to be dropped off in them

road.cc

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 456 posts

Re: Waymo says can't avoid bike lanes because riders want to be dropped off in them

#321

Post by pandaman »

Rebelgecko wrote: post #318
pandaman wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like what? I hear people claim that not stopping at STOP sign is somehow making it safer than stopping but when asked about the mechanism of the safety in such a maneuver they either disappear or proclaim that Idaho where this is allowed is in top half of safest states for cyclists so it must work somehow. I cycle myself and see no rules that somehow don't make sense for bikes. In fact, since bikes are much less mane…

I live in California so YMMV depending on the laws where you live and the temperament of drivers. If I do a "proper" stop at a stop sign (0mph, place foot on ground, fortunately I don't clip in), cars will see me stopping and try to blast thru the stop sign when it isn't their turn. So I end up stopping while the first car goes thru the intersection, and while I'm getting resituated on the pedals a second car enters…

You described cars violating rules, but what is your remedy for that, not to stop? How is it going to help with the cars blowing their stops?

Re: Waymo says can't avoid bike lanes because riders want to be dropped off in them

#322

Post by Rebelgecko »

pandaman wrote: post #321
Rebelgecko wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in California so YMMV depending on the laws where you live and the temperament of drivers. If I do a "proper" stop at a stop sign (0mph, place foot on ground, fortunately I don't clip in), cars will see me stopping and try to blast thru the stop sign when it isn't their turn. So I end up stopping while the first car goes thru the intersection, and while I'm getting resituated on the pedals a second car enters…

You described cars violating rules, but what is your remedy for that, not to stop? How is it going to help with the cars blowing their stops?

Yes, slow down to 2-5 mph but not coming to a complete stops solves this problem. I usually try to time it so that I slow down alongside a car and we can run the stop sign at the same speed.

If you assert your right to use the road, cars won't try to take advantage of your size/acceleration as much, especially if you have another car run interference for you.

YMMV if you live somewhere where it's common for cars to actually stop at a stop sign.

Re: Waymo says can't avoid bike lanes because riders want to be dropped off in them

#323

Post by JumpCrisscross »

dangus wrote: post #309
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> a band-aid to bad regional transit connectivity Maybe. American suburbs are already spread out. It doesn’t make sense to run subways to every corner the way we do in urban centers. Doing last mile with shared transport—versus cars which park idle for most of the day around train stations—makes sense.

Did I say we should run subways to every corner? Here’s a nice video about how small suburbs and even farms don’t need to involve deep car dependence: https://youtube.com/watch?v=ztpcWUqVpIg Meanwhile, Arlington, Texas has over 200,000 people with no bus system. And before you say “oh it’s Europe it’s old” I will point out that the Netherlands had a huge car dependency problem in the mid-century and deliberately move…

> Here’s a nice video about how small suburbs and even farms don’t need to involve deep car dependence

I’ll watch in detail-thank you.

An important caveat, though, and it’s not about age but density. The Netherlands ex Amsterdam has just under 1,400 people per square mile. That’s still denser than every single U.S. state. (New Jersey and Rhode Island are the only two that break 1,000, and only the former if we exclude each state’s largest city.) The tenth-densest state, Pennsylvania, is still almost 5x less dense than the Netherlands, and again, I’m doing this for the Netherlands ex Amsterdam.

We can absolutely build more transit in our metropolitan centers. But the layout of America, in part driven by history, in part by our embrace of car culture, forces fundamentally different transport optima than almost anywhere in Western Europe.

> there’s zero reason why NJ transit should be a different agency than NYC’s transit authority

Same reason the Dutch and German authorities are separate.

Re: Waymo says can't avoid bike lanes because riders want to be dropped off in them

#324

Post by derwiki »

Saline9515 wrote: post #176
expedition32 wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should cyclists be inconvenienced by taxis? They have just as much right to get to their destination.

Because taxis and cyclists are road users like others, car drivers also have to stop if a taxi has to drop off someone as long as it's quick. Same with buses, also. Or trams. It's the same with pedestrians : if an old person walks on a small sidewalk, I will stop or slow down. Or if I see two guys carrying a washing machine. As a pedestrian, I don't see cyclists stopping often when they ride on the sidewalk, though.

How often do you see two guys carrying a washing machine?

Re: Waymo says can't avoid bike lanes because riders want to be dropped off in them

#325

Post by pandaman »

Rebelgecko wrote: post #322
pandaman wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You described cars violating rules, but what is your remedy for that, not to stop? How is it going to help with the cars blowing their stops?

Yes, slow down to 2-5 mph but not coming to a complete stops solves this problem. I usually try to time it so that I slow down alongside a car and we can run the stop sign at the same speed. If you assert your right to use the road, cars won't try to take advantage of your size/acceleration as much, especially if you have another car run interference for you. YMMV if you live somewhere where it's common for cars to a…

This sounds like a survivorship bias, you imagine that people who blow stops won't do that if you don't stop but, people who did the same on a bike and were t-boned by a car might not be in a good condition to post about their experience anymore.

Anyways, even if you are 100% right and not stopping at stop on a bike will prevent people blowing stop completely (and people who have the right of way will also yield to your bike because they will see you 100%) how is it safer than to stop and proceed when there is no traffic across?

Re: Waymo says can't avoid bike lanes because riders want to be dropped off in them

#326

Post by dublinben »

pandaman wrote: post #325
Rebelgecko wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, slow down to 2-5 mph but not coming to a complete stops solves this problem. I usually try to time it so that I slow down alongside a car and we can run the stop sign at the same speed. If you assert your right to use the road, cars won't try to take advantage of your size/acceleration as much, especially if you have another car run interference for you. YMMV if you live somewhere where it's common for cars to a…

This sounds like a survivorship bias, you imagine that people who blow stops won't do that if you don't stop but, people who did the same on a bike and were t-boned by a car might not be in a good condition to post about their experience anymore. Anyways, even if you are 100% right and not stopping at stop on a bike will prevent people blowing stop completely (and people who have the right of way will also yield to y…

Behavior by cyclists certainly has a bias towards survivorship. Every other vehicle on the road represents a potentially lethal threat at any time.

Inadequate dedicated infrastructure for cyclists leads to behavior like "Idaho stops" that look counterintuitive to drivers, but improves safety for cyclists at intersections.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idaho_stop

Re: Waymo says can't avoid bike lanes because riders want to be dropped off in them

#327

Post by JumpCrisscross »

dangus wrote: post #308
kelnos wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We live in the real would and have to work with what actually exists. I'd love it if my city had Tokyo's rail system, but it doesn't, and won't.

We actually don’t have to work with what exists. We actively chose and continue to choose what exists. Every day new land is developed that perpetuates these choices. Every day we decide to keep things the same or implement change. Here’s a nice video about how rural towns can be configured to not be car dependent: https://youtube.com/watch?v=ztpcWUqVpIg You’ll notice that this isn’t some ancient European pre-automob…

> Every day new land is developed that perpetuates these choices. Every day we decide to keep things the same or implement change

This is a great argument. Retrofitting America is one discussion. But building new developments such that they don't require a car–at least within themselves–should be doable.

Re: Waymo says can't avoid bike lanes because riders want to be dropped off in them

#328

Post by gzread »

SOLAR_FIELDS wrote: post #96
spankalee wrote: post #59

Cities that want to keep cars out of bike lanes should keep all cars out of them, autonomous or not, by ticketing them. But they don't, so taxis and delivery drivers stop in them. That's traffic enforcement's fault. Given that human drivers stop in bike lanes, Waymo then has a tradeoff: 1) Be the only ones to follow the letter of the law, break a lot of people's expectations, and catch backlash for disrupting traffic…

Cities who want to keep cars out of bike lanes should stop offering “mom says we have bike lanes at home” repainting of streets. Create a curb and raise the bike lanes. It’s the only safe solution. I understand this is not realistic in a lot of scenarios but it is basically the only way you can achieve actual safety short of cement separators at the road level, which is basically a curb anyway. There’s just no realit…

> There’s just no reality where a bicycle can share the road unimpeded with a motor vehicle safely.

Logically equivalent:

> There’s just no reality where a motor vehicle can share the road unimpeded with a bicycle safely.

... or a pedestrian. Those motor vehicles sure are a menace!

Re: Waymo says can't avoid bike lanes because riders want to be dropped off in them

#329

Post by pandaman »

dublinben wrote: post #326
pandaman wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sounds like a survivorship bias, you imagine that people who blow stops won't do that if you don't stop but, people who did the same on a bike and were t-boned by a car might not be in a good condition to post about their experience anymore. Anyways, even if you are 100% right and not stopping at stop on a bike will prevent people blowing stop completely (and people who have the right of way will also yield to y…

Behavior by cyclists certainly has a bias towards survivorship. Every other vehicle on the road represents a potentially lethal threat at any time. Inadequate dedicated infrastructure for cyclists leads to behavior like "Idaho stops" that look counterintuitive to drivers, but improves safety for cyclists at intersections. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idaho_stop

You did not read the thread did you? I have asked how is this supposed to improve safety, this is what is this thread about.

Re: Waymo says can't avoid bike lanes because riders want to be dropped off in them

#330

Post by ok_dad »

pandaman wrote: post #216
ok_dad wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pulling into the bike lane for 30 seconds causes bikers to have to unsafely pull around the car, possibly causing accidents. In some cities and lanes you may be endangering dozens of bikers during the 30 seconds. I had to commute by foot for two years into a city, and I have to say I understand the rage. Cars nearly killed me a dozen times and I was always more safe than the law required of me as a pedestrian. Most d…

>Pulling into the bike lane for 30 seconds causes bikers to have to unsafely pull around the car Or, hear me out, they could stop if passing the car is unsafe.

Victim blaming right there. They have as right to the lane, cars don’t.
Post reply on HN