Re:Good for the young, healthy, & coordinated
on
How Safe Is Cycling?
·
· Score: 1
We have a local rider who rides at our Velodrome at 84. Its hard to keep up with him on the road as well. [Our track has steep 46 degree corners, you have to maintain a speed over 30km/h simply to stay on the track.]
Re:Good for the young, healthy, & coordinated
on
How Safe Is Cycling?
·
· Score: 1
The elderly and frail get that way by not getting enough exercise. If you don't stress your muscles as you age you lose muscle mass quickly. If you maintain an active life style and stress your muscles you can maintain high level of physical intensity well into your 60's and 70's.
Most people don't simply because it is simply hard work and they don't like to exercise that is hard work. It also takes a fair amount of time and commitment.
Because unless the bike-path IS a bike-path it is more probably multi-use. And pedestrians are far more dangerous than cars.
For commuting, bike-paths are typically not well suited as they don't always go from where you are to where you want to get to. If you have a 20 mile commute you want to do that at 20mph and not have to extend it to 25 miles and lower your speed down to 12mph because of pedestrians.
Bike paths are great for local commuters, kids, tourists etc. They are very rarely suitable for commuting or distance training.
So the Netherlands has made the decision that having people riding bikes is more beneficial than having people driving cars. Less pollution, less wasted resources, people are healthier from the exercise and have more money left in their pockets from not having to pay for a car, gas and insurance. Good for them.
We have covered that already. That was during racing. Not during riding on the road.
Re:It would be safer if cyclists followed traffic
on
How Safe Is Cycling?
·
· Score: 1
And I have never ever not even once seen a car blast through a late yellow going to red, roll through a stop sign, go left across traffic, swerve into other lanes, etc... Drivers are always courteous and follow the rules of the road 100% of the time, probably even staying just under the maximum speed while looking for puppies and kids they can stop and pull off the road.
What universe are you living in? Car and truck (and bus) drivers are just as bad as any cyclist.
I'll point out that when I'm on my bike, in my lane, I'll often do a California rolling stop for Stop signs. Part of the reason is simple courtesy to the cars behind me. If I have to stop then I have to unclip. That means I have to re-clip and restart. That adds 5-8 seconds to my getting through the intersection. Which tends to piss off the cars behind me. So if it is safe, roll through and get through the intersection faster.
Tried that. Couldn't get much response from city AND less response from any magnet small enough to actually attach to a road bike (its possible that multi-pound one would work, and I think you can get those for motorcycles where the weight and size is not an issue.)
I race bikes on the road and at the track. We get lots of crashes. We get lots of broken bones (collar bones, wrists, shoulder blade, ribs and hips in roughly that order.) These are almost all due to rider in-attention or in-appropriate movement in large packs. The number of people killed is very low (i.e. I'm simply unaware of any, as in zero, period, for local racing, I can remember one or two in pro-racing Grand Tours over 10 years). The number of people that spend a night in the hospital is low. Even people who need a pin or plate are typically sent home and come back the next day for a fast surgery (in and out the same day.) Overnight stays typically relate to broken ribs and breathing problems.
The vast majority of cycling deaths that I'm aware of are due to cars hitting cyclists. With additional ones from drivers opening doors, a rider avoiding a pedestrian and hitting the ditch.
The almost canonical worst case is an inattentive driver plowing into the back of a peloton of riders at speed (i.e. > 50Mph). Worst case because the cyclists simply don't have any chance of avoiding it because they don't see the vehicle approaching.
Overall, based on competitive cyclists who race. We get injured MORE racing... but when we get injured training (i.e. on the road, not racing, just training) it typically involves a car and the injuries are more severe.
Not worthless at all... four crashes... all related to racing.
But four decades of riding WITHOUT crashes is definitely a worthwhile datapoint.
It is possible that someone who has been riding that long and does bike racing may be more cognizant of his surroundings when riding compared to non competitive riders.
Since its a login app and not a browser.... the only thing it can do is display what site it thinks you are trying to authenticate to and then authenticate you to it if you say to continue. And all that does is allow the existing session (on the possibly different system) browser connect without requiring further authentication.
MIM and Phishing attacks might be possible, but no more probable or possible than existing login's. And with this system the MIM or Phisher doesn't gain any additional information about you. Just a unique login that can only be reproduced by you if you visit again.
The primary attraction is that is two-party authentication and not three-party.
It also may be more convenient if widely deployed and there are some friendly user agents. You simply won't have to remember separate login and passwords for all those random small web sites that want you to create an account before you can interact with them (to download a file, leave a comment, verify a mailing address, get documentation, etc etc etc.)
Probably not for use when connecting to those two or three places that actually need really secure and private authentication (PayPal and your Bank and.. hmmm that might be it.)
Since not everyone knows about bananas and radiation we should put a nice little radiation warning symbol sticker on every banana so that everybody can recognize the risk and make a sensible decision about whether they want to eat it.
Also all methods of access to Denver (roads leading in, airport etc) should have large warning nuclear warning signs so that everybody can make a sensible decision about whether they want to visit or not.
It might be dangerous so I for one just will avoid visiting Denver or eating any more bananas. After all ANY level of radiation MIGHT be dangerous. I may be past my prime reproductive years but certainly I don't want take ANY chances at all. Also I will be moving my basement office to the second floor. I've heard there might be some radon gas down here... And I plan on only going out at night (or in the day I'll stay inside my car.)
With this very careful regime my anti-radiation friends and I will simply out live all of you nuts who keep claiming that radiation is natural and safe in low dosages.
The difference is that there is little societal benefit to NOT having your chicken pox vaccine but there is a huge benefit to people being able to eat.
We put up with 30,000 + deaths a year so that people can easily get around using cars. Simply lowering the maximum speed on highways to 30 mph and in the city to 10 mph would be a huge win WRT to deaths. But the tremendous cost to society mitigates against that.
When there is a small cost against a small but incremental benefit it is still a good idea to do it. If you can conclusively demonstrate that the cost to society from 100% use of any vaccination is higher than the cost of not vaccination we can (and should) have a discussion. Be prepared however to defend against the "but one child saved" groups.
Exactly, the ongoing experiment demonstrating the safety of powered on devices has been happening for years. N times 1000's of flights per day with M times 100's of passengers on each flight. Virtually every one of those passengers owns and is carrying one or more devices (cell phone, reader, etc.)
What is the estimated percentage of those who will either a) ignore, b) forget, c) be unable to actually turn off their device. Is it 1%, 10%, 50%? Estimate the average number of devices left on and probability of any flight taking off WITH all of those devices turned off.
At say 5% that means that probably every flight every day takes off with possibly 5-20 devices powered on.
Its highly improbable that any commercial flight these days takes off with all devices turned off!
More than a few good EE types work for Al Qaeda... IFF it was possible to easily modify these devices to cause jets to crash it would have happened by now.
If we don't defend our Lightning cables when they come to take them away from our iPhones, will we be able to defend them when they come to take them away from or iPads and iPods!
For people in in the IOSphere iStandardization across our various iDevices is more important than across other devices we simply do not, would not and will not ever own. Especially when that standard is sub-standard in various ways (orientation of connector problem, inferior design of jacks and plugs, lower wattage available for charging.)
The better standard would simply require standardization at the OTHER end of the cable. Require all phones to come with a cable that has a standard USB A plug. That can then be charged into any USB Charger or USB Host. And BTW Apple already provides that. Both a USB to Lightning cable and a USB charger.
This was (IMHO) the intent of the USB Charging Standard. Make the wall warts standard. Plug any device that wants to charge into that with an appropriate standard (at that end) cable. Mandating the connector at the phone end is not required.
10 miles is silly. First in many areas its not enough. Around New Orleans and probably in Florida lots of places farther inland still in danger.
On the other hand I live less than a kilometer from the Pacific Ocean. But at 100m above sea level would be pretty safe. More worried about things higher up coming down than anything coming up.
Why the mod down. Sandy was a tropical storm (as measured by wind speed) when it hit New York.
The super is due to the amount of damages which is due to the amount of expensive infrastructure that was built in areas that were vulnerable to that type of storm.
Which is interesting because those cars actually get much better gas mileage than their predecessors. Presumably if you scaled the size and weight back to 50% (i.e. what you impute to be the weight a decade or so ago) then gas mileage would improve substantially.
Properly done with modern composites it wouldn't necessarily mean a total loss in safety either.
Slashdot Mirror
We have a local rider who rides at our Velodrome at 84. Its hard to keep up with him on the road as well. [Our track has steep 46 degree corners, you have to maintain a speed over 30km/h simply to stay on the track.]
The elderly and frail get that way by not getting enough exercise. If you don't stress your muscles as you age you lose muscle mass quickly. If you maintain an active life style and stress your muscles you can maintain high level of physical intensity well into your 60's and 70's.
Most people don't simply because it is simply hard work and they don't like to exercise that is hard work. It also takes a fair amount of time and commitment.
Because unless the bike-path IS a bike-path it is more probably multi-use. And pedestrians are far more dangerous than cars.
For commuting, bike-paths are typically not well suited as they don't always go from where you are to where you want to get to. If you have a 20 mile commute you want to do that at 20mph and not have to extend it to 25 miles and lower your speed down to 12mph because of pedestrians.
Bike paths are great for local commuters, kids, tourists etc. They are very rarely suitable for commuting or distance training.
So the Netherlands has made the decision that having people riding bikes is more beneficial than having people driving cars. Less pollution, less wasted resources, people are healthier from the exercise and have more money left in their pockets from not having to pay for a car, gas and insurance. Good for them.
We have covered that already. That was during racing. Not during riding on the road.
And I have never ever not even once seen a car blast through a late yellow going to red, roll through a stop sign, go left across traffic, swerve into other lanes, etc... Drivers are always courteous and follow the rules of the road 100% of the time, probably even staying just under the maximum speed while looking for puppies and kids they can stop and pull off the road.
What universe are you living in? Car and truck (and bus) drivers are just as bad as any cyclist.
I'll point out that when I'm on my bike, in my lane, I'll often do a California rolling stop for Stop signs. Part of the reason is simple courtesy to the cars behind me. If I have to stop then I have to unclip. That means I have to re-clip and restart. That adds 5-8 seconds to my getting through the intersection. Which tends to piss off the cars behind me. So if it is safe, roll through and get through the intersection faster.
Tried that. Couldn't get much response from city AND less response from any magnet small enough to actually attach to a road bike (its possible that multi-pound one would work, and I think you can get those for motorcycles where the weight and size is not an issue.)
Significant? Is 1-2% significant? 10-20%?
Please quantify.
I race bikes on the road and at the track. We get lots of crashes. We get lots of broken bones (collar bones, wrists, shoulder blade, ribs and hips in roughly that order.) These are almost all due to rider in-attention or in-appropriate movement in large packs. The number of people killed is very low (i.e. I'm simply unaware of any, as in zero, period, for local racing, I can remember one or two in pro-racing Grand Tours over 10 years). The number of people that spend a night in the hospital is low. Even people who need a pin or plate are typically sent home and come back the next day for a fast surgery (in and out the same day.) Overnight stays typically relate to broken ribs and breathing problems.
The vast majority of cycling deaths that I'm aware of are due to cars hitting cyclists. With additional ones from drivers opening doors, a rider avoiding a pedestrian and hitting the ditch.
The almost canonical worst case is an inattentive driver plowing into the back of a peloton of riders at speed (i.e. > 50Mph). Worst case because the cyclists simply don't have any chance of avoiding it because they don't see the vehicle approaching.
Overall, based on competitive cyclists who race. We get injured MORE racing... but when we get injured training (i.e. on the road, not racing, just training) it typically involves a car and the injuries are more severe.
Not worthless at all... four crashes... all related to racing.
But four decades of riding WITHOUT crashes is definitely a worthwhile datapoint.
It is possible that someone who has been riding that long and does bike racing may be more cognizant of his surroundings when riding compared to non competitive riders.
Ah, so Microsoft is running the unoptimized Apple drivers on the Surface tablets..
That explains everything!
Since its a login app and not a browser.... the only thing it can do is display what site it thinks you are trying to authenticate to and then authenticate you to it if you say to continue. And all that does is allow the existing session (on the possibly different system) browser connect without requiring further authentication.
MIM and Phishing attacks might be possible, but no more probable or possible than existing login's. And with this system the MIM or Phisher doesn't gain any additional information about you. Just a unique login that can only be reproduced by you if you visit again.
The primary attraction is that is two-party authentication and not three-party.
It also may be more convenient if widely deployed and there are some friendly user agents. You simply won't have to remember separate login and passwords for all those random small web sites that want you to create an account before you can interact with them (to download a file, leave a comment, verify a mailing address, get documentation, etc etc etc.)
Probably not for use when connecting to those two or three places that actually need really secure and private authentication (PayPal and your Bank and .. hmmm that might be it.)
Will be interesting to see if it goes anywhere.
Since not everyone knows about bananas and radiation we should put a nice little radiation warning symbol sticker on every banana so that everybody can recognize the risk and make a sensible decision about whether they want to eat it.
Also all methods of access to Denver (roads leading in, airport etc) should have large warning nuclear warning signs so that everybody can make a sensible decision about whether they want to visit or not.
It might be dangerous so I for one just will avoid visiting Denver or eating any more bananas. After all ANY level of radiation MIGHT be dangerous. I may be past my prime reproductive years but certainly I don't want take ANY chances at all. Also I will be moving my basement office to the second floor. I've heard there might be some radon gas down here... And I plan on only going out at night (or in the day I'll stay inside my car.)
With this very careful regime my anti-radiation friends and I will simply out live all of you nuts who keep claiming that radiation is natural and safe in low dosages.
You are ignoring the right of everyone else not to live with you if you refuse to take sensible precautions against disease.
As is commonly accepted your right to hit me does not prevail over my right not to be hit.
The difference is that there is little societal benefit to NOT having your chicken pox vaccine but there is a huge benefit to people being able to eat.
We put up with 30,000 + deaths a year so that people can easily get around using cars. Simply lowering the maximum speed on highways to 30 mph and in the city to 10 mph would be a huge win WRT to deaths. But the tremendous cost to society mitigates against that.
When there is a small cost against a small but incremental benefit it is still a good idea to do it. If you can conclusively demonstrate that the cost to society from 100% use of any vaccination is higher than the cost of not vaccination we can (and should) have a discussion. Be prepared however to defend against the "but one child saved" groups.
Exactly, the ongoing experiment demonstrating the safety of powered on devices has been happening for years. N times 1000's of flights per day with M times 100's of passengers on each flight. Virtually every one of those passengers owns and is carrying one or more devices (cell phone, reader, etc.)
What is the estimated percentage of those who will either a) ignore, b) forget, c) be unable to actually turn off their device. Is it 1%, 10%, 50%? Estimate the average number of devices left on and probability of any flight taking off WITH all of those devices turned off.
At say 5% that means that probably every flight every day takes off with possibly 5-20 devices powered on.
Its highly improbable that any commercial flight these days takes off with all devices turned off!
More than a few good EE types work for Al Qaeda... IFF it was possible to easily modify these devices to cause jets to crash it would have happened by now.
IOS 7 runs on pretty much everything newer than the iPhone 3GS.
iPhone 4 runs IOS7 (2010 design).
iPhone 4S runs IOS7 (2011 design) and is still being sold.
What 2011 Android phone runs the most current version of Android and is STILL being sold?
If we don't defend our Lightning cables when they come to take them away from our iPhones, will we be able to defend them when they come to take them away from or iPads and iPods!
For people in in the IOSphere iStandardization across our various iDevices is more important than across other devices we simply do not, would not and will not ever own. Especially when that standard is sub-standard in various ways (orientation of connector problem, inferior design of jacks and plugs, lower wattage available for charging.)
The better standard would simply require standardization at the OTHER end of the cable. Require all phones to come with a cable that has a standard USB A plug. That can then be charged into any USB Charger or USB Host. And BTW Apple already provides that. Both a USB to Lightning cable and a USB charger.
This was (IMHO) the intent of the USB Charging Standard. Make the wall warts standard. Plug any device that wants to charge into that with an appropriate standard (at that end) cable. Mandating the connector at the phone end is not required.
20% less cool and half the amps..
Not a huge problem for your iPhone probably. But definitely a problem for your iPad.
And literally (really literally not emphatically literally) the iPad chargers are not less cool. They get pretty warm :-)
10 miles is silly. First in many areas its not enough. Around New Orleans and probably in Florida lots of places farther inland still in danger.
On the other hand I live less than a kilometer from the Pacific Ocean. But at 100m above sea level would be pretty safe. More worried about things higher up coming down than anything coming up.
Why the mod down. Sandy was a tropical storm (as measured by wind speed) when it hit New York.
The super is due to the amount of damages which is due to the amount of expensive infrastructure that was built in areas that were vulnerable to that type of storm.
Which is interesting because those cars actually get much better gas mileage than their predecessors. Presumably if you scaled the size and weight back to 50% (i.e. what you impute to be the weight a decade or so ago) then gas mileage would improve substantially.
Properly done with modern composites it wouldn't necessarily mean a total loss in safety either.
Emissions per square kilometer. Makes it easy to compare any region anywhere....
If you are paying for Google App's account they don't scan for Ad's.