2 ms·
the reasoning in the article and the exhortation to stand are both a bit dubious. injuries are more likely due to differential attentiveness between walkers and
by clairity 8y ago
the reasoning in the article and the exhortation to stand are both a bit dubious. injuries are more likely due to differential attentiveness between walkers and standers, rather than the walking itself. standers tend to be less attentive to others because standing allows you to let your collision detection guard down.
you could also have fewer injuries hy getting everyone (except those who can't) to walk, which would also result in a lower overall difference in attentiveness.
- zamadatix 8y agoI think it's even less likely to get everyone to walk than to stand though and I think everyone could agree all standing as proposed is likely safer than all walking anyways.
- clairity 8y agomy point was that the safety argument is specious, not to argue about what was more likely to be implemented. getting hurt on an escalator is just not a real problem, and the safety bugaboo is used as a way to regulate other people's behavior needlessly. we don't need more silly regulations like this when things like distracted driving and air pollution are real problems that kill thousands of people.
- zamadatix 8y agoYour original comment actually said nothing about over-regulation or escalator safety not being a real problem. It did however claim to have a better solution to safety concerns that were contradictory to the claims of the article(s).