anonymou2

16 ms·

91.
by anonymou2 7y ago
So there are no limits on a spherical world? you need to read things like this: https://dothemath.ucsd.edu/2012/04/economist-meets-physicist... or William Catton's overshoot.
92.
by anonymou2 7y ago
I would say that progress is stealing from the future generations.
93.
by anonymou2 7y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banqiao_Dam
94.
by anonymou2 7y ago
no, they will become corrupt.
95.
by anonymou2 7y ago
what is a pain about using Tor?
96.
by anonymou2 7y ago
you haven't watched "Mountain Men" have you? :-D
97.
by anonymou2 7y ago
Don't trust your feelings. The problem with the way cyclists and cycling transportation have been used politically is that it is now impossible to have any serious conversation about it, it's just like climate change. The experien
98.
by anonymou2 7y ago
I'd say a lot has to do with cyclist behavior. Hugging the curb does not help, it invites motorists to pass even when it is not safe to do so. It is much safer to take the lane, occupy the middle of it, so other vehicles coming from be
99.
by anonymou2 7y ago
they have the best cycling infrastructure, they are called roads.
100.
by anonymou2 7y ago
yeah right, and 1 month old infants too.
101.
by anonymou2 7y ago
fine, high speed controlled access freeways may have been built only for cars. But even in that case a regular service road parallel to it is still a much better solution that a bicycle path. I sometimes ride in such a service road.
102.
by anonymou2 7y ago
Then why do I always bump into at least on or two car drivers (certainly not all) that harass me when I do not ride on the bike lane but on the road adjacent to it? Why do the motorists care where I ride if it wasn't built to clear the
103.
by anonymou2 7y ago
My point is that even when they are "optional" they are not. At least that's my experience riding in Spain, where they have built optional bike lanes but you get plenty of harassment from idiots who think you have to use. Thi
104.
by anonymou2 7y ago
That's exactly what segregated bicycle facilities are all about, discrimination. Of course in South Africa you were also discriminated by the color of your skin not just by your vehicle of choice. From the article: "When in 1935 a
105.
by anonymou2 7y ago
I am curious, how do motorists react when you ride on a regular road with an optional bike lane adjacent to it? Because where I live, in Spain, they have built such "optional" lanes and when I ride adjacent to them I get a lot of
106.
by anonymou2 7y ago
So wherever there is a bike lane he lost his right to use the road, it works just as designed.
107.
by anonymou2 7y ago
It is so tiring to hear the same silly argument again and again. Roads are already the best biking infrastructure, period. We cyclists don't want to lose our right to use it by being kicked off to segregated bike facilities. We don&#x2
108.
by anonymou2 7y ago
If car drivers don't respect you I don't think the solution is to let them have all the road for themselves and put you away from their view. Fighting for the rights of cyclits by segregating them is like trying to fight sexism by
109.
by anonymou2 7y ago
So you just admitted that also in Amsterdam bike lanes are made for the convenience of motorists.
110.
by anonymou2 7y ago
No, they exist for motorists' convenience, as can be seen from the example. Cyclists have been brainwashed for the last 50 years to believe that riding on the regular road means instant death, that's why they stay in the bike lane
111.
by anonymou2 7y ago
No, being an asshole is not solved by infrastructure, what you need is education. Cyclists typically don't believe that they are driving a vehicle (which they are). In fact dedicated infrastructure for cyclists only helps keep the myth
112.
by anonymou2 7y ago
That was the whole point of bike lanes, get cyclists off the roads and leave these exclusively for motorists. So It seems it has worked pretty well. Generations of cyclists fooled by this, it's so sad.
113.
by anonymou2 7y ago
Quite the opposite, it is more dangerous to ride in a segregated manner because it contradicts the basic principles of traffic which exist so that vehicles of all types can safely share the road. For example there is a basic principle that
114.
by anonymou2 7y ago
No way, that's a lie been repeated for the last 60 years to get rid of bicycles and leave the roads only for motorists. Cyclists have the same right to use the public roads as motorists, no more but certainly no less. Some of us, cycli
115.
by anonymou2 7y ago
I, I, I, I, I, all I care, .... that's really the problem that we face.
116.
by anonymou2 7y ago
No, the roads belong to everyone not just motorists, building a cyclist ghetto and kicking cyclists off the roads so that motorists can have them all for themselves is just wrong. Motorists should be responsible for their actions.
117.
by anonymou2 7y ago
You don't own your phone, unless you run replicant on it. And even then you still have the proprietary modem.
118.
by anonymou2 7y ago
https://pint.readthedocs.io/en/0.9/
119.
by anonymou2 7y ago
Thankfully there is free (as in freedom) software. It is as important as ever that it exists, it is our only hope to stop these "gods".
120.
by anonymou2 7y ago
Their numbers are probably only going to increase now anyway, so no need to breed them.

More ›