441–450 of 456 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Victim blaming right there. They have as right to the lane, cars don’t.
So you're advocating... what exactly? Crashing into the car on purpose because it's their right ?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, cycling is a sport. Should we also flatten hills as they have the inconvenience of requiring to push harder on pedals? If the physical aspect of cycling (involving stopping for taxis, pregnant women, children, or distracted pedestrian plebs) is too hard, solutions exist: public transports, walking, or electric bikes (whose riders seem equally annoyed to slow down, for some reason). The problem with "building inf…
> The problem with "building infrastructure" is that plebs' money is not infinite, so public works to please the high lords of the pedal may not be possible. That was my point, thanks for making it: There is money for building and maintaining 6 lanes of sophisticated road surface that needs to withstand trucks¹ we surely have the money to replace part of it with a cheaper to maintain bicycle path that sees next to no…
And ready to invest in your shipping container-on-a-cargo-bike startup, which will be used to make deliveries to supermarkets in the city centers (for the last plebs who don't order their slop on Uber Eats ofc)! Or cement deliveries using drones!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I still think it’s worth observing the Netherlands as an example because they also had mid-century car-oriented development that they successfully retrofitted. And of course, also, this doesn’t mean “nobody owns a car in the Netherlands.”
Do you have a good source on that retrofit?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
> We actually don’t have to work with what exists. Sure we do, by definition. We can work to change things, sure. But for many places in the US (especially established cities) this is a monumental effort. For example, I live in San Francisco. I wish we had more subways. Our bus system isn't bad, and they've converted/added many bus-only lanes over the past several years, but buses are still at the mercy of traffic (a…
Intro sentence: We can't change anything, by definition. (This is a strange definition because last I checked the highway system was built, it didn't just fall on the earth from the sky)
Paragraph 1: It's too hard! Weird, because hard stuff like putting a highway underground in Boston seemed to be "worth the price" rather than investing in transit solutions. (The Big Dig cost $2.8 billion, over $7 billion adjusted for inflation, which would have built out a heck of a commuter rail system in Boston. They could have just removed the highway entirely rather than burying it)
Paragraph 2 and 3: How do I change things? Who is "we?" Well, a lot of people ask this very question and join up together in advocacy groups, run for public office, etc.
Paragraph 4: assigning false conclusions to my comments. I am not suggesting you move to a small town, I'm not sure where you got that idea. I'm not sure why you keep saying you can't change things. Have you tried to change things? How much time do you spend per week advocating for what you want to see in the world? How much physical effort are you putting into it? Change doesn't just manifest.
More examples of citizen-induced change:
https://www.cnu.org/what-we-do/build-great-places/embarcader... (with the help of a major natural disaster making the right choice more obvious)
https://clevelandhistorical.org/items/show/55
https://usa.streetsblog.org/2013/02/20/the-origins-of-hollan...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 exclud…
Are there any major metropolitan areas that cross Dutch and German borders?
Is there a customs border between Hoboken and NYC?
Of course NJ Transit and NYC transit should combine in the NYC metropolitan area, they are serving the same people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The problem with "building infrastructure" is that plebs' money is not infinite, so public works to please the high lords of the pedal may not be possible. That was my point, thanks for making it: There is money for building and maintaining 6 lanes of sophisticated road surface that needs to withstand trucks¹ we surely have the money to replace part of it with a cheaper to maintain bicycle path that sees next to no…
Google maps is your friend to discover that most cities of the world don't have 6 lanes in every street! And ready to invest in your shipping container-on-a-cargo-bike startup, which will be used to make deliveries to supermarkets in the city centers (for the last plebs who don't order their slop on Uber Eats ofc)! Or cement deliveries using drones!
1. Even with a single lane the upkeep for a bicycle path is lower than for a road lane. There being more or less lanes doesn't change the math. The only difference is that for single lane road a bicycle path may be unnecessary to begin with since maybe it is a calm backwater anyways. Modal splits can be a good idea then.
2. Do you think trucks magically lose their ability to drive when there are bicycle paths nearby? Or which strawman variant of my argument are you arguing against? I said: a decent network of bicycle paths is needed, not that all roads should be torn up. If this is your style of arguing for your position, it doesn't really reflect well on you or the position.
The way it works is very simple: a better and safer network of bicycle infrastructure means everybody can more easily use the bicycle and public transport, of course people coming with the public transport and locals get the most out of it. That means less cars on the road, that means less road wear, noise, dirt and other bad side effects that mostly just affect the people living there. And who is going to decide how to use the space a city owns? Ideally the people who live there.
I live 2 hours from Kopenhagen and it works perfectly fine there. I visited the Netherlands quite often ot works fine there. Trucks also still work and you can still buy stuff at the grocery store, crazy huh? It is also a thousand times more enjoyable to get around than in some brutalist hellscape where you need to go everywhere with the car. In my own city my commute is 15 mins with bike, 20 mins with subway and 30 mins with car. Guess which one I pick most often.
Waymo didn’t “say” this. Or at least the article this article references doesn’t claim they did. It’s a now third-hand paraphrase from an SF bike advocate who says he heard it from some unnamed representative of Waymo. If someone has something more direct, happy to read it, since this seems to be clickbait napalm at the moment.
Thank you! I've seen this all over the place the last few days. It's clickbait from a cycling group and very few people have actually bothered to read it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
All the fines in the world won’t save you from getting mowed down by a distracted driver on their phone. Drinking and driving has heavy fine deterrents, yet people still do it anyway. You know what stops a drunk or distracted driver from killing someone? A cement barrier
That's the wrong way to look at it. People still drink and drive because the deterrents aren't heavy. It's a bit tautological but if they were heavy enough then by definition they would be deterrents, but they aren't, so they aren't. The correct solution to this kind of problems and others is to fix the obviously broken fine system. The first fine for anything should sting and it should make anyone who gets it think…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>how is it safer than to stop and proceed when there is no traffic across? Generally, on a bike you want to be predictable. If you do something weird, like not going when it's your turn, you're increasing your risk. And in many situations if you wait for there to be no cars at a stop sign, you're going to end up holding up cars behind you and be on the receiving end of road rage, or drivers behaving recklessly to get…
>Generally, on a bike you want to be predictable. If you do something weird, like not going when it's your turn, you're increasing your risk. Absolutely agree. As same as going when it's not your turn. But, first and foremost, you should not be going across a moving vehicle. Even another bike. Just falling off your bike can cause pretty serious trauma. Why do this? >Plus you may be waiting literally hours for all the…
When did you live in LA? Especially coming out of COVID lockdowns, what you're saying is not consistent with my daily experience. It's relatively uncommon for cars to actually stop (to the point that when Waymo initially rolled out in LA, people would get mad and honk at them for stopping!)
I tried to keep a count on my commute today. I think I saw 3 cars come to a complete stop (and in each case it was because someone was already in the intersection). On the flip side, dozens of cars blew through stop signs (and red lights!). It may get garbled by Youtube compression, but here's a pretty representative clip of 3 drivers running a stop sign back-to-back-to-back: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6z6fFnDzfv8