4 ms·
Cyclists shouldn't be on the road in the first place. They're a non-powered vehicle and as such are pedestrians same as someone on a skateboard. They either nee
by orclev 9y ago
Cyclists shouldn't be on the road in the first place. They're a non-powered vehicle and as such are pedestrians same as someone on a skateboard. They either need to be on sidewalks, or have their own separate paths (that are physically separate from roads which are for powered vehicles only). As for non-driverless cars (driven cars?) that's a more complicated problem, but as they become increasingly less common they should eventually get their own dedicated lanes to keep them out of the way of the driverless cars. Eventually we'll likely see a bifurcated system where driverless cars operate at much higher speeds that they can safely do (say 100+ mph in some areas), while manually driven cars are restricted to speeds more appropriate for human reflexes and awareness, say something averaging about 50 mph with some sections getting up to 80 mph or so.
- loeg 9y agoHaving separated, convenient pathways for every mode of transportation sounds like a nice utopia, but we struggle to build that kind of infrastructure today. Until that utopia exists, bikes have to ride somewhere, and that's the road. Sidewalks are (typically) far more dangerous for cyclists due to short sightlines out of driveways and alleys. And driverless cars need to be able to recognize cyclists anyway. > Eventually we'll likely see a bifurcated system where driverless cars operate at much higher speeds that they can safely do (say 100+ mph in some areas) I agree that bicycles probably shouldn't ride in traffic on the freeways, although often they are allowed to ride on the shoulder of freeways today (at least in rural areas).