5 ms·

> do these neighborhoods not have cars, that are way more dangerous? only because there are more, but cars have to actually follow safety guidelines when they

> do these neighborhoods not have cars, that are way more dangerous? only because there are more, but cars have to actually follow safety guidelines when they are designed to reduce risks for pedestrians being hit. that's why most of them looks the same. bikes don't and e-bikes in particular run much faster than regular bikes and are used much more by incompetent bikers, given they are basically a non-taxed non-regulated non-plated moped (mopeds are quite dangerous for pedestrians) > Instead of putting the blame on e-bikes, blame your local city government one way roads are a way the local government address the issue, sidewalks are another way to protect pedestrians, if people on e-bikes (see above why e-bikes more than regular bikes) don't follow rules (they usually don't, everybody knows that, unless we are playing the hypocrisy game) I'm all in for arresting them and destroying the vehicle to build anti bikes protection on sidewalks. Problem is local government would never do that. I can tell you all about the city where I live where they spent millions to build bike lanes all over the city, after people and local fad-of-the-moment political groups protested, rallied, involved - and probably paid - influencers to ask for them!, and bikes (e-bikes more than others, riders more than regular folks) ride on the sidewalk because "It's safer, the bike lane runs side by side with the car lane" Welcome to the realm of reality, where people are usually shit. I say don't give the the tools to be shittier: ban e-bikes and force owners to get a permit to ride them in a city. At least we know who they ate in case of accident (they usually run!)

pharmakom 4y ago
KE = 0.5 * m * v * v
- Retric 4y ago
  Oddly bikes kill roughly as many people per mile as cars do, and injure significantly more. Drivers do kill approximately 40x as many people in NYC, but they also travel far more. The politics around this are tricky in part because of comments like yours. https://nypost.com/2019/08/31/nyc-bicyclists-are-killing-pedestrians-and-the-city-wont-stop-it/ https://nypost.com/2019/08/31/nyc-bicyclists-are-killing-ped...
  - eli 4y ago
    Your source is a tabloid article and it does not appear to actually show a per-mile statistic. Where are you getting that from?
    - Retric 4y ago
      Estimates for number of miles traveled by cyclists or cars in NYC varies, you can get an order of magnitude estimate just looking at traffic though. Anyway the article is quoting the same statistics anyone gets from cover, government sources like this: https://www1.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/bicycle-crash-data-report-2017.pdf https://www1.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/bicycle-crash-da... Pedestrian killed in 2017 by bicylists/pedestrian accidents 1, bicylists only fatalites 1. Pedestrian injured in 2017 by bicylists/pedestrian accidents 315, bicylists injured in 2017 by bicylists/pedestrian accidents 88.
amrocha 4y ago
If your city built shitty, unsafe bicycle lanes and therefore people don't use them it sure sounds like you should be mad at the city instead of the people who are trying to use a sustainable mode of transport without dying
- peoplefromibiza 4y ago
  You are assuming that that's even possible, it says a lot about some bikers' mentality (I'm assuming you are one by the way you got all offended, for nothing) But the city where I live, Milan, built standard bike lanes as they are built all over Europe. So please, before assuming, ask. I would also remind you that walking is more sustainable than electric bikes and pedestrians surely don't want to die because of e-bikes mania.
  - cogman10 4y ago
    > I would also remind you that walking is more sustainable than electric bikes and pedestrians surely don't eant to die because of e-bikes mania. So, I'm going to get super pedantic here... But, nope. Walking burns more calories than riding an ebike and those calories come from somewhere. Walking isn't an efficient conversion of calories into energy. Biking ends up being more sustainable because it coverts more calories into motion. E-bikes even more sustainable because it uses less calories and instead relies on a battery (charged from on ever greening grid). You could debate about whether or not biking is more sustainable than ebiking due to battery production impact. However, both are going to have a clear win over walking. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/ghg-kcal-poore https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/ghg-kcal-poore https://www.bikeradar.com/features/long-reads/cycling-environmental-impact/#:~:text=What%20are%20the%20total%20emissions,emissions%20come%20from%20food%20production https://www.bikeradar.com/features/long-reads/cycling-enviro....
    - peoplefromibiza 4y ago
      > Walking burns more calories than riding an ebike and those calories come from somewhere You can't be serious... Walking also reduce your risk of going to the hospital, how much energy is saved? Do ambulances run on magic dust? > However, both are going to have a clear win over walking. I seriously hoped you were jocking. Until we won't be born with wheels, walking will win. I sincerely hope that you'll at least get this, one day...
nextaccountic 4y ago
> only because there are more, but cars have to actually follow safety guidelines when they are designed to reduce risks for pedestrians being hit. But cars kills pedestrians they hit. A lot. And I mean, really a lot, the amount of people cars kill is staggering.
- peoplefromibiza 4y ago
  > But cars kills pedestrians they hit. So do bikes. see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32376016 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32376016 > And I mean, really a lot, the amount of people cars kill is staggering. The amount of kilometers cars run is also staggering. Nobody is saying cars are good, but at least cars don't run on sidewalks, they stay on the roads and pedestrians don't walk in the middle of the road "just because they can". Rules are rules, unless someone thinks that bikers are special and aren't subject to the same laws the rest of us have to follow. Unfortunately it's much easier to encounter bikes going the wrong way, biking on pedestrian only zones, zig-zagging between people walking in a park, jumping on the sidewalk or skipping the red light, than cars (in proportion to the number of vehicles circulating)
  - bannedbybros 4y ago
  - crote 4y ago
    Interestingly, this does not seem to be the case in countries with a well-developed car & cycle infrastructure. It still happens, but it is way rarer than anything involving cars. Comparing it per-kilometer is disingenuous due to the wildly different speed. If you want to make a fairer comparison, you should look at it per travel-hour. And cars definitely do all the things you mention bikes doing wrong - you are probably just so used to it that you don't notice it anymore.
    - peoplefromibiza 4y ago
      > you should look at it per travel-hour. that would be awesome. if only there was a way to monitor bikes and who runs them... anyway, per hour is even more faulty than per kilometers. nobody drives a bike for 5 hours straight, unless it's a professional competition. > And cars definitely do all the things you mention bikes doing wrong - you are probably just so used to it that you don't notice it anymore. I've never seen a car jumping on the sidewalk intentionally or running high speed among people in a park walking their kids in a stroller, in the almost 50 years I've been on this planet.
eli 4y ago
> only because there are more, but cars have to actually follow safety guidelines when they are designed to reduce risks for pedestrians being hit. I challenge you to pick any stop sign in your neighborhood and count how many cars come to the legally mandated complete stop before the line.
- peoplefromibiza 4y ago
  most dangerous red lights and stop signs are monitored by authorities to reduce accidents. There ate cameras mounted everywhere. I worked on a mobility project for the city of Monza to make street crossing safer around schools and public offices. Unfortunately bikes don't have plates and we can't send the rider a ticket after the fact. Anyway: I challenge you to monitor a stop sign on a road heavily used by riders working for any of the delivery companies and see what happens.
  - eli 4y ago
    Seems the goalposts shifted. Now cars only follow the rules at the “most dangerous” intersections? They all seem pretty dangerous for a pedestrian in the crosswalk. My city actually does have stop sign cameras, a relative rarity in the states. There are 8 of them for thousands of stop signs. Maybe it’s different where you are but here almost nobody stops at a stop sign properly and sometimes pedestrians and cyclists get killed because of it. The cameras generate constant complaints from people who live near them because even though they’re marked, drivers are so unaccustomed to a full stop that they struggle to do so even when they know it results in an automatic fine.
    - peoplefromibiza 4y ago
      > Now cars only follow the rules at the “most dangerous” intersections? that's quite the interpretation there... the most dangerous intersections are already monitored, don't need to challenge me to do it, they are already studied to improve safety. sure enough, the less dangerous are going to be less dangerous. At least I believe that's what's going to happen, no matter if it's cars or bikes.
pizza234 4y ago
> e-bikes in particular run much faster than regular bikes and are used much more by incompetent bikers, given they are basically a non-taxed non-regulated non-plated moped (mopeds are quite dangerous for pedestrians) This is factually false, or at least, in several countries, where their design is regulated: 1. the engines are limited to 250W, which is not weak, but not strong, either; 2. some even have an electronic cap to 25 km/h, and engine turns off after such speed (I believe this is for mid-engine models); 3. can't propel on-demand. E-bikes are also heavy, not aerodynamic, and don't put the driver in a position to push stronly. The speed demons who overtake me in the streets, are typically non electric racing bikes. I had both types, and they definitely assist the ride, but they don't push the driver to go faster. Wheat fits the description you've given are actually electric (kick)scooters: - they propel only on-demand - they're often driven by reckless teenagers, which sometimes bring a passenger - since they're smaller than bikes, there is a considerably lower (both physical and psychological) barrier to traveling on the pavements
- peoplefromibiza 4y ago
  > some even have an electronic cap to 25 km/h, which is a lot. especially if the biker is a 90kg man.

pharmakom 4y ago

KE = 0.5 * m * v * v

Retric 4y ago
Oddly bikes kill roughly as many people per mile as cars do, and injure significantly more. Drivers do kill approximately 40x as many people in NYC, but they also travel far more. The politics around this are tricky in part because of comments like yours. https://nypost.com/2019/08/31/nyc-bicyclists-are-killing-pedestrians-and-the-city-wont-stop-it/ https://nypost.com/2019/08/31/nyc-bicyclists-are-killing-ped...
- eli 4y ago
  Your source is a tabloid article and it does not appear to actually show a per-mile statistic. Where are you getting that from?
  - Retric 4y ago
    Estimates for number of miles traveled by cyclists or cars in NYC varies, you can get an order of magnitude estimate just looking at traffic though. Anyway the article is quoting the same statistics anyone gets from cover, government sources like this: https://www1.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/bicycle-crash-data-report-2017.pdf https://www1.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/bicycle-crash-da... Pedestrian killed in 2017 by bicylists/pedestrian accidents 1, bicylists only fatalites 1. Pedestrian injured in 2017 by bicylists/pedestrian accidents 315, bicylists injured in 2017 by bicylists/pedestrian accidents 88.

amrocha 4y ago

If your city built shitty, unsafe bicycle lanes and therefore people don't use them it sure sounds like you should be mad at the city instead of the people who are trying to use a sustainable mode of transport without dying

peoplefromibiza 4y ago
You are assuming that that's even possible, it says a lot about some bikers' mentality (I'm assuming you are one by the way you got all offended, for nothing) But the city where I live, Milan, built standard bike lanes as they are built all over Europe. So please, before assuming, ask. I would also remind you that walking is more sustainable than electric bikes and pedestrians surely don't want to die because of e-bikes mania.
- cogman10 4y ago
  > I would also remind you that walking is more sustainable than electric bikes and pedestrians surely don't eant to die because of e-bikes mania. So, I'm going to get super pedantic here... But, nope. Walking burns more calories than riding an ebike and those calories come from somewhere. Walking isn't an efficient conversion of calories into energy. Biking ends up being more sustainable because it coverts more calories into motion. E-bikes even more sustainable because it uses less calories and instead relies on a battery (charged from on ever greening grid). You could debate about whether or not biking is more sustainable than ebiking due to battery production impact. However, both are going to have a clear win over walking. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/ghg-kcal-poore https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/ghg-kcal-poore https://www.bikeradar.com/features/long-reads/cycling-environmental-impact/#:~:text=What%20are%20the%20total%20emissions,emissions%20come%20from%20food%20production https://www.bikeradar.com/features/long-reads/cycling-enviro....
  - peoplefromibiza 4y ago
    > Walking burns more calories than riding an ebike and those calories come from somewhere You can't be serious... Walking also reduce your risk of going to the hospital, how much energy is saved? Do ambulances run on magic dust? > However, both are going to have a clear win over walking. I seriously hoped you were jocking. Until we won't be born with wheels, walking will win. I sincerely hope that you'll at least get this, one day...

nextaccountic 4y ago

> only because there are more, but cars have to actually follow safety guidelines when they are designed to reduce risks for pedestrians being hit. But cars kills pedestrians they hit. A lot. And I mean, really a lot, the amount of people cars kill is staggering.

peoplefromibiza 4y ago
> But cars kills pedestrians they hit. So do bikes. see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32376016 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32376016 > And I mean, really a lot, the amount of people cars kill is staggering. The amount of kilometers cars run is also staggering. Nobody is saying cars are good, but at least cars don't run on sidewalks, they stay on the roads and pedestrians don't walk in the middle of the road "just because they can". Rules are rules, unless someone thinks that bikers are special and aren't subject to the same laws the rest of us have to follow. Unfortunately it's much easier to encounter bikes going the wrong way, biking on pedestrian only zones, zig-zagging between people walking in a park, jumping on the sidewalk or skipping the red light, than cars (in proportion to the number of vehicles circulating)
- bannedbybros 4y ago
- crote 4y ago
  Interestingly, this does not seem to be the case in countries with a well-developed car & cycle infrastructure. It still happens, but it is way rarer than anything involving cars. Comparing it per-kilometer is disingenuous due to the wildly different speed. If you want to make a fairer comparison, you should look at it per travel-hour. And cars definitely do all the things you mention bikes doing wrong - you are probably just so used to it that you don't notice it anymore.
  - peoplefromibiza 4y ago
    > you should look at it per travel-hour. that would be awesome. if only there was a way to monitor bikes and who runs them... anyway, per hour is even more faulty than per kilometers. nobody drives a bike for 5 hours straight, unless it's a professional competition. > And cars definitely do all the things you mention bikes doing wrong - you are probably just so used to it that you don't notice it anymore. I've never seen a car jumping on the sidewalk intentionally or running high speed among people in a park walking their kids in a stroller, in the almost 50 years I've been on this planet.

eli 4y ago

> only because there are more, but cars have to actually follow safety guidelines when they are designed to reduce risks for pedestrians being hit. I challenge you to pick any stop sign in your neighborhood and count how many cars come to the legally mandated complete stop before the line.

peoplefromibiza 4y ago
most dangerous red lights and stop signs are monitored by authorities to reduce accidents. There ate cameras mounted everywhere. I worked on a mobility project for the city of Monza to make street crossing safer around schools and public offices. Unfortunately bikes don't have plates and we can't send the rider a ticket after the fact. Anyway: I challenge you to monitor a stop sign on a road heavily used by riders working for any of the delivery companies and see what happens.
- eli 4y ago
  Seems the goalposts shifted. Now cars only follow the rules at the “most dangerous” intersections? They all seem pretty dangerous for a pedestrian in the crosswalk. My city actually does have stop sign cameras, a relative rarity in the states. There are 8 of them for thousands of stop signs. Maybe it’s different where you are but here almost nobody stops at a stop sign properly and sometimes pedestrians and cyclists get killed because of it. The cameras generate constant complaints from people who live near them because even though they’re marked, drivers are so unaccustomed to a full stop that they struggle to do so even when they know it results in an automatic fine.
  - peoplefromibiza 4y ago
    > Now cars only follow the rules at the “most dangerous” intersections? that's quite the interpretation there... the most dangerous intersections are already monitored, don't need to challenge me to do it, they are already studied to improve safety. sure enough, the less dangerous are going to be less dangerous. At least I believe that's what's going to happen, no matter if it's cars or bikes.

pizza234 4y ago

> e-bikes in particular run much faster than regular bikes and are used much more by incompetent bikers, given they are basically a non-taxed non-regulated non-plated moped (mopeds are quite dangerous for pedestrians) This is factually false, or at least, in several countries, where their design is regulated: 1. the engines are limited to 250W, which is not weak, but not strong, either; 2. some even have an electronic cap to 25 km/h, and engine turns off after such speed (I believe this is for mid-engine models); 3. can't propel on-demand. E-bikes are also heavy, not aerodynamic, and don't put the driver in a position to push stronly. The speed demons who overtake me in the streets, are typically non electric racing bikes. I had both types, and they definitely assist the ride, but they don't push the driver to go faster. Wheat fits the description you've given are actually electric (kick)scooters: - they propel only on-demand - they're often driven by reckless teenagers, which sometimes bring a passenger - since they're smaller than bikes, there is a considerably lower (both physical and psychological) barrier to traveling on the pavements

peoplefromibiza 4y ago
> some even have an electronic cap to 25 km/h, which is a lot. especially if the biker is a 90kg man.