Posts by BenWilson
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: When "common sense" isn't, in reply to Russell Brown,
I'm quite happy to let the big vehicles go through in some places
Totally, it's judgment calls all the time. Going through a pinch point, I might even stop if a bus or truck is next to me. But coming up Gt North Rd from Waterview toward Avondale, where the cycleway ends (halfway up, FFS!), I'll take the road, and generally give myself a meter from the kerb. If a vehicle can't safely pass me in a lane, then I want them to actually go the near-zero effort of indicating a partial lane change as they pass me, and moving across a bit into the other lane. If you leave it so that they think they might be able to squeeze past, they will very often do exactly that.
-
Hard News: When "common sense" isn't, in reply to BlairMacca,
But all of these pale in comparision to your head cracking on the ground right?
Ask yourself the same question, but replace "ground" with "dashboard" or "windscreen"
-
Hard News: When "common sense" isn't, in reply to Ben Gracewood,
Having the bike and controls in view is useful when reviewing footage (seeing braking points etc). Makes for a more interesting video :)
True enough, although the bike frame does take up quite a lot of the most interesting part of the shot, and being lower down reduces what can be seen.
I have a piece of software on my phone that does this, keeps rolling footage. It also records all the GPS stuff too, so you get not only brake points, but all those other cool stats drivers want (speeds at all points, elevation, etc). It was designed for cars, but works fine on the bike. However, I don't have a decent mount for the phone, and TBH, when I did have a mount, the phone was dangerously distracting.
I do wonder if the very best place for a camera would be the helmet, though. I've seen a few people riding around with that.
-
Hard News: When "common sense" isn't, in reply to HORansome,
I’m really curious about the psychology of people not wanting to wear helmets whilst riding.
Here's 7 reasons
1. It doesn't feel nice. The strap rubs, your head gets hot.
2. It mucks up your hair
3. It's another thing you have to carry around
4. It's another thing you have to lock up
5. It looks dorky
6. It costs money
7. It slows you down getting on and offI still wear one for most rides, though. There are a couple of advantages, beyond just pure safety:
1. It's got a visor to keep the sun out of my eyes.
2. It's something to attach a headlamp to.No. That would be highly impractical. I think there are better things I can do to be visible than that.
Yup. At night, flashing lights. During the day, it's mostly about how you behave. Ride big like you are actually a vehicle. Since that is the law on the matter, I have no qualms. It's funny, since I made this mental switch, I've not been shouted at by anyone. Maybe they sense something.
-
Hard News: When "common sense" isn't, in reply to Ben Gracewood,
Nice idea. Why don't you mount it on the handlebars, though?
-
Interesting link Lucy gives that suggests the more professional the vehicle driver, the less safety margin they leave, based on actual studies done. I had subjectively felt that this was the case, but couldn't be sure since a big noisy thing next to you does feel closer.
-
The problem there is that making flouro a condition of getting on a bike at any time provides a significant disincentive to cycling -- more so than compulsory helmets.
And given that the introduction of helmets corresponded to a massive decline in cycle usage here and in many other places, and that low numbers cycling is a major risk factor, it's really silly to make mandatory yet another thing that will stop people getting on bikes.
-
Capture: Spring is Like a Perhaps Hand, in reply to ChrisW,
I found those to be extremely attractive to bumblebees, so much so that I found several bee carcasses around the plant. It's like they got hooked, and dosed until they died.
none of the threads would open until five minutes ago.
Phew, glad to hear it wasn't just me.
-
Hard News: The Wogistan form book, in reply to Kyle Matthews,
The 911 hijackers used knives among other things in their attacks FFS.
It's entirely possible that they used industrial plastic box-cutters, which don't show up on metal detectors anyway. They could probably get through anything less than a full pat-down, and even then you could probably conceal them in your bum.
-
Hard News: The Wogistan form book, in reply to Craig Ranapia,
I was pulled aside for a not-really-voluntary (i.e. you can decline, but you’ll be escorted from the airport by security if you do) “bomb residue test”.
I wonder if I'm the only person on earth whose level of fear and alarm actually dropped after one of these swab tests, when they told me it was highly suspicious. Coming back from Amsterdam, they swabbed my bag and then told me it contained "strong traces of heroin and explosives". It was so ridiculous that I felt relieved, compared to other more credible traces they may have found. I was tempted to ask "So which one is it? I never carry both of those together". But I figured the best thing was to act confused. It seemed to me to be quite likely to be a tactic to provoke a body language response.
But after a few minutes I remembered that I had once had a tub of "glycerine in cetamacrogol cream" (a moisturizer) depressurize in that suitcase. So ironically, there might really have been traces of explosives and heroin after all.
Last ←Newer Page 1 … 376 377 378 379 380 … 1066 Older→ First