Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Lead Developer of Yum Killed In Hit-and-run

Posted by Soulskill on from the rest-in-peace dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Seth Vidal, a lead developer of Yum, was killed in a hit-and-run accident while riding his bicycle in Durham, NC last night." The Fedora Project posted a statement. Quoting: "Seth was a lead developer of yum and the update repository system, and a contributor to the CentOS project as well as the original Fedora Extras system. He worked tirelessly on the infrastructure for the Fedora Project to make all systems work well and consistently for our contributors around the world. He was a gifted speaker, a brilliant thinker, a clever wit, a humble and genuinely funny person, and a good friend. The Fedora community owes an enormous debt of gratitude to Seth's dedication to Fedora and other free software projects, his commitment to community values, and his passion for excellence in his work. To say he will be missed is an understatement." Update: 07/10 00:24 GMT by U L : Local news reports that the driver turned himself in.

67 of 413 comments (clear)

  1. When you ride at night, by Spy+Handler · · Score: 5, Informative

    wear white.

    1. Re:When you ride at night, by CanHasDIY · · Score: 5, Informative

      blame the victim. i guess you think women in short skirts are asking to be raped?

      He's not "blaming the victim," he's pointing out a safety tip for those of you who don't understand the basic physics of how our eyes work, you Fuck.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    2. Re:When you ride at night, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think it was a word of warning to other cyclists to always do what you can to be seen, not blaming the victim.
      Modern feminists have you tricked into thinking you are either fully in control of a situation or you are fully a victim of a situation.
      Fortunately, life isn't black and white

    3. Re:When you ride at night, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No amount of high-vis can protect you from stupid drivers. Given that the driver did not stop, I think we can assume that they place no value on the lives of others.

    4. Re:When you ride at night, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      White doesn't cut it at night.
      Wear reflective.

    5. Re:When you ride at night, by characterZer0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      White does not always help. If you ride at night, use bright headlights and taillaights. I commute by bicycle and have lights on regardless of time of day. Too many drivers just do not pay sufficient attention.

      In many places hit and run carries a lighter penalty than DUI, so often drivers have an incentive to flee. Hit and run should be a felony.

      --
      Go green: turn off your refrigerator.
    6. Re:When you ride at night, by CanHasDIY · · Score: 2

      In many places hit and run carries a lighter penalty than DUI

      ... The fuck????

      Where? I want to know which communities/states to add to my "Avoid Like the Bubonic Plague" list.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    7. Re:When you ride at night, by VAXcat · · Score: 2

      He's not blaming the victim, he's quoting a Roling Stones song lyric. Jeez....woooshhhh

      --
      There is no God, and Dirac is his prophet.
    8. Re:When you ride at night, by wisnoskij · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And no amount of driving skill can protect you from invisible stupid bicyclers.

      "I think we can assume that they place no value on the lives of others."
      Or they did not want to go to jail for 20 years for a no-fault accident.

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    9. Re:When you ride at night, by barc0001 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The driver fleeing the scene is a pretty clear indication of whose fault the driver presumed the accident to be. Hint: not the cyclist's.

    10. Re:When you ride at night, by Culture20 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      When you ride at night, wear lights. Unless you're going to the airport.

    11. Re:When you ride at night, by dan828 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Or he was drunk. Or high. Or had a suspended license. Or a warrant. Or was an "undocumented worker". Or any number of things that would lead the guy to flee the scene, even if he wasn't the at fault party. I mean, my experience tells me that the driver likely was at fault, but we really don't know, and there can be a ton a reasons why someone would take off.

    12. Re:When you ride at night, by pspahn · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I received Revolights for Christmas last year.

      Of course, they won't prevent me from getting hit, but they sure do help. Cars, pedestrians, other cyclists... they all stop when I go by simply because they are looking at my lights because they look pretty fucking cool.

      --
      Someone flopped a steamer in the gene pool.
    13. Re:When you ride at night, by QuadEddie · · Score: 3, Informative

      He was a black guy with a suspended licence.

    14. Re:When you ride at night, by DavidJSimpson · · Score: 3, Informative

      From the article, the accident happened at 9pm. So it probably wasn't dark.

    15. Re:When you ride at night, by Duhavid · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "And no amount of driving skill can protect you from invisible stupid bicyclers."

      Try riding a bike for about a year, seriously. You will start to think "what will protect me from blind, stupid car drivers".

      "Or they did not want to go to jail for 20 years for a no-fault accident"

      Mind made up already? From what I have read, it sounds like the car driver was at fault.
      He was hit from behind, and the driver slowed, and swerved
      And then drove off. Could be either at fault. With the hit from behind part, it is hard to seriously argue is was the cyclist at fault.

      --
      emt 377 emt 4
    16. Re:When you ride at night, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No kidding. When you're riding day or night visibility is your you friend. The most dangerous person is the spaced out driver driving home on the same daily commute he's been doing for the last decade. You need to make yourself stick out or he'll plow in to you like you're not even there.

      Right now I'm at work and I'm charging my serfas thunderbolts. Even in broad daylight they're shockingly visible.
      https://www.serfas.com/products/view/669/referer:products|index|lights|tail-lights

      That and a 700 lumen front light for when it's dark (Sometimes set it to flash on daytime commutes, particularly overcast days) You'd have to be near blind to miss me.
      http://www.cygolite.com/products/expilion700.html

      Yeah, the routine is weird when I get home. Pop off 4 devices (Bike gps/computer is USB charged too) and USB charge them all.

    17. Re:When you ride at night, by Charliemopps · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You're misconstruing "death by hit and run" with "hit and run" Most hit and runs are in parking lots and the other drivers inside the store. Also, in many states now, DUIs are considered so heinous the punishments in the "insane" category. It's not that hit and runs are lenient, it's that DUI offenses are treated ridiculously harsh. My state has one of the most lax DUI laws in the country and you still get a $2k fine, lose your license for at least a year and likely will get jail time.

    18. Re:When you ride at night, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      He was a black guy with a suspended licence.

      Citation, you racist ignorant fuck? (note, recind that last part if you actually *supply* a legitimate citation)

      http://www.wral.com/man-charged-in-durham-hit-and-run-that-killed-bicyclist/12644209/

    19. Re:When you ride at night, by damicatz · · Score: 2

      North Carolina is one of those places.

      Felony hit and run is a Class H Felony (http://www.nccourts.org/Courts/CRS/Councils/spac/Documents/FelonyChart_12_01_11MaxChart.pdf). With no priors, the maximum you can get is 8 months in prison.

      Felony death by motor vehicle (any death from a motor vehicle that is the result of driving while impaired) is normally treated as involuntary manslaughter (Class F, 20 months max with no priors) but can be upgraded to second degree murder (Class B1, 300 months for no prior offense) if there are aggravating circumstances (e.g. a prior history of DWI).

    20. Re:When you ride at night, by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 2

      yeah but reflective doesn't rhyme with night.

      Good point.

      "When the sun's defective, wear reflective." No, that's no good.
      "When the sun's not detected, make sure you're reflected." That's better.

      (And of course right out is "If you're not reflected, the mourners will be genuflected." It's not even a good rhyme.)

    21. Re:When you ride at night, by bws111 · · Score: 2

      New York State does not have any offense called 'hit and run'. They (and I assume most other places) have a law called 'leaving the scene of an incident without reporting'. That only covers the 'run' part. If a death was involved, leaving the scene is a class D felony, carrying a two to five thousand dollar penalty.

      That still leaves the 'hit' part. Depending on the circumstances, the 'hit' part may be vehicular homicide, which is an additional charge to the 'leaving the scene' charge. That can also be a class D felony, carrying both a fine and/or imprisonment.

    22. Re:When you ride at night, by MacGyver2210 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Also, in many states now, DUIs are considered so heinous the punishments in the "insane" category.

      I'd love to know which ones. In Wisconsin, where I live, I see people FREQUENTLY getting 4th through 8th DUIs, and I can't help but wonder why the cops are so fucking terrible at keeping these people off the streets(or, you know, doing their job at all). I quickly realized that they don't WANT these people off the streets, as they use it as a revenue generator.

      "We give you a real hard slap on the wrist, and take your plastic card, and suddenly you can't drive. Oh wait, you don't follow the law, you'll drive anyway(or pay the exorbitant fines and fees to get your 'sort-of' license reinstated). When you break the law again, we can charge you even MORE and let you go AGAIN!"

      If the government actually wanted to prevent DUIs, they would adopt Germany's DUI penalty: First offense - ENORMOUS fine, lose your license(which costs thousands of euros to obtain in Germany), vehicle seized and sold, proceeds donated to any victims or a fund for the same. Second offense - Huge fines, and prison. Lots, and lots, of prison.

      --
      If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits
    23. Re:When you ride at night, by Antibozo · · Score: 2

      Riding a bicycle on the sidewalk is both illegal and dangerous. I've actually almost gotten into fights with people because they were riding on the sidewalk and I instructed them to ride in the road.

      That could because riding on a sidewalk was not illegal.

      That is, it is illegal in some places, but it's far from a universal law. In Washington, D.C., it is legal to ride on the sidewalk in most of the city, excluding a high-traffic area in the downtown. In Northern Virginia it is generally legal unless signed otherwise; in fact some of the trails in Arlington, just outside D.C., are routed over sidewalks.

      Whether it's dangerous depends on a lot of things, including the expectations of the other sidewalk users. In the D.C. area, i can tell you, injuries to pedestrians from cyclists riding on the sidewalk are exceedingly rare.

      Check your local laws, and please don't misinform.

    24. Re:When you ride at night, by Rakarra · · Score: 2

      And as a followup, this is why I hate biking at night and avoid it when I can, or choose quiet streets with little to no traffic where any cars coming to, from, or across can be seen with plenty of time.

      I did once run into a car about a year ago when a car in the lane left of me made a right turn across a bike lane into a driveway. His excuse? "But I had my right blinker on!" As if that excuses cutting across a lane of oncoming traffic. Even if you take precautions you can't avoid any act of negligence! But hopefully you can avoid most of them.

    25. Re:When you ride at night, by Duhavid · · Score: 2

      That is pretty sad. And quite true.

      How does anyone operate a machine capable of creating so much death and destruction without having a fair idea of it's parameters?

      But yeah, I do expect them to follow that guideline. I think in most places, the law would hold them to it also.
      My personal opinion is that most people should not be driving. My oldest daughter just started driving, and I hope and believe I have impressed an appreciation that driving is much more than just pointing the car in a given direction....

      --
      emt 377 emt 4
    26. Re:When you ride at night, by Antibozo · · Score: 2

      Actually riding on the sidewalk is much more dangerous.

      As i said, whether it's dangerous depends on a lot of things. There are plenty of places in my area where there are long stretches of sidewalk without driveways or crosswalks. There are people who ride at more or less a walking pace, which incurs no more danger than walking itself. There are places such as open beachfront areas where there are enough cyclists on sidewalks that drivers are conditioned to look for them. There are places where a roadway is grooved, or has badly placed drainage grates that make a sidewalk a safer option. And so on.

      I'm a regular bike commuter. I generally avoid sidewalks, unless trails are routed over them. My post was primarily to correct the misinformation that cycling on the sidewalk is illegal; this is one of several commonly held myths about cycling law (another one, absurdly, being that cyclists must ride on sidewalks). In some places sidewalk cycling is illegal, and some places it's dangerous. It is not, however, universally both of these.

    27. Re:When you ride at night, by barc0001 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Or he was drunk" - His fault and he was breaking the law

      "Or high" - His fault and he was breaking the law

      "Or had a suspended license" - Indeed he did, and once again, HIS FAULT for being on the road when he shouldn't have been.

      "Or a warrant." - So he's breaking the law 24/7 and should have turned himself in to sort it out.

      "Or was an 'undocumented worker'" - You mean someone in the country illegally who hasn't got a driver's license? You mean someone breaking the law by driving a motor vehicle without a license? His fault.

      "even if he wasn't the at fault party" - These words do not mean what you think they mean. If any of your conditions you listed for fleeing were true (and one was!) then he should NOT have been on the road, and by choosing to drive he deliberately started a chain of events that ended in tragedy. His fault.

    28. Re:When you ride at night, by peppepz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And no amount of driving skill can protect you from invisible stupid bicyclers.

      Actually, it's quite easy, you just have to drive slow enough to be able to brake before hitting anything that is in front of you. That would have avoided most of the accidents I've seen.

      Or they did not want to go to jail for 20 years for a no-fault accident.

      A no-fault accident is when a biker appears from the side of the road and you can't manage to avoid hitting him. In this case, the biker was hit from behind, so the fault his the driver's, full stop. Moreover, when you have an accident, you don't get to decide whose fault it is. You stay there and help the victim. If you run, you're a criminal, no excuses.

  2. Very short history of yum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    here.

  3. Thank you by ssam · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Thank you for all your hard work. You will be missed.

  4. Re:Probably a prank gone wrong. by CanHasDIY · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I have seen drivers of vehicles in the USA perform an act which looks like a deliberate "nudge" to a random cyclist before driving away at high speed.

    If I had an always-on dash-mounted video camera, I would be tempted to post videos of people doing such nonsense.

    So sad.

    You should - vehicular assault is a serious offence, and if your video can be used to prove malice, those sociopathic pricks will be confined to a cell where they belong.

    I've been wanting a dash cam for the opposite reason - a lot of the cyclists around here are either stupid or have a deathwish, judging by how flagrantly they violate right-of-way laws.

    --
    An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  5. There have been so many... by Irick · · Score: 3, Insightful
    It's sobering just how many of these great contributors to oss and technology in general have passed away these past few years. Mortality is not something I often contemplate at twenty two but I find it constantly popping up in the legacy of this subculture.

    I really do wonder if we are predisposed to see death as a problem that needs to be solved, because all I can think of are the tragic losses of minds and icons that could be prevented somehow and how valuable that would be to humanity as a whole.

    Seth will be missed and hopefully his work will live on.

    1. Re:There have been so many... by sideslash · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's worse than you realize. In fact, 100% of people who work on Open Source Software die.

  6. Re:Probably a prank gone wrong. by Hentes · · Score: 2

    Sadly, this behaviour is not limited to America. Some people just get crazy once inside a car.

  7. Hit and Run driver turned himself in. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    They caught the guy who did this.

    http://www.wral.com/man-charged-in-durham-hit-and-run-that-killed-bicyclist/12644209/

    1. Re:Hit and Run driver turned himself in. by barc0001 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Dude was driving with a revoked license. He needs to go to jail since obviously just taking his license away doesn't seem to be all that effective in curbing his poor judgement.

    2. Re:Hit and Run driver turned himself in. by Antony+T+Curtis · · Score: 2

      So... The guy was knowingly driving with a revoked license. They should throw the library at him.

      --
      No sig. Move along - nothing to see here.
    3. Re:Hit and Run driver turned himself in. by damicatz · · Score: 3, Informative

      He already has a DWI.

      http://www1.aoc.state.nc.us/www/calendars.Offense.do?submit=submit&case=3102012061874&court=CR

      DWI laws in this state are a joke. And when they finally get banned from driving a car (after half a dozen convictions or so), they are still allowed to go and drive a moped on the road.

  8. Re:This is why... by scot4875 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If someone on a bike runs a red light or stop sign and they get hit, that's their bad and that's on them; they'll get no sympathy from me.

    If you treat someone on a bike like shit because you saw a random biker run a red light or a stop sign once (or twice, or 1000 times, it doesn't matter), that makes you a dick, and that's on you.

    --Jeremy

    --
    Jesus was a liberal
  9. Hit and runs are NEVER "accidents". by CalRobert · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you hit somebody and leave them to spend their last gasping breath in a gutter, it is not an "accident". It is manslaughter, or if a prank as described above, cold-hearted murder. I hate, hate, hate the US' auto-centric point of view. Tens of thousands of people per year are killed because of it. It needs to end. I hope I can get permanent residency outside of that cesspool.

    1. Re:Hit and runs are NEVER "accidents". by wisnoskij · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That is false, it is entirely possible to accidentally perform a hit and run.

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    2. Re:Hit and runs are NEVER "accidents". by Chryana · · Score: 2

      Well, if you hit a cyclist and don't even notice it, which is why you "ran", maybe you should not be driving, accident or not.

    3. Re:Hit and runs are NEVER "accidents". by quantaman · · Score: 2

      I've never been in an accident but once when I was in high school I saw some kids riding a quad in the ditch do an unintentional backflip. Even though it was the right thing to do I hesitated half a second before stopping just because I was worried I'd go out and have to deal with something real traumatic. Fortunately I did stop, more fortunately so did an off duty nurse, and most fortunately all the kids were fine.

      Anyway I can kind of understand why the drivers keep going, they didn't hurt the person on purpose and pro-actively stopping the vehicle and taking responsibility is a hard thing to do. That being said it's still their responsibility to do that hard thing.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    4. Re:Hit and runs are NEVER "accidents". by Artifakt · · Score: 2

      It is possible to accidentally perform the actual hit. To run afterwards means you either knew you hit the person and then had depraved indifference to the potential to stop and assist and just maybe save that person's life, or that you were so unaware of what you were doing that you had a legal obligation not to drive in that condition, and the depraved indifference enters automatically at that point even if it's before the collision even happened. That's how my state views a hit and run fatality - you can't do one accidentally, because at some point in the process you had to deliberately decide to do what you did even if it resulted in you killing somebody. That's manslaughter at minimum, usually with aggravating conditions. Try and claim to a judge that the whole thing was somehow accidental and see what happens - it's a good way to get the maximum sentence.

      --
      Who is John Cabal?
  10. Re:Probably a prank gone wrong. by CanHasDIY · · Score: 2

    Holy shit! From the article:

    Witnesses told police that the car, a late-1990s or early 2000s model, slowed quickly and swerved before hitting Vidal and continuing north on Hillandale Road.

    It certainly sounds like a sad "prank" as you said. WTF?

    Depends; did they swerve towards or away from the cyclist? TFA seems to have missed that not-so-minor detail.

    My guess is (assuming the driver swerved away) is that the driver didn't see him until it was too late, and tried to avoid by slamming on the binders and swerving.

    IMO, That part makes sense, and is perfectly reasonable; The "Oh shit I think I hit that guy so I'm GONE" reaction is where the driver went from "human who made a mistake" to "worthless piece of shit that deserves hard time in fed-max."

    --
    An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  11. Driver turned himself in... by MrKevvy · · Score: 4, Informative

    http://www.wral.com/man-charged-in-durham-hit-and-run-that-killed-bicyclist/12644209/

    --
    -- Insert witty one-liner here. --
  12. Re:This is why... by lightBearer · · Score: 2

    I've been practicing ways to make my fellow cyclists pay more attention to their dick behaviour.

    My most recent attempt is to yell "confirmation bias" whenever I see one of us doing something like ignoring a stop sign or blowing a light. The idea is that, when they come back (and normally get aggressive thinking I was cussing them out) I explain that every dick move they make makes all of us look bad.

    That leads me to you drivers: you see those of us who cut you off and blow the light. You see the ones who split the lane and haul ass to the light so they can be first out the gate when it changes. You don't see most of us who are being cautious because, in our caution, we're staying the fuck out of your way. Trust me: we exist.

    I hope this driver is found and has to answer for what they did. I hope more of us cyclists start caring about how being killed in traffic affects us all.

    --
    - No Bounce, No Play -
  13. Re:Probably a prank gone wrong. by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Which is why you carry one of those emergency hammers designed to shatter tempered glass. It gets their attention. And when asked how I hit them with the hammer I asked how they were within arms reach when the law states there is a minimum 3' passing distance.

  14. Re:This is why... by Antibozo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yea, OK, so if you and your cyclists buddies want to get together and raise the money to pay for dedicated bike paths, I'll support using public land to build them.

    However, if you're like many of the d-bags around these parts who want their private bike streets paid for with my road and fuel taxes... You can go piss up a rope.

    You know that most cyclists have cars, and drive, too, so they're paying fuel taxes right alongside you, right? But when they're riding their bikes, they're using up a lot less space on the roads, reducing congestion and leaving more room for you to get around. Compared with cars, bikes contribute virtually no wear on roads, and areas paved for bike traffic cost a fraction of what regular rated roads cost, because of the dramatically reduced load requirements. When cyclists get where they're going, they will lock up to a bike rack that fits 20 vehicles in the area of a parking space, leaving more parking for you to put your car in. They're also reducing gasoline demand, which might slightly lower the price you pay at the pump. As a driver, you stand to gain in numerous ways from others' cycling.

    And fuel taxes don't cover the cost of the roads, anyway, mainly because they've been essentially stagnant while the cost of fuel increased fivefold. Drivers' use of the roads is heavily subsidized now by general taxation, so you don't get to point at cyclists and say they're the freeloaders.

    http://dc.streetsblog.org/2013/01/23/drivers-cover-just-51-percent-of-u-s-road-spending/
    http://www.uspirg.org/reports/usp/do-roads-pay-themselves

  15. Re:This is why... by Antibozo · · Score: 2

    If someone on a bike runs a red light or stop sign and they get hit, that's their bad and that's on them; they'll get no sympathy from me.

    Go hang out at a stop sign one day and count the percentage of cars you see actually stop. Pot, kettle, black.

    http://washcycle.typepad.com/home/2008/07/the-myth-of-the.html

  16. Re:aptitude update by armanox · · Score: 2

    Delta RPMs for one.

    --
    I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.
  17. Re:additional advice: by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 4, Informative

    i will be riding and walking against traffic out of self-preservation, and will continue to advise others to do the same

    Sure, do whatever you want, but please don't advise others. What you're doing is dangerous and illegal. Here's what others say:

    Is it safer for bicyclists to ride with traffic or to ride against traffic?

    Bicyclists should ride with traffic. One of the keys to safe bicycling is to be as predictable and as conspicuous as possible so that motorists always know you are there and can predict what you are going to do. By riding against traffic -- especially on the sidewalk -- you make yourself almost invisible to motorists turning at intersections and driveways who may not be expecting or looking for road users coming from your direction. Indeed, as many as one in four bicycle/motor vehicle collisions involve a rider who is either riding against traffic and/or riding on the sidewalk.

    In a lengthy article explaining why riding the wrong way against traffic is dangerous, author Ken Kifer explores the three principle dangers:

    • Turning motorists are not looking where wrong-way riders are riding.
    • The motorist and bicyclist have limited time and little space in which to react to each others' presence.
    • The closing speed of a bicyclist and motorist riding head on into each other is higher than if the bicyclist and motorist were traveling in the same direction.

    He also points out that riding with traffic decreases the number of vehicles passing you, and doesn't bring you into conflict with bicyclists who are riding the right way with traffic!

    There are many, many others sites with similar information: http://www.capitalbikeshare.com/news/2012/02/24/never-ride-against-traffic or simply Google: bicycle ride "(with|against)" traffic

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  18. Re:This is why... by Antibozo · · Score: 2

    From your link:

    So bikers complied with stop signs at a rate nearly 1/20th of the average of all vehicles. And you were trying to disprove them about bikers consistently riding through stop signs?

    I don't think you read the essay very thoroughly. The point was not that cyclists do not run stop signs; it is that pretty much everyone runs stop signs. The difference is that, when a cyclist does it, it's very rarely dangerous to anyone, and when it is dangerous, the danger is usually to the cyclist. But a cyclist running a stop sign has a much better read on the situation because he can actually see and hear what is around him. Similarly, people jaywalk constantly but very rarely get killed, because they aren't encased in soundproof glass and metal when they do so.

    Meanwhile, the "1/20" you cite is a rather absurd abstraction; the average compliance for all vehicles in the study you refer to was only 22.8%. So fewer than 1 in 4 people in general are stopping at stop signs, but you think cyclists are somehow the problem when they're only 1-5% of the road population?

    The essay doesn't say that cyclists should run stop signs (although in Idaho, stop signs are relaxed to yield signs for cyclists). It points out that there's nothing unique about their doing so, and compliance with stop signs is not a logical prerequisite for extending sympathy or protection to any particular population of road users. The irrational way drivers tend to respond when they see cyclists break a minor law is, in most cases, deeply hypocritical. Drivers annually kill in excess of 30,000 people in the U.S. alone. Cyclists kill a couple. The risk profile is several orders of magnitude different, but drivers don't seem to recognize that when they get all pissy because they just saw a cyclist run a stop sign.

  19. Or bright yellow with reflective strips by aepervius · · Score: 2

    I got a special vest just for that. It is very thin (does not protect against wind or heat or rain or anything whatsoever) so I can wear it above any clothing I got. It is very very bright yellow, with a lot of reflective strips before me, on the side, and behind me. Did you see worker on the road at night ? Same as this but on thhin material. You can also buy such a night worker best, they are rather expansive and protect from rain (I saw one at 250 euro) but they are thick and you can't wear over your clothing. The reflective bands are usually very wide and also overall. Going at night without those reflective bands, even with white clothing is not good enough, too many people "speed" and by the time they see you it is too late. Reflective bands make you see from much further away.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
    1. Re:Or bright yellow with reflective strips by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2

      One of our former students is now starting a company that produces vests with built-in LEDs. They're bright glowing red from the back and white from the front. They, alone, are bright enough that you exceed the minimum legal requirements for bike lights at night even if you don't have any lights on the bike itself. Even better, they have flashing yellow lights in the arms that are activated when you lift the arm to the horizontal position. They're currently circulating some prototypes, but I'm looking forward to seeing them hit the market.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  20. Re:This is why... by Razed+By+TV · · Score: 2

    This is not a valid counterpoint. I've seen a a biker ride off the sidewalk, from behind a tree, in front of a car that had the right of way. Thank god the car stopped in time.
    If he hadn't, even though the accident would be the biker's fault, it is still going to mess up the driver psychologically. You can tell me all you want that the biker has the right to be stupid because he is the one that pays the cost. However, you overlook that the driver pays as well.

  21. yeah, the police get right on those cases by SuperBanana · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You should - vehicular assault is a serious offence, and if your video can be used to prove malice, those sociopathic pricks will be confined to a cell where they belong.

    BWHAHAAHAHAHAHAHA. I had someone sideswipe me and then intentionally "brake check" me (looked in his mirror right at me, glaring, and slammed on his brakes, with nothing in front of him, no intersection, etc.) I gave the cops a complete plate and description and they said there was nothing they could do, because I hadn't been injured - even though the driver, in side-swiping me, had caused a "collision" and by leaving, a hit-and-run - and by stopping in the middle of the road, driven recklessly.

    I've been wanting a dash cam for the opposite reason - a lot of the cyclists around here are either stupid or have a deathwish, judging by how flagrantly they violate right-of-way laws.

    No, "a lot" of cyclists don't have deathwishes nor are they stupid. You just think they do, because they're a minority outgroup - so you exaggerate negative attributes. The vast majority of cyclist crashes are caused by drivers operating recklessly or illegally. And what right-of-way laws would those be, by the way? Let me guess: you think that you have a right of way over someone on a bicycle, right? Yeah, you don't, actually.

    --
    Please help metamoderate.
    1. Re:yeah, the police get right on those cases by Common+Joe · · Score: 2

      No, "a lot" of cyclists don't have deathwishes nor are they stupid. You just think they do, because they're a minority outgroup - so you exaggerate negative attributes. The vast majority of cyclist crashes are caused by drivers operating recklessly or illegally.

      As a frequent driver, bicyclist, and pedestrian, I think all three "classes" of people have significant amounts of stupidity, recklessness, and high-probability-danger in them. How many cars follow the two second rule? How many bicyclist run red lights? How many pedestrians actually dress well (bright colors at night) and are predictable to where they are going before stepping into a street? I would argue that in all three cases, about 75% of the people I typically encounter are not well trained to drive, bike, or even walk safely.

  22. you're victim-blaming as well. by SuperBanana · · Score: 5, Insightful

    He's not "blaming the victim," he's pointing out a safety tip for those of you who don't understand the basic physics of how our eyes work, you Fuck.

    Yes, actually, the poster (we don't know it's a "he"...) is perpetuating victim-blaming of cyclists for their injuries and deaths. It's rampant in the US.

    1)The cause is unknown (ie, it's not known that visibility was the problem, so how he was dressed is moot) 2)The onus is not on cyclists to dress in a particular way, the onus is on people with the very nice headlights on the front of a very deadly machine to operate that machine properly and be able to avoid a 6 foot tall, 3 foot wide object in the road traveling in the same direction as them 3)In stories like these, people (especially those who don't cycle) take it as an opportunity to condescendingly lecture those of us who do, about how to ride our bicycles. Seth, for example, was apparently an avid cycling advocate, which means he was damn well aware of how to ride "safely", probably knew the laws better than most drivers, and almost certainly had lights, which means he was plenty "visible."

    In almost every story about cyclist injuries and deaths, the comments are hateful, vile, and portray the problem as being everything from cyclists merely being present, to how they behave (despite the fact that drivers are at fault in the vast majority of crashes, as numerous studies have proven), to, yes, how they dress. We're apparently at fault if we're not dressed like psycho day-glo clowns.

    Let's take a look at some of the comments on TFA, shall we?

    • "they don't belong on the roads."
    • "Riding a bicycle at 9pm on a major road is a statistic about to happen. How many people are going to have to die before laws are changed concerning cyclists?"
    • "Did the bike have lights? Was the man in night riding "bright" clothes?"
    • "If a bicyclist is going to be riding at nights - you need some kind of reflective wear so that the vehicles can better see them - I'm not taking sides, but I've driven on roads at night and have passed bicyclists and could barely see them"
    • "the car driver might not have been in the wrong...a bike, at 9pm is close to invisible, especially with glare of oncoming headlights."
    • "he should have been wearing reflective clothing too..I didn't see anything in the article about him wearing reflective clothing..."
    • "I hate seeing cyclists on the road! roads are too dangerous for bikes, period."

    Now do you understand why the comment wasn't appropriate? The comparison to rape victims is quite accurate; rape victims used to be blamed for going out at night, or not having a "friend" (male) with them, to not carrying self-defense devices, to being dressed "like that."

    I was just struck by a driver recently. The ER doctor finished up his exam by instructing me to "ride defensively" and "bike carefully." I had been operating legally and prudently, and the driver in a split second cut me off and stopped - blocking the road. There was nothing I could do. I was a victim. And the ER doctor was lecturing me, implying it was my fault for not being "careful" enough.

    --
    Please help metamoderate.
  23. be more visible to people NOT LOOKING....? by SuperBanana · · Score: 4, Informative

    White does not always help. If you ride at night, use bright headlights and taillaights. I commute by bicycle and have lights on regardless of time of day. Too many drivers just do not pay sufficient attention.

    Bright headlights and taillights do not always help. If you ride at night, use dayglo clothing, flags, strobe lights, and pyrotechnics. Too many drivers just do not pay sufficient attention.

    If they're "not paying attention" (aka not looking at the road), please explain to me how "being more visible" will help....

    I've been hit in the middle of the day, I've been doored despite having a very bright headlight, and I've been cut off ("right hooked") by someone who just passed me, again in the day. Visibility has nothing to do with it. It's about drivers thinking they have the right of way over us universally, and it's about drivers not looking.

    In most studies, the number of crashes vs time has little to do with daylight, and everything to do with rush hour - ie people driving aggressively, and traffic density.

    --
    Please help metamoderate.
  24. about those taxes by SuperBanana · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Dear Richard Allen Black,

    "my road and fuel taxes"

    There's no such thing as a road tax, and fuel taxes don't pay for roads. Not even close, because they haven't been adjusted for fuel efficiency nor for inflation since before you were born. In almost every country, roads are paid for by property and income taxes.

    Second, your car (especially if you drive an SUV or pickup) causes wear and tear on the road. My bicycle does not. Your state has one of the highest highway death rates in the country, so while my bicycle doesn't cause property damage, injury and death...your car sure as hell does, and at great cost to others and the state.

    Third, you live in Montana, which is in the top ten in terms of states which take the most in federal taxes relative to what the federal government spends on you. You're leeches, by a ratio of 2:1; you pay $4k in taxes and the federal government spends $8k on your stupid, ignorant ass. Those roads you drive on? You didn't pay for them, hick.

    Where's my rebate check from you and your road-damaging, federal-tax-leeching "d-bags"?

    --
    Please help metamoderate.
  25. Re:North Carolina drivers are the worst in the US. by tepples · · Score: 2

    So instead of a bicycle, what do you recommend for getting to parts of town not served by public transit or for getting around on days when public transit does not operate? If you recommend a car, how do you recommend that one obtain the state-mandated 50 hours of verifiable supervised driving practice?

  26. Yum by Trogre · · Score: 2

    A very useful tool, and indispensable to users of Fedora, CentOS, Scientific Linux. Yum did for rpm what apt-get did for dpkg.

    Thank you, Seth.

    --
    "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  27. Re:Had a bicyclist blow through a red-light today by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2

    Last week, I pulled up to a red light and took a photograph of the car that had stopped with three of its wheels in the cycle lane (lights here often have a strip of cycle lane across the front so that bikes that are turning can get out of the way as soon as the lights change). The driver seemed to take exception to this, gesticulated and then drove off. Straight through the red light.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  28. As a sysadmin who cares for lots of RHEL/CentOS.. by Mysticalfruit · · Score: 2

    My job would be a lot harder if it wasn't for yum. Thanks Seth. My condolences to your family.

    --
    Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
  29. DUI kills more people than intentional homicide by SuperBanana · · Score: 2

    18,000 people died in 2006 from DUI crashes.

    That's 4,000 more than homicides. So yes, it's pretty "heinous" and should get "insane" punishment. The problem is the punishments aren't insane enough; they sound "insane", but the criminals just get right back in their cars and kill/main more people.

    Every time you get behind the wheel and you're drunk/high, you're loading a handgun with a bullet, spinning the chamber, and pointing it at innocent people on the road, and pulling the trigger.

    The difference is that you're very often driving to a store where they happily sell you that gun and bullet knowing full well you're going to get into your car and play roulette with it.

    No gun store in the country would sell you a gun knowing you'd do that, yet millions of bars serve patrons who drove to their establishments, knowing full well they're going to get back into their cars, drunk.

    --
    Please help metamoderate.