5 ms·
Over engineering in real life, solving lack of common sense by introducing a solution where the cyclist is paying. I think the solution is nice for sure, but s
by Oras 6mo ago
Over engineering in real life, solving lack of common sense by introducing a solution where the cyclist is paying.
I think the solution is nice for sure, but solving the wrong problem.
- fnands 6mo agoEh, it's pragmatic. It's replacing a problem you can't solve (human stupidity), with one you can (a better bell).
- paganel 6mo agoWhy can't the cyclists slow down when they see that there's a human obstacle in front of them?
- bdavbdav 6mo agoIn the roads near my office (central London), which are seldom used by cars, several pedestrians at a time very often walk down the road or diagonally cross the road head in phone. You can get very close and the still don’t notice (the slower you are, the quieter you become so even less likely to hear you). I’m not sure arguing against a bell is helpful - people need to look on any road, especially with the advent of quiet electric cars.
- paganel 6mo agoSure is helpful, because it goes like this: pedestrians first -> then cyclists -> then motorists. You may notice that in this worldview (one which I find very hard to argue against) cyclists should give priority to pedestrians, no questions asked. I don't care about fancy bells or whatever, no-one takes those into consideration even when we (us, pedestrians, that is) can hear them because, and I repeat, cyclists are not as important as pedestrians are.
- tpm 6mo agoYou may not care about fancy bells but you will care about loud honking close to your ears in my very recent experience from the streets of Shanghai. You don't have absolute priority just because you are a pedestrian. > Why can't the cyclists slow down when they see that there's a human obstacle in front of them? Because if the space is limited and they actually want to get somewhere, they just don't have time for that? And slowing down often means stopping and causing a traffic jam. Note that I mostly agree with what you wrote (and I give priority to pedestrians when I'm riding my bike) but there are different situations that have to be taken into account.
- paganel 6mo ago> they just don't have time for that? They for sure have time for that. When I drive my car can't use that as an excuse.
- tpm 6mo agoThere is a number of differences between a car and a bike, including how pedestrians react to them. Also you probably (hopefully) don't drive your car on narrow sidewalks which in some cases is unavoidable for bikes in cities.
- gs17 6mo ago> and I give priority to pedestrians when I'm riding my bike Even when you "actually want to get somewhere"?
- fleebee 6mo agoWhere I live, generally if you're allowed to use a road or a lane, you have equal rights to others using it. On a road, cyclists have equal rights to motorists; on shared lanes, pedestrians don't have special rights and are expected to walk near the edge. Your worldview (mostly) applies to pedestrian crossings but that's the extent of it.
- bdavbdav 6mo agoI think that’s probably quite a selfish world view (and also quite arrogant to claim your own view is hard to argue against - of course you would find it hard to argue against, that is moot…) When there is infrastructure to support all 3 kinds of users, it seems a lot more equitable for everyone to use the space cooperatively. I absolutely agree one should give way to more vulnerable road users, but that all 3 can have better outcomes (safety, speed of journey, efficiency etc) it all use it cooperatively and conscientiously. To labour the point, on shared cycle and pedestrian paths with a line down the middle, does a bell ring combined with slowing down to a safe speed not seem like an appropriate warning?
- dairylee 6mo agoWe do slow down. I've lost count of the times I've been riding at walking pace behind someone, on a shared path, waiting to get past because they're completely oblivious to the bell ringing, politely asking, or even flashing lights.
- djtango 6mo agoGenerally I am pretty accommodating of pedestrians and give them a wide berth but sometimes they do some pretty obnoxious things like walk six abreast or cut right in front of you erratically without looking. I have very little time for people who freely absolve themselves of their personal responsibility to be aware of their surroundings and we shouldn't be encouraging people to zone out of society just so they can consume more. I am comfortable cycling slower than walking pace and if I am in a real rush for speed I will cycle on the road but sometimes pedestrians can cause serious cycling accidents even when you're careful or slow.
- _zpvl 6mo agoThere are often a LOT of human obstacles, and we have places to be! I slow down a bit but I don’t have a lot of patience for total unawareness. I don’t find this to be an issue with riding in the city because I ride on the road or in bike lanes. But when I go trail riding, it’s very annoying when people take up the trail and do not hear or react to my bell. Sometimes the situation is such that it is difficult to stop or evade the person, such as during a technical descent. If you’re out on the woods, there is really no excuse not to be aware of your surroundings.
- throw83940449 6mo agoThere is easy excuse, people expect other people to be rational, and to slow down a bit. Not to ride downhill at full speed. I heard "human obstacle" last time in carmagedon!
- inejge 6mo ago> Why can't the cyclists slow down when they see that there's a human obstacle in front of them? They usually do. (The considerate and/or non-confrontational ones. There are always idiots, and people have the tendency to remember negative outliers and project their behavior on the group as a whole, which is unfortunate.) However, slowing down isn't the whole story. Riding a non-motorized bicycle is much easier if the rider can keep moving, however slowly, so it would be considerate in turn for the pedestrian to step aside and let the cyclist pass, if possible. A distracted pedestrian can be warned by a bell. Separately, delivery riders as a category have an incentive to ride as quickly as possible, which is a recipe for conflict. Removing that incentive means removing or completely reimagining the service. I don't think that anybody has a solution or mitigation at present.
- pandaman 6mo agoCyclists can slow down when there is an obstacle in front of them. But they cannot teleport away when a pedestrian runs into the side of the bike.
- tossandthrow 6mo agoHuman stupidity? As in allowing too much noise in the cities to the extend that people need to protect their minds?
- throwaway132448 6mo agoThe stupidity that makes depriving one of your senses seem like a sensible thing to do in a busy chaotic environment. I don’t actually mind people doing that though. What is annoying is the entitled attitude that there should be no consequence for that choice, and everyone else should orbit/compensate around their lack of situational awareness.
- piva00 6mo agoStockholm is a very quiet city, people still wear noise-cancelling headphones all the time.
- yladiz 6mo agoWhat is the right problem that should be solved here?
- exitb 6mo agoBetter segregation of cyclists and pedestrians into their own spaces. The bell shouldn't be something that you use regularly.
- eru 6mo agoDepending on how much traffic there is, combining them is fine.
- exitb 6mo agoYes, but I would consider it somewhat rude to use the bell in a space where both bikes and pedestrians are allowed. If it would be required to be used regularly, I'd say the path is badly designed. I used to commute to work by bike in ~1M city in Europe, mostly on dedicated bike lanes, but some shared, and had just the smallest, barely audible bell, only because it was required by law. I don't remember using it much at all. I don't know what the problem is. Maybe the Londoners should take a good look at themselves.
- eru 6mo agoDifferent folks have different preferences. I agree that on a footpath pedestrians should be treated as having priority. A semi-common way I use my bell: when on a shared footpath with plenty of space to take over, I often use my bell when I'm still ten meters away, so that I don't give pedestrians are heart attack by suddenly dashing right past them. (I have a nice ding dong bell. They don't seem to mind. It also helps that I often have a cheerful five year old in the back.)
- Mashimo 6mo agoBut some bikers probably also use anc headphones, no?
- xvedejas 6mo agoOver-engineering? It's a fully mechanical bike bell that's made slightly differently. It's a very established and straightforward technology.
- rmoriz 6mo agoThe presentation looks like marketing overkill, their solution looks pretty simple. It‘s just two trills „Trillerwerk“ bells combined. It was the standard in Germany until the late 1990s https://youtu.be/-mW7dWHDivo https://youtu.be/-mW7dWHDivo
- Raed667 6mo agowhen the alternative is "everyone doing the right thing" this solution starts to look like the pragmatic approach
- jofzar 6mo agoI completely disagree, this is just another level of safety. If everything went perfectly everytime we wouldn't need any safety equipment, but things aren't always perfect.
- Phemist 6mo agoThe real problem is that cyclists and pedestrians apparently in some countries share space commonly enough that this is necessary? In the Netherlands, bicycle utopia, I cannot remember the last time I used my bell to alert a pedestrian of my existence. Granted, I never cycle in Amsterdam, but that is a special location where high-powered ship horns are probably required. Regarding ANC, I naturally turn it off while cycling on my Bose Quiet Comfort II, as the ANC will try (and fail) to cancel the noise from the wind. I don't think this is a solved problem? So for bicycle-to-bicycle alerting, this also seems overkill.
- djtango 6mo agoIn Singapore, cyclists are generally expected to use the pavement and share it with pedestrians.
- Phemist 6mo agoWhich, seems to me, is the actual problem that should be solved.
- djtango 6mo agoI've thought about it before and I think part of it is that the average cyclist here moves a lot slower because of the temperature and humidity. When I put even an ounce of effort into my cycle I become a sweaty mess which can be a little antisocial depending on the situation
- joe_mamba 6mo agoI dislike the smug condescending tone of your comment. Not everyone lives in the "cycle utopia" Netherlands. For some of those that don't live there, this could be a game changer and life saver since its easier to buy a bell than wait for your city to build you segregated cycle lanes. Personally, I see no use for this bell since in Austria bicycles share the road space with cars, trucks and trams rather than pedestrians, which could be more dangerous, and what I would need is a bicycle bell that could penetrate car enclosures so that drivers would get off their phones and pay attention to the stuff around them. Yes, I know, ideally there should be dedicated cycle lanes only for bicycles but nothing in life is ever ideal, and the city isn't gonna do that anytime soon since that would mean completely eliminating car traffic on the narrow streets, witch would be political suicide, so a bell would be an instant life saver.
- xxs 6mo agowhich part would you consider overengineered?
- lxgr 6mo agoWhat's your easy technical solution to improve common sense, then? Or is it the all time classic of "just improving society"? I'm all ears for your ideas.
- watwut 6mo agoThe problem is the cyclist trying to overtake pedestrian on sidewalk faster. The cyclist paying for it is correct person paying for it. I say it as cyclist. Pedestrians have right to be absent minded in parks and on public sidewalks.
- fixxation92 6mo agoI have to agree here. The amount of cyclists I see with full over the ear headphones on-- if these guys are blarning tunes, there is no way they'll every hear the traffic around them. Extremely dangerous.
- Theodores 6mo agoAgreed, however, what do you think about my 'dream bicycle bell'? I replaced my bell recently because mine had developed a form of 'tourettes' after a bit of plastic fell off. So I did survey the marketplace for something 'more me'. This made me think about what the ideal bell should be. I reckon that you should be able to buy tuned bells, as in A - G with 440hz 'C' being in there somewhere. Maybe there could be different colours of the rainbow for each frequency. This would be quite tuneful if I was riding with family or friends, with them also having a tuned bell on their bicycles. Obviously no use for penetrating noise cancelling headphones, however, I don't think these are an issue. If someone is zoned out on headphones then it is on them if they have no spacial awareness. If they don't hear the bell, then that is on them. I also think big auto is patronising, to think they have anything to offer the cyclist apart from death and pollution. What would the car dependent ones know about shared path etiquette? Nowadays the biggest danger to me on shared paths are the Uber Eats delivery guys with their electric motorbikes. Early evenings can be quite risky with those zombies, particularly within half a mile of a McDonalds. They pose a true 'kinetic' risk that the jogger wearing headphones does not.
- mabedan 6mo ago> lack of common sense Walking in noisy environments is most of the usage people get out of noise cancelling headphones. The other use case is noisy workspaces or coffee places.