I wasn't intending to do consecutive posts on Kickstarter bicycle-related projects, but I bumped into a news item that brought another example of a bicycling related Kickstarter to my attention:
"Rideye is a black box for bicyclists-There are ways to get from point A to B other than driving a car. There’s the bus, walking, or bicycling . . . The most dangerous method of the aforementioned list though, is riding your bike."
Rideye solves this by providing evidence of motorist bad behavior for your future court case- you know, after you are injured. The story goes on (since it a "coolest gadgets" site) to talk about the many technical attributes of the device (that I'm not much interested in - and I'm not going to address the "most dangerous" statement, which is based on ???).
This oversubscribed Kickstarter makes a compelling argument for a product to insure your safety - well, actually not so much
The device's main claim to being a "black box" rather than simply a GoPro Hero clone is that it has a crash sensor that stops the recording (in the event of a crash ~) - this may seem superfluous except that since the device records in a 2.5 hour loop, if it didn't shut off when there is a crash, it could easily record over your evidence. (I personally find this the weakest aspect of the whole idea - if I'm going to video what happens on the chance of an accident, I for sure want video of what happens after the accident, like audio of the driver when he/she jumps out of their car and shouts, "oh my God, I didn't see you! It's all my fault." Oh well. You don't get that with this because it will have shut down.)
I get the idea that if a motorist does something illegal and you record it on video you have some better chance in court, but I don't get how that helps with safety in the usual sense. While aviation blackboxes are in part about assigning blame they are mostly about trying to prevent future crashes by understanding past ones. How a blackbox that helps assign blame helps making a particular cyclist who buys one more safe is not at all clear. The Kickstarter states, "Last year my friend was seriously injured in a hit-and-run doing the thing he loved most, and I promised him he would never have to ride with that fear again." If by having a camera to record your crashes you somehow feel better protected against the physical injuries you might suffer, there is some logic working there that I don't get. At all.
Not to say that video isn't useful for legal cases involving cyclists who are involved in accidents that are not their fault - it can be. There is a very long (and depressing) blog post on GreaterGreaterWashington that described in detail how a cyclist used Metro DC police video to show he was not at fault (and despite police assumptions that he, the cyclist, was at fault). So if you want to have video of you riding for that reason, for evidence, that's great - but it does nothing for safety. The Kickstarter's statement, "Let's make cycling safer for everyone" is simply baloney.
In the first few seconds sample Rideye camera records copious evidence that will cause no end of legal troubles if he later crashes
Where I live and ride (Virginia and also ride in D.C.) we have contributory negligence - in fact, we have pure contributory negligence, which means that if my negligence as a cyclist contributed to the accident even 1 percent, I may be unable to get $ from someone whose 99 percent of negligence caused me harm. So if I was going to use this device, it would be important to record my own legally pristine cycling behavior at all times, or else what's the point? In the above "sample video" at 22 seconds, the cyclist rides between a parked car and a car in a traffic lane - so if the car door opens or something else happens, what is the defense? "The space was wider than my handlebars, so going into it at 12 to 15 mph made excellent sense."
From Russia, without the slightest love, a bike crash video from a bike cam - it's ok, he survives apparently with no serious injury
As a completely different way to think about this, I would point out that for cars, Russia leads the way with dashboard cameras used in this sort of blackbox let's-record-possible-evidence-in-case-we-crash kind of way. (And to my surprise, I found the above example of a bike cam video from Russia, too.) Doesn't this validate the Rideye Kickstarter? Well, sure, if you want to agree that for cyclists America = Russia. And based on the GreaterGreaterWashington blog post, maybe that is true. But keep in mind what the situation is in today's Russia - if you don't have video evidence, the first problem you have is with police bribery (not the courts) - in other words, you want to have video evidence so that you don't get in a bidding war with other drivers over how the accident is described by the Russian traffic cops. "But officer, my video shows . . . " And of course none of this Russian dash board cam stuff has improved the safety as far as how Russian drivers operate their vehicles even one iota - search "russia dash cam crash compilation" in Google if you don't believe me. (Also, you can look at the relevant portion of the entry in Wikipedia about Russian transportation - hey, didn't I get a master's degree about transportation in that country? No, since it was 30 years ago it was about Soviet transportation, so a different country. But . . . same Russians.)
Is it really that bad here? And is this really useful for cyclists?
Personally my impression from comments on the videos is that mostly people look at this and compare it pricewise to GoPro Hero products - they want video of their cycling, not possible evidence.
Wednesday, October 2, 2013
Monday, September 30, 2013
Kickstarter - Not a (Bike) Store. Really??
I once saw one of the founders of Kickstarter speak at a conference. He was quite charismatic, in a laid-back hipster kind of way. But then I'm old.
About a year ago I noticed that Yancey and some of his other Kickstarterizing colleagues had a blog post to make absolutely positively clear that Kickstarter is not a store!!! "It's hard to know how many people feel like they're shopping at a store when they're backing projects on Kickstarter, but we want to make sure that it's no one."
Well, maybe. But in less than two minutes I found evidence otherwise. Searching for projects using the simple keyword "bicycle."
First off, we have "Fortified" that will kickstart a company to sell bike lights that last forever. Actually, they already kickstarted a theft-resistant bike light that I blogged about, which was a success (apparently) but now they are ready to move from theft resistant lighting to lasts-forever lighting - as an anti-capitalist attempt to keep big companies from selling us cyclists more crappy lighting (and other stuff - but they are starting with lights).
Fortified - kick in some $tarter money and you'll get some lights - but remember, it's not a store!
Mostly I have no problem with this product per se - in particular, the idea of fighting big corporations that sell people crap (so that they can sell it to us again later, again) is appealing. I am somewhat surprised that it is apparently appealing to others since this Kickstarter is over-subscribed by four-to-one and still has time to go. Wow!
But keep in mind, my comment today is that Kickstarter claims it is not a store. But here, other than nine people who signed up for a T-shirt, all the backers of this Kickstarter (and there are 845 of these supporters as of today) are backing at levels that insure (in theory) they got some of the early lights produced. Isn't signing up early to buy stuff something you can do at a store? (Like Amazon.)
My counter example is of a project that has effectively zero support because (I think) it isn't selling anything that anyone wants.
This is a good idea for developing world cyclists, but not so popular with Kickstarter "shoppers" (or however we are to refer to them)
In fact integrated shift-brake units are annoying and increase repair costs. My 1982 road bike with separate shifters on the down tube that are mechanically not much more complicated than what she is suggesting are very low maintenance, particularly compared to the combined Shimano 6700 Ultegra "brifters" (combined brake-shift units) that regularly eat shift cables and one stopped working altogether on one bike, requiring replacement. Ugh!
This simple easy to manufacturer, one-size-fits-all shift unit would be great for developing countries.
So, how much support for this project that could easily simplify life for thousands of Africans, how much support is there? Well, as of today, she has reached two (2) percent of her $10,000 goal with 31 days to go. She has four friends (one assumes) who have signed up at a funding level that would give them a "collectible bike shift lever" but . . . it just isn't as exciting an opportunity, apparently, as buying dramatic lighting systems for one's own bike.
Arguably regardless of what Kickstarter's principals wrote on this topic, it appears there could be some confusion among visitors of the Kickstarter site and some relate to it as a store.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sidebar comment about "last forever" bike lighting - bicycle lighting in this country is getting better steadily - a little slowly in some respects (I think) but the problem with saying a light would "last forever" is that it suggests that in a couple of years you won't want something else simply because better stuff has come on the market. I myself am in this situation, although I am trying to not be wasteful and buy some new thing when the old one works OK - but still, I have a 100 lumen light that has a rather substantial separate battery that was typical four years ago and now the whole thing could be the size of the light unit. And twice as powerful - but I'm not sure I even want that much light.
The "Fortified" lights are fine for lumens and battery power (I suppose) but I suspect that they are typical for how narrow and focused the light beam is - which is, not very. This is incredibly annoying as more and more cyclists trundle along trails at each other seeing who can blind whom first. The Fortified 300 lumen headlight, as the company itself puts it, "lights up the whole road" - well, great, but actually that isn't what is wanted. In Germany I'm told they have standards for such things - anyway, it is hard to imagine that we have reached bicycle headlight nirvana today and that whatever I buy today, at any price, I would want forever.
About a year ago I noticed that Yancey and some of his other Kickstarterizing colleagues had a blog post to make absolutely positively clear that Kickstarter is not a store!!! "It's hard to know how many people feel like they're shopping at a store when they're backing projects on Kickstarter, but we want to make sure that it's no one."
Well, maybe. But in less than two minutes I found evidence otherwise. Searching for projects using the simple keyword "bicycle."
First off, we have "Fortified" that will kickstart a company to sell bike lights that last forever. Actually, they already kickstarted a theft-resistant bike light that I blogged about, which was a success (apparently) but now they are ready to move from theft resistant lighting to lasts-forever lighting - as an anti-capitalist attempt to keep big companies from selling us cyclists more crappy lighting (and other stuff - but they are starting with lights).
Fortified - kick in some $tarter money and you'll get some lights - but remember, it's not a store!
Mostly I have no problem with this product per se - in particular, the idea of fighting big corporations that sell people crap (so that they can sell it to us again later, again) is appealing. I am somewhat surprised that it is apparently appealing to others since this Kickstarter is over-subscribed by four-to-one and still has time to go. Wow!
But keep in mind, my comment today is that Kickstarter claims it is not a store. But here, other than nine people who signed up for a T-shirt, all the backers of this Kickstarter (and there are 845 of these supporters as of today) are backing at levels that insure (in theory) they got some of the early lights produced. Isn't signing up early to buy stuff something you can do at a store? (Like Amazon.)
My counter example is of a project that has effectively zero support because (I think) it isn't selling anything that anyone wants.
This is a good idea for developing world cyclists, but not so popular with Kickstarter "shoppers" (or however we are to refer to them)
In fact integrated shift-brake units are annoying and increase repair costs. My 1982 road bike with separate shifters on the down tube that are mechanically not much more complicated than what she is suggesting are very low maintenance, particularly compared to the combined Shimano 6700 Ultegra "brifters" (combined brake-shift units) that regularly eat shift cables and one stopped working altogether on one bike, requiring replacement. Ugh!
This simple easy to manufacturer, one-size-fits-all shift unit would be great for developing countries.
So, how much support for this project that could easily simplify life for thousands of Africans, how much support is there? Well, as of today, she has reached two (2) percent of her $10,000 goal with 31 days to go. She has four friends (one assumes) who have signed up at a funding level that would give them a "collectible bike shift lever" but . . . it just isn't as exciting an opportunity, apparently, as buying dramatic lighting systems for one's own bike.
Arguably regardless of what Kickstarter's principals wrote on this topic, it appears there could be some confusion among visitors of the Kickstarter site and some relate to it as a store.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sidebar comment about "last forever" bike lighting - bicycle lighting in this country is getting better steadily - a little slowly in some respects (I think) but the problem with saying a light would "last forever" is that it suggests that in a couple of years you won't want something else simply because better stuff has come on the market. I myself am in this situation, although I am trying to not be wasteful and buy some new thing when the old one works OK - but still, I have a 100 lumen light that has a rather substantial separate battery that was typical four years ago and now the whole thing could be the size of the light unit. And twice as powerful - but I'm not sure I even want that much light.
The "Fortified" lights are fine for lumens and battery power (I suppose) but I suspect that they are typical for how narrow and focused the light beam is - which is, not very. This is incredibly annoying as more and more cyclists trundle along trails at each other seeing who can blind whom first. The Fortified 300 lumen headlight, as the company itself puts it, "lights up the whole road" - well, great, but actually that isn't what is wanted. In Germany I'm told they have standards for such things - anyway, it is hard to imagine that we have reached bicycle headlight nirvana today and that whatever I buy today, at any price, I would want forever.
Saturday, September 28, 2013
Russian Boy Madly Cycling, 1977
On my Flickr account where I keep images of cycling from various public domain sources I also have been uploading digitized photos from when I was in Russia, in Leningrad mostly, in the 1970s.
I only seem to have a few that involve bicycles, and all are of children on bikes.
Taken when I was living in then-Leningrad in spring, 1977
This little boy probably wasn't happy that I was taking his picture, so perhaps that explains his rush. This generation of urban Russians probably included many who didn't learn how to ride a bicycle - Russia is a much smaller market for purchase of bicycles than the U.S., even today - something like 4 million bicycles sold in 2012 versus close to 19 million in the U.S. (including kids' bikes). While at first glance it looks like a reasonable little bike, it is actually rather sad - I don't think those can be inflatable tires but are rather solid rubber (or something) so it would be a fairly rough ride. Everything about it looks under-built. On the plus side, it cannot have been particularly heavy, which is the downfall of most modern kids' cheap bikes - overbuilt of cheap heavy metal so that a kid's bike weighs as much as an adult's bike
For Lenin's birthday, Soviets would do a public spring cleaning on one weekend in April
This photo, also taken in 1977, shows two children with what appears to be better bicycles - small wheels but with inflatable tires, at least. (The second one is towards the middle and facing away from the camera.) So perhaps for some "upper middle class Soviet urban folks" (or whatever one would describe them as) of that period, having a bicycle for one's (usually only) child was not unusual.
I only seem to have a few that involve bicycles, and all are of children on bikes.
Taken when I was living in then-Leningrad in spring, 1977
This little boy probably wasn't happy that I was taking his picture, so perhaps that explains his rush. This generation of urban Russians probably included many who didn't learn how to ride a bicycle - Russia is a much smaller market for purchase of bicycles than the U.S., even today - something like 4 million bicycles sold in 2012 versus close to 19 million in the U.S. (including kids' bikes). While at first glance it looks like a reasonable little bike, it is actually rather sad - I don't think those can be inflatable tires but are rather solid rubber (or something) so it would be a fairly rough ride. Everything about it looks under-built. On the plus side, it cannot have been particularly heavy, which is the downfall of most modern kids' cheap bikes - overbuilt of cheap heavy metal so that a kid's bike weighs as much as an adult's bike
For Lenin's birthday, Soviets would do a public spring cleaning on one weekend in April
This photo, also taken in 1977, shows two children with what appears to be better bicycles - small wheels but with inflatable tires, at least. (The second one is towards the middle and facing away from the camera.) So perhaps for some "upper middle class Soviet urban folks" (or whatever one would describe them as) of that period, having a bicycle for one's (usually only) child was not unusual.
Friday, September 27, 2013
How Not to Drive a Bus
It has been more than two years since I had a blog post about crummy bus driving from Dillon's Bus Co., the folks who in my view provide the best (or worst) examples of how not to operate a transit vehicle in the District of Columbia.
Having cut me off, the bus ends up occupying two lanes
Here is my email sent to Dillon's yesterday after I encountered the bus shown above on my commute home:
Complaint: Your bus, I believe 9167 but the license plate is clearly visible in the attached, was following me on my bicycle on Independence Ave SW heading west around 4:30 pm. Between 3rd and 4th he moved to the left lane, to pass me on my bicycle. Moving at around 20 mph. However a passenger was waiting for him at 4th so he then moved back into the right lane, cutting me off.
I will grant he signaled his lane change. I could see the person who was waving him down, so it was no surprise to me that he was going to try to move into my lane.
This left his bus, as shown in the photo, with the back end occupying almost all of the second lane out and the front end occupying the curb lane, blocking traffic at the light (before it changed). I rode around him to take this photo.
* If you have a bus stop in the next block, is it really wise to try to pass a road bike? I am legally entitled to my lane.
* Isn't blocking two lanes while stopping to pick up passengers frowned on by Dillon's? It should be. If the driver had stayed in his lane behind me he would have arrived at the stop approximately 2 seconds later than he did and been completely in the curb lane where he and his bus belong.
Thanks for your attention.
Yes, I have written before. I am aware that people who complain more than once are often ignored as "serial complainers" - fine. Have it your way, if that's your way.
I added the last part because after my first email Dillon's stopped answering - but I only write like once a year, so this is hardly that often. If their drivers drove buses safely I wouldn't have to write at all.
I was a city bus driver for 12 years, although this was quite a while ago. Still, I know poor driving when I see it.
Having cut me off, the bus ends up occupying two lanes
Here is my email sent to Dillon's yesterday after I encountered the bus shown above on my commute home:
Complaint: Your bus, I believe 9167 but the license plate is clearly visible in the attached, was following me on my bicycle on Independence Ave SW heading west around 4:30 pm. Between 3rd and 4th he moved to the left lane, to pass me on my bicycle. Moving at around 20 mph. However a passenger was waiting for him at 4th so he then moved back into the right lane, cutting me off.
I will grant he signaled his lane change. I could see the person who was waving him down, so it was no surprise to me that he was going to try to move into my lane.
This left his bus, as shown in the photo, with the back end occupying almost all of the second lane out and the front end occupying the curb lane, blocking traffic at the light (before it changed). I rode around him to take this photo.
* If you have a bus stop in the next block, is it really wise to try to pass a road bike? I am legally entitled to my lane.
* Isn't blocking two lanes while stopping to pick up passengers frowned on by Dillon's? It should be. If the driver had stayed in his lane behind me he would have arrived at the stop approximately 2 seconds later than he did and been completely in the curb lane where he and his bus belong.
Thanks for your attention.
Yes, I have written before. I am aware that people who complain more than once are often ignored as "serial complainers" - fine. Have it your way, if that's your way.
I added the last part because after my first email Dillon's stopped answering - but I only write like once a year, so this is hardly that often. If their drivers drove buses safely I wouldn't have to write at all.
I was a city bus driver for 12 years, although this was quite a while ago. Still, I know poor driving when I see it.
Wednesday, September 25, 2013
Stereographs in Twitch Mode - Example
GIF made with the NYPL Labs Stereogranimator
L. A. W., bicycle race, safety, the finish. 1865?-1880? 1890
A little random cycling fun from New York Public Library - for more, look here.
Yikes.
Saturday, September 14, 2013
Dear Abby, Cyclists, and the Law
In a recent column titled "Bicyclists need to follow the laws, too," the syndicated advice maven Abigail Van Buren (who it turns out is her daughter, who owns the rights to being Dear Abby, per Wikipedia) answers a typical complaint of the "those lawbreaker cyclists!" type.
The thing is copyrighted, so I can't reproduce it here. The Chicago Times has it here if you want to read it.
The main point of the writer is, "Bicyclists are supposed to abide by the vehicle codes, too, but they rarely do — and that includes not wearing protective gear." The writer then list some illegal acts of cyclists, such as texting while riding and failing to stop at stop signs. So what is her question to Abby? "How many lives must be destroyed or lost before the police start enforcing penalties for the danger these people cause to others?"
Abby doesn't offer a guess as the number. Of lives that will be lost. Or offer anything of use or related to reality. On this planet, anyway.
In the typical meme of contemporary journalism (of a sort) she suggests that perhaps the lack of enforcement is a conspiracy - that police are instructed to go out and fail to enforce traffic laws for cyclists. She asks for law enforcement officials reading the column to comment on that aspect.
I guess one should give Abby credit for possibly being concerned about the lives of the cyclists, since she seems to think many of them are suicidal for wearing dark clothing when riding and even riding after dark! Apparently typical state laws concerning bicycle lighting requirements are unknown to Abby. She more or less ignores the danger that the writer is referring to, which is to those others than the cyclists.
Due to a law non-enforcement conspiracy, this scofflaw cyclist is not being ticketed for crossing against the light - but it's OK with Dear Abby; he has protective gear and a high visibility vest on.
As cyclists who ride a lot know, often enough the way law enforcement works is to have goal-oriented projects, which can and do include, "go out and write X many tickets for cyclists at location Y." I myself got a $50 ticket on Hains Point for running a particular stop sign. (Which was fine - we don't have an Idaho bicycle stop law here.) The Park Police officer told me, "my boss told me to go out and write tickets for cyclists failing to stop at this stop sign so I can't give you a warning." He thanked me for not complaining but didn't stop writing the ticket.
So there is some good and some bad to Abby's response - she doesn't appear to buy into the "scofflaw cyclists are a huge threat to others" point that the writer makes (that's good) but then appears to open a new subject, which is that cyclists who get into accidents may well bring it upon themselves by not wearing the right color clothing (which is absurd). And she suggests that the police are under orders not to ticket cyclists (presumably out of some kind of political correctness?) which is hilarious.
Hmm.
The thing is copyrighted, so I can't reproduce it here. The Chicago Times has it here if you want to read it.
The main point of the writer is, "Bicyclists are supposed to abide by the vehicle codes, too, but they rarely do — and that includes not wearing protective gear." The writer then list some illegal acts of cyclists, such as texting while riding and failing to stop at stop signs. So what is her question to Abby? "How many lives must be destroyed or lost before the police start enforcing penalties for the danger these people cause to others?"
Abby doesn't offer a guess as the number. Of lives that will be lost. Or offer anything of use or related to reality. On this planet, anyway.
In the typical meme of contemporary journalism (of a sort) she suggests that perhaps the lack of enforcement is a conspiracy - that police are instructed to go out and fail to enforce traffic laws for cyclists. She asks for law enforcement officials reading the column to comment on that aspect.
I guess one should give Abby credit for possibly being concerned about the lives of the cyclists, since she seems to think many of them are suicidal for wearing dark clothing when riding and even riding after dark! Apparently typical state laws concerning bicycle lighting requirements are unknown to Abby. She more or less ignores the danger that the writer is referring to, which is to those others than the cyclists.
Due to a law non-enforcement conspiracy, this scofflaw cyclist is not being ticketed for crossing against the light - but it's OK with Dear Abby; he has protective gear and a high visibility vest on.
As cyclists who ride a lot know, often enough the way law enforcement works is to have goal-oriented projects, which can and do include, "go out and write X many tickets for cyclists at location Y." I myself got a $50 ticket on Hains Point for running a particular stop sign. (Which was fine - we don't have an Idaho bicycle stop law here.) The Park Police officer told me, "my boss told me to go out and write tickets for cyclists failing to stop at this stop sign so I can't give you a warning." He thanked me for not complaining but didn't stop writing the ticket.
So there is some good and some bad to Abby's response - she doesn't appear to buy into the "scofflaw cyclists are a huge threat to others" point that the writer makes (that's good) but then appears to open a new subject, which is that cyclists who get into accidents may well bring it upon themselves by not wearing the right color clothing (which is absurd). And she suggests that the police are under orders not to ticket cyclists (presumably out of some kind of political correctness?) which is hilarious.
Hmm.
Tuesday Congressional Bike Ride
During the summer, several times on my commute to work on Tuesday mornings I would see groups like this of riders escorted by U.S. Capitol Police on their mountain bikes escorting folks who are presumably members of Congress and staff members (or other guests). The numbers varied. This was on Tuesday September 10.
Terrible cell phone photo
On this occasion they and I were sitting on opposite sites of the street waiting for the light. Apparently this is a good weather Tuesday morning regular thing for those who are interested. In this case, you have three riders escorted (accompanied?) by five police on bikes. The Suburban SUV behind them is apparently their SAG wagon.
A high level U.S. diplomat commuting to work in 1914
It isn't clear to me when members of Congress might have taken an interest in cycling - that would require some research, I suppose. I do know of this fellow (shown above), Alvey Adee, was one of the highest government officials of the early 20th century who was known for his cycling prowess, riding to and from work into his 70s. He also took trips to Europe where the purpose was to cycle through France and the like.
Terrible cell phone photo
On this occasion they and I were sitting on opposite sites of the street waiting for the light. Apparently this is a good weather Tuesday morning regular thing for those who are interested. In this case, you have three riders escorted (accompanied?) by five police on bikes. The Suburban SUV behind them is apparently their SAG wagon.
A high level U.S. diplomat commuting to work in 1914
It isn't clear to me when members of Congress might have taken an interest in cycling - that would require some research, I suppose. I do know of this fellow (shown above), Alvey Adee, was one of the highest government officials of the early 20th century who was known for his cycling prowess, riding to and from work into his 70s. He also took trips to Europe where the purpose was to cycle through France and the like.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)