Comment by cucumber3732842
21 hours ago
> Laws for drivers written by people with chauffeurs.
Not even that. They know the laws are stupid. They don't care. It's just another day at work for them. They're trying to surgically write laws to garner support/votes from shorsighted hand wringing Karens (plenty of examples in HN comments) while also not actually hurting industry/donors.
So stupid rules and stupid beeps are what you get.
Women's suffrage was the stupidest thing humanity ever did. And the general populace is still not ready to admit the mistake, as proven by the expected incoming downvotes.
I'm not going to upvote you, because I don't agree. I do hope they don't bury this though. A lot of people (some women included) think as you do. But I have never felt comfortable asking why in person. As long as you are exposing yourself to ridicule would you mind explaining? The obvious answer was always the notion that women make decisions on emotions more often, but is that really well supported? My experience is that they simply make decisions based on different emotions.
Edit: I think most destructive decisions are made in fear, and everyone does that sometimes. But we fear different things.
Anyone who's working on making driving a car unbearable has my vote! My bicycle has a single chime and it's manually operated.
Let me guess: You get your groceries delivered by some underpaid sucker? While I enjoy biking it's impractical many times (if you don't live a sheltered life with people doing all the annoying stuff for you).
We have those inner city bike extremists here, too. There's proposals like banning all motorized traffic from the city because you "can walk to your bakery duh". But they never ask themselves how the baker gets all his materials to the bakery.
To be fair it depends so much on the city. Oxford is a great example, driving there is a hellish experience because it's a historic place with notable buildings which too important to knock down, especially in order to replace them with roads and car parks. They try to cram cars in anyway and it's just miserable. In reality the whole city centre should be pedestrianised because that's what the city is actually supposed to be designed around. Remove the private cars and buses, taxis, and yes of course delivery drivers will have plenty of room.
This perfectly legitimate argument for Oxford would be silly to make about say Milton Keynes.
I own a car and a bike. I wouldn’t mind if cars were banned or very heavily restricted in the city.
I have a trailer for the bike, we can haul 100 lbs. it’s more than enough.
Businesses can be allowed to get deliveries, just personal cars are restricted.
In my city, many businesses have switched to operating from a cargo bike: plumbers, electricians, even mechanics.
2 replies →
Depends on where they live. Groceries don’t have to be a weekly run to a far flung place to get a truck bed full of stuff. It can be a daily visit to a neighborhood supermarket on your way home. If zoning laws allow those can exist.
1 reply →
> But they never ask themselves how the baker gets all his materials to the bakery.
You can allow transport for business (speed-limited to 30 km/h or ~20 mph) and ban individual's cars. There are busses, trams and subway and there is no need to have a car.
1 reply →
It won't work for everyone, but I have a bicycle trailer for food shopping. 20 minutes ride each way. I go about once a week.
I have car and rarely use it for grocerries. I walk to shop and buy stuff. I take car only rarely, when I need to go far.
The condescending assumptions people make when they dont have arguments are getting absurd.
No, I walk 200 meters to Billa or Lidl, or less to one of the plethora of small grocery stores.
giving up your freedom to limit others in the name of safety seems unwise.
too much control creates a generation behave like the kids.
Oh, the good old cars are freedom cliché? Thank you, I feel perfectly free when I don't have to worry about parking, gas, maintenance, taxes, inadvertently killing anyone, polluting...
8 replies →
If your primary mode of transportation is a bicycle and you're cheering shit that annoys and (critically) distracts motorists you might have a death wish.
I feel compelled to mention that the vast majority of cyclists are part of a household which owns a car, as well.
Yeah, the occupants of the car won't be dying, I'm pretty sure every collision is survivable with seatbelts on with modern cars that have a meter of crumple zone in every direction and look like bloated whales. But pedestrians, cyclists, and motorcyclists are gonna die on impact with them.
Solidarity. Cars belong in the rubbish bin of history. The Soviet Union had the right idea, as usual--make cars unbearable to drive to encourage public transportation.
I don’t think you’ve ever lived under SU rules.
1 reply →
While not in the SU directly, I got to enjoy public transport in communist Poland for a few years and yeah, you don't want that.
4 replies →
The Soviet Union never had such a goal. Passenger cars universalization was actually a long term goal of the system, but the soviet system prioritized heavy industry, infrastructure and defense over consumer goods.
That was the reason while Ukraine, before the war, was a huge net exporter of electricity. They never got too many or really good cars, but they do sure had plenty of electric generation plants.
The Chinese apparently learned with this, and used and export oriented economy to have the necessary scale to invest both in heavy industry as well as consumer goods.
That works for people in cities, if cities were made to by usable by cyclists and pedestrians. Not so much for people that live in rural areas.
[dead]
Wait until they mandate a panel of warning LEDs on your bike or a cam on your bike recording your face.
Wait until manual bikes are banned and only gps tracked e-bikes exist for citizen safety!
I legit can't tell if this is sarcasm or not.
Why would you care what the guy was thinking writing that comment? Do you know him? He might as well just be a stochastic parrot.
Just like with other media (movie, book, etc), the product is the end product, in this case a joke or a thought-provoking view. You shouldn't care about the creator's actual views or consider them while engaging with his comment.
That's what so great about it, isn't it?