5 ms·

Just this morning on my bicycle ride to work, I was nearly run down by a taxi making a blind entry into a large road and doored by a 10-year-old. The fear of ca

by sshine 10y ago

Just this morning on my bicycle ride to work, I was nearly run down by a taxi making a blind entry into a large road and doored by a 10-year-old. The fear of cars is not "old school" but very much real. This is not to mention the aggression that drivers go and build up in their small bubbles. I am always prepared to get off my bike and take them up on their threatening offers. I look forward to less aggressive, more responsive computer-controlled vehicles.

Tomte 10y ago
Looks like you're just as aggressive, waiting for someone to finally "offer" threats. Cyclist are no angels, either. I always find it fascinating how they clamor for at least a meter space next to them when cars are passing, but when traffic is slow (not standing still – that's a different story), mere centimeters to my side mirrors are enough to pass cars themselves. I think a drastic re-education of traffic participants would be necessary: de-emphasize small, inadvertant and temporary infractions and punish vindictive and deliberately dangerous behaviour much more aggressively.
- jacobolus 10y ago
  If a cyclist hits anyone, that person is unlikely to suffer serious injury, and extremely unlikely to die. If a car traveling 40 mph or faster hits a pedestrian or cyclist, the person hit will almost certainly die. The two are really not comparable. If we replaced all the drivers on the road with still-fallible but conscientious/polite human drivers who always followed traffic laws, always drove the speed limit, were effective at looking for and stopping for obstructions in the road (e.g. pedestrians crossing the street), followed at a safe distance, and adjusted their speed and following distance to match road conditions, the death rate from traffic collisions would drop dramatically. If we replaced all the cyclists with perfect riders, the death rate from traffic collisions would change only marginally.
  - Tomte 10y ago
    That's fantasy land. You're just trying to absolve cyclists from any wrongdoing. A cyclist that passes a slow car with, say, 30 km/h and brushes into the car may very well die. It's exactly symmetrical to the situation of a car passing a slow cyclist with 30 km/h. Furthermore, dying isn't everything that should be avoided. Injuries and material damage are also bad. Further-furthermore, aggressive and careless cyclists can also kill a pedestrian. Not as easily as a car can, but still. As a pedestrian my number one danger are cyclists. Cars and pedestrians are quite predictable in their movements. Cars especially don't sneak up on you without any noise and then pass you on a random side, while you're walking around.
    - saiya-jin 10y ago
      plus cars heavily respect red lights, something most cyclists don't give a fraction of a f__k about. And on top of that - their brakes are useless, they in many cases drive as fast as they can, downhill or not. Yeah, for me as a driver, cyclists are the biggest threat in the cities and outside (effectively anywhere but highways). As a pedestrian, cyclists are again the biggest thread in the towns mostly on pedestrian crossings.
      - Tomte 10y ago
        Cyclists have a tendency to disregard traffic lights (and I feel that urge myself when cycling), because it's so darn strenuous to get back to normal speed. As a pedestrian stopping and going again is effortless. As a car driver the same. Only cyclists dread stopping.
        gjm11 10y ago
        Stopping and starting a car may not require physical effort but it does burn more fuel, gives you a less even ride, and makes traffic flow less smoothly. When I'm driving I try quite hard to avoid having to stop at lights. (By slowing gradually as I approach them, not by going through them when red.) I warmly commend this policy to other drivers.
      - zimpenfish 10y ago
- fao_ 10y ago
  > Cyclist are no angels, either. I always find it fascinating how they clamor for at least a meter space next to them when cars are passing, but when traffic is slow (not standing still – that's a different story), mere centimeters to my side mirrors are enough to pass cars themselves. Right, this is because a car that's moving faster than a cyclist and traveling close can drag the cyclist off their bike. A cyclist that is moving faster than a car cannot drag a driver out of their car.
  - Tomte 10y ago
    You're not understanding the point, which has been elaborated many times now in this subthread: Nobody is talking about the cyclist being dangerous to the car driver. But if the cyclist touches the car, he can be dragged off. No matter who was passing the other and who was faster. Only the contact matters.
    - TulliusCicero 10y ago
      I think they understand the point quite well. You're just ignoring that there's a huge difference between causing danger to yourself vs causing danger to others.
    - jdietrich 10y ago
      Being hit by a car is invariably worse than hitting a car, because the car is carrying orders of magnitude more kinetic energy. It's simple classical mechanics - (1/2)mv^2. A car has 15-30x more mass and is travelling 2-4x faster than a cyclist. If I'm filtering through slow traffic at 10mph and clip the side of a car, I'll have a minor tumble - scuffed handlebars, grazed palms, dented pride. If a motorist clips me at 40mph, I'm almost certain to suffer serious injuries. I might be hit on the back of the head by a wing mirror, I might be dragged under the wheels, I might be launched over the hood, I might be bounced into some street furniture.
- lmm 10y ago
  > I think a drastic re-education of traffic participants would be necessary: de-emphasize small, inadvertant and temporary infractions and punish vindictive and deliberately dangerous behaviour much more aggressively. No, this is completely backwards. Small, inadvertant and temporary infractions kill people just as dead as vindictive and deliberately dangerous behaviour. And whether it's the driver's fault or the cyclist's fault, either way it's the cyclist who dies. What we need to do is start holding drivers responsible for deaths that are their fault, "accident" or not. If you don't have the skill or concentration to avoid causing a collision, you shouldn't be controling a ton of metal in a public space.
- ainiriand 10y ago
  What you do in the car can kill anyone. What the cyclist does is almost impossible to hurt anyone but himself.
thro32 10y ago
>doored by a 10-year-old You almost hit a 10-year-old. Drive slower, if you have problem to stop or change a direction. >I am always prepared to get off my bike and take them up on their threatening offers Is it happening often? Why all those drivers build-up all that aggression? >I look forward to less aggressive, more responsive computer-controlled vehicles. So do I. Bicycles with hard-coded speed limit would be great.
ngws 10y ago
What about computer-controlled bicycles? They can probably react faster than humans, meaning less accidents! You only have to do the pedalling, and the computer will handle the rest. I'll PM Elon immediately.
- dagw 10y ago
  Better to let the propulsion be handled by small electric motor and use the (optional) peddling to charge the batteries. This way the human doesn't get in the way of hitting the optimal speed and acceleration.

by sshine 10y ago

Tomte 10y ago

Looks like you're just as aggressive, waiting for someone to finally "offer" threats. Cyclist are no angels, either. I always find it fascinating how they clamor for at least a meter space next to them when cars are passing, but when traffic is slow (not standing still – that's a different story), mere centimeters to my side mirrors are enough to pass cars themselves. I think a drastic re-education of traffic participants would be necessary: de-emphasize small, inadvertant and temporary infractions and punish vindictive and deliberately dangerous behaviour much more aggressively.

jacobolus 10y ago
If a cyclist hits anyone, that person is unlikely to suffer serious injury, and extremely unlikely to die. If a car traveling 40 mph or faster hits a pedestrian or cyclist, the person hit will almost certainly die. The two are really not comparable. If we replaced all the drivers on the road with still-fallible but conscientious/polite human drivers who always followed traffic laws, always drove the speed limit, were effective at looking for and stopping for obstructions in the road (e.g. pedestrians crossing the street), followed at a safe distance, and adjusted their speed and following distance to match road conditions, the death rate from traffic collisions would drop dramatically. If we replaced all the cyclists with perfect riders, the death rate from traffic collisions would change only marginally.
- Tomte 10y ago
  That's fantasy land. You're just trying to absolve cyclists from any wrongdoing. A cyclist that passes a slow car with, say, 30 km/h and brushes into the car may very well die. It's exactly symmetrical to the situation of a car passing a slow cyclist with 30 km/h. Furthermore, dying isn't everything that should be avoided. Injuries and material damage are also bad. Further-furthermore, aggressive and careless cyclists can also kill a pedestrian. Not as easily as a car can, but still. As a pedestrian my number one danger are cyclists. Cars and pedestrians are quite predictable in their movements. Cars especially don't sneak up on you without any noise and then pass you on a random side, while you're walking around.
  - saiya-jin 10y ago
    plus cars heavily respect red lights, something most cyclists don't give a fraction of a f__k about. And on top of that - their brakes are useless, they in many cases drive as fast as they can, downhill or not. Yeah, for me as a driver, cyclists are the biggest threat in the cities and outside (effectively anywhere but highways). As a pedestrian, cyclists are again the biggest thread in the towns mostly on pedestrian crossings.
    - Tomte 10y ago
      Cyclists have a tendency to disregard traffic lights (and I feel that urge myself when cycling), because it's so darn strenuous to get back to normal speed. As a pedestrian stopping and going again is effortless. As a car driver the same. Only cyclists dread stopping.
      - gjm11 10y ago
        Stopping and starting a car may not require physical effort but it does burn more fuel, gives you a less even ride, and makes traffic flow less smoothly. When I'm driving I try quite hard to avoid having to stop at lights. (By slowing gradually as I approach them, not by going through them when red.) I warmly commend this policy to other drivers.
    - zimpenfish 10y ago
fao_ 10y ago
> Cyclist are no angels, either. I always find it fascinating how they clamor for at least a meter space next to them when cars are passing, but when traffic is slow (not standing still – that's a different story), mere centimeters to my side mirrors are enough to pass cars themselves. Right, this is because a car that's moving faster than a cyclist and traveling close can drag the cyclist off their bike. A cyclist that is moving faster than a car cannot drag a driver out of their car.
- Tomte 10y ago
  You're not understanding the point, which has been elaborated many times now in this subthread: Nobody is talking about the cyclist being dangerous to the car driver. But if the cyclist touches the car, he can be dragged off. No matter who was passing the other and who was faster. Only the contact matters.
  - TulliusCicero 10y ago
    I think they understand the point quite well. You're just ignoring that there's a huge difference between causing danger to yourself vs causing danger to others.
  - jdietrich 10y ago
    Being hit by a car is invariably worse than hitting a car, because the car is carrying orders of magnitude more kinetic energy. It's simple classical mechanics - (1/2)mv^2. A car has 15-30x more mass and is travelling 2-4x faster than a cyclist. If I'm filtering through slow traffic at 10mph and clip the side of a car, I'll have a minor tumble - scuffed handlebars, grazed palms, dented pride. If a motorist clips me at 40mph, I'm almost certain to suffer serious injuries. I might be hit on the back of the head by a wing mirror, I might be dragged under the wheels, I might be launched over the hood, I might be bounced into some street furniture.
lmm 10y ago
> I think a drastic re-education of traffic participants would be necessary: de-emphasize small, inadvertant and temporary infractions and punish vindictive and deliberately dangerous behaviour much more aggressively. No, this is completely backwards. Small, inadvertant and temporary infractions kill people just as dead as vindictive and deliberately dangerous behaviour. And whether it's the driver's fault or the cyclist's fault, either way it's the cyclist who dies. What we need to do is start holding drivers responsible for deaths that are their fault, "accident" or not. If you don't have the skill or concentration to avoid causing a collision, you shouldn't be controling a ton of metal in a public space.
ainiriand 10y ago
What you do in the car can kill anyone. What the cyclist does is almost impossible to hurt anyone but himself.

thro32 10y ago

>doored by a 10-year-old You almost hit a 10-year-old. Drive slower, if you have problem to stop or change a direction. >I am always prepared to get off my bike and take them up on their threatening offers Is it happening often? Why all those drivers build-up all that aggression? >I look forward to less aggressive, more responsive computer-controlled vehicles. So do I. Bicycles with hard-coded speed limit would be great.

ngws 10y ago

What about computer-controlled bicycles? They can probably react faster than humans, meaning less accidents! You only have to do the pedalling, and the computer will handle the rest. I'll PM Elon immediately.

dagw 10y ago
Better to let the propulsion be handled by small electric motor and use the (optional) peddling to charge the batteries. This way the human doesn't get in the way of hitting the optimal speed and acceleration.