Robots in your bike lane, coming soon
#76
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,951
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,517 Times
in
1,031 Posts
Note that many intersection in the cities or anywhere else are NOT controlled by traffic lights. Motorists passing through an intersection where the other streets have the stop or yield sign are not prepared or likely to stop because a pedestrian is waiting to cross, at least not in (m)any East Coast city.
Last edited by I-Like-To-Bike; 07-18-19 at 12:07 PM.
#77
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Northampton, MA
Posts: 1,909
Bikes: 36" Unicycle, winter knock-around hybrid bike
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 930 Post(s)
Liked 393 Times
in
282 Posts
Are you implying that motorists who are driving though an intersection on a through street (without a stop or yield-to-pedestrian sign controlling their movement) are obligated, let alone likely, to come to a halt to let pedestrians who might want to cross from the pavement or sidewalk parallel to the side street where the motorists and cyclists' movements are controlled by a stop sign?
However, in any situation where it is legal for pedestrian to cross at all, then, unless either
a) There is a pedestrian light currently commanding the pedestrian not to cross
or
b) The pedestrian arrives too late for the motorist to safely stop
Then
1) At least in Minnesota the motorist is required to stop so that the pedestrian can cross, because their law paints a virtual crosswalk anywhere there could be one
2) Anywhere else it would be prudent and courteous for them to do so. Likely it will eventually become required, either explicitly or as the result of related laws
Note that many intersections in the cities or anywhere else are NOT controlled by traffic lights. Motorists passing through an intersection where the other streets have the stop or yield sign are not prepared or likely to stop because a pedestrian is waiting to cross, at least not in (m)any East Coast city.
Last edited by UniChris; 07-18-19 at 12:35 PM.
#78
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Mich
Posts: 7,291
Bikes: RSO E-tire dropper fixie brifter
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked 2,910 Times
in
1,884 Posts
Are you implying that motorists who are driving though an intersection on a through street (without a stop or yield-to-pedestrian sign controlling their movement) are obligated, let alone likely, to come to a halt to let pedestrians who might want to cross from the pavement or sidewalk parallel to the side street where the motorists and cyclists' movements are controlled by a stop sign?
Note that many intersection in the cities or anywhere else are NOT controlled by traffic lights. Motorists passing through an intersection where the other streets have the stop or yield sign are not prepared or likely to stop because a pedestrian is waiting to cross, at least not in (m)any East Coast city.
Note that many intersection in the cities or anywhere else are NOT controlled by traffic lights. Motorists passing through an intersection where the other streets have the stop or yield sign are not prepared or likely to stop because a pedestrian is waiting to cross, at least not in (m)any East Coast city.
__________________
-Oh Hey!
-Oh Hey!
#79
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,951
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,517 Times
in
1,031 Posts
However, in any situation where it is legal for pedestrian to cross at all, then, unless either
a) There is a pedestrian light currently commanding the pedestrian not to cross
or
b) The pedestrian arrives too late for the motorist to safely stop
Then
1) At least in Minnesota the motorist is required to stop so that the pedestrian can cross, because their law paints a virtual crosswalk anywhere there could be one
2) Anywhere else it would be prudent and courteous for them to do so. Likely it will eventually become required, either explicitly or as the result of related laws
a) There is a pedestrian light currently commanding the pedestrian not to cross
or
b) The pedestrian arrives too late for the motorist to safely stop
Then
1) At least in Minnesota the motorist is required to stop so that the pedestrian can cross, because their law paints a virtual crosswalk anywhere there could be one
2) Anywhere else it would be prudent and courteous for them to do so. Likely it will eventually become required, either explicitly or as the result of related laws
The above statement is a lot different than your previous assumptions and overreach (below) on this subject:
"At least in the US, there's both a social and legal trend that, contrary to your opinion, is increasingly making this a situation where cars must stop to let humans cross.
Effectively, you are the one "doing it wrong" . What should be happening is that the car coming one way stops when they see you waiting to cross, you check for traffic the other way and when it is safe you cross. Typically one car stopping is a *huge* signal to those going the other way to also stop, if they were not being mindful of their obligation to do so. And if following traffic is going to rear-end a car that has appropriately slowed and stopped, that following traffic was not following safely."
#80
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 39,059
Mentioned: 210 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18320 Post(s)
Liked 15,299 Times
in
7,231 Posts
It apparently does not work with all browsers, including mine.
#81
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 39,059
Mentioned: 210 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18320 Post(s)
Liked 15,299 Times
in
7,231 Posts
Obtl
#82
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Northampton, MA
Posts: 1,909
Bikes: 36" Unicycle, winter knock-around hybrid bike
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 930 Post(s)
Liked 393 Times
in
282 Posts
No, it isn't. It's merely providing more detail of the eame thing.
Read again:
1) At least in Minnesota the motorist is required to stop so that the pedestrian can cross, because their law paints a virtual crosswalk anywhere there could be one
2) Anywhere else it would be prudent and courteous for them to do so. Likely it will eventually become required, either explicitly or as the result of related laws
2) Anywhere else it would be prudent and courteous for them to do so. Likely it will eventually become required, either explicitly or as the result of related laws
and
"At least in the US, there's both a social and legal trend that, contrary to your opinion, is increasingly making this a situation where cars must stop to let humans cross.
Effectively, you are the one "doing it wrong"
Go ahead and be as obstinate here as you apparently are on the roads; it reflects just as badly on you in both settings.
Last edited by UniChris; 07-18-19 at 12:50 PM.
Likes For UniChris:
#83
- Soli Deo Gloria -
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Northwest Georgia
Posts: 14,782
Bikes: 2018 Rodriguez Custom Fixed Gear, 2017 Niner RLT 9 RDO, 2015 Bianchi Pista, 2002 Fuji Robaix
Mentioned: 235 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6844 Post(s)
Liked 736 Times
in
469 Posts
So how does this work?
The government is just going to ignore that the lane is for bikes and allow motorized delivery robots?
They are just going to ignore that the MUP is for non-motorized, recreational transport and allow commercial use?
Who is going to file the first lawsuit to prevent these things?
The Silver Comet Trail here in Georgia has signs prohibiting motorized vehicles. If I see these things I'm going to dial 911 and report them.
-Tim-
The government is just going to ignore that the lane is for bikes and allow motorized delivery robots?
They are just going to ignore that the MUP is for non-motorized, recreational transport and allow commercial use?
Who is going to file the first lawsuit to prevent these things?
The Silver Comet Trail here in Georgia has signs prohibiting motorized vehicles. If I see these things I'm going to dial 911 and report them.
-Tim-
Likes For TimothyH:
#84
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Northampton, MA
Posts: 1,909
Bikes: 36" Unicycle, winter knock-around hybrid bike
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 930 Post(s)
Liked 393 Times
in
282 Posts
Or they'll do the typical startup thing and brazen it out assuming the laws will catch up to their fulfillment "of an obvious need", before they get in too much trouble for it
If they do become legal, I want to a rolling water cooler to escort my rides and run interference.
Likes For UniChris:
#85
Quidam Bike Super Hero
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Stone Mountain, GA (Metro Atlanta, East)
Posts: 1,150
Bikes: 1995 Trek 800 Sport, aka, "CamelTrek"
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 331 Post(s)
Liked 415 Times
in
282 Posts
So how does this work?
The government is just going to ignore that the lane is for bikes and allow motorized delivery robots?
They are just going to ignore that the MUP is for non-motorized, recreational transport and allow commercial use?
Who is going to file the first lawsuit to prevent these things?
The Silver Comet Trail here in Georgia has signs prohibiting motorized vehicles. If I see these things I'm going to dial 911 and report them.
-Tim-
The government is just going to ignore that the lane is for bikes and allow motorized delivery robots?
They are just going to ignore that the MUP is for non-motorized, recreational transport and allow commercial use?
Who is going to file the first lawsuit to prevent these things?
The Silver Comet Trail here in Georgia has signs prohibiting motorized vehicles. If I see these things I'm going to dial 911 and report them.
-Tim-
On topic, can someone construct a "cattle catcher" for my bike?
Last edited by Digger Goreman; 07-18-19 at 01:46 PM. Reason: addition to post
#86
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Mid Atlantic / USA
Posts: 2,115
Bikes: 2017 Specialized Crosstrail / 2013 Trek Crossrip Elite
Mentioned: 43 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1002 Post(s)
Liked 237 Times
in
155 Posts
This is a delay that you are causing by your refusal to take an offered opportunity, if it is in fact safe to do so.
Perhaps it's time to learn how to fit into cooperative road interactions, because in actuality the situation is not always adversarial.
No, don't do anything that is unsafe. But if a car is stopped and the driver is making eye contact, you can begin to cross in front of that car while waiting to see what happens on the other side. Typically the fact of the one lane being stopped, and of your crossing, will quickly resolve the situation on the other side in your favor, but yes, wait until you are sure.
I guarantee that those drivers you have this stalemate with leave with very uncharitable thoughts of your obstinance.
Perhaps it's time to learn how to fit into cooperative road interactions, because in actuality the situation is not always adversarial.
No, don't do anything that is unsafe. But if a car is stopped and the driver is making eye contact, you can begin to cross in front of that car while waiting to see what happens on the other side. Typically the fact of the one lane being stopped, and of your crossing, will quickly resolve the situation on the other side in your favor, but yes, wait until you are sure.
I guarantee that those drivers you have this stalemate with leave with very uncharitable thoughts of your obstinance.
I cross at a light every day where there is a left and a right turn signal where there is no telling which direction cars are going to go. I don't want to be in that intersection with cars. But I know, for a fact, that all the traffic will get through the intersection before the light changes. This leaves me with ample time to cross AFTER THE CARS ARE GONE before the light changes and the signal coming towards be turns green and allows the traffic to turn into the intersection from the other direction.
So I wait until the last car goes through, then I safely cross before the opposing traffic enters.
It works out well every day.
I'm never going to ride through that death trap in traffic.
I hop up on the sidewalk and stand there, out of the traffic flow, waiting for the safe point to jump back in and cross. And every other time someone stops and tries to urge me to go back into traffic in front of them.
Nope. Not doing it. Why would I want to be in FRONT of your car? Why does the driver want me in front when he's just going to immediately try to pass me or make the turn around me.
Follow the right of way laid out by the traffic laws. Then I know what you're doing. And once all the cars are gone, then I'll ride safely with no cars left to have to guess what I'm going to do. And if the drivers are mad at me because of this...that's their problem. I'm standing off the road in the grass on the other side of the sidewalk for a reason....so you know I'm not going to jump out in front of you.
#87
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Mid Atlantic / USA
Posts: 2,115
Bikes: 2017 Specialized Crosstrail / 2013 Trek Crossrip Elite
Mentioned: 43 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1002 Post(s)
Liked 237 Times
in
155 Posts
It's great how this turned into a discussion of Right-of-way - another one of my pet peeves.
(How does the multi-quote work here? I clicked four or five posts, but don't see how to insert them. Anyway, I love all your comments. That's a great image of those sad little delivery bots in England.)
(How does the multi-quote work here? I clicked four or five posts, but don't see how to insert them. Anyway, I love all your comments. That's a great image of those sad little delivery bots in England.)
We covered Battlebots...ways to disable robots...ways to confuse robots...funny things you can do to robots....
Being mad as human drivers was the next logical progression
#88
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 307
Bikes: All mine are electric bikes now
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 57 Post(s)
Liked 59 Times
in
37 Posts
TIL patrolling robots are probably at a store near you!
#89
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Mich
Posts: 7,291
Bikes: RSO E-tire dropper fixie brifter
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked 2,910 Times
in
1,884 Posts
it should blink like a reptile & say "meep meep!" as it passes by.
__________________
-Oh Hey!
-Oh Hey!
#90
Senior Member
Pretty sure the only way these would be legal on most American bike paths is if they put pedals on them or have disabled people riding them.
Seriously, if motor rules aren't made very clear, there's some urban paths that could essentially turn them into commercial delivery routes. For example, pedal assist rules currently limit speed, but so far no regulation of weight, which is inviting to heavy cargo bikes.
Seriously, if motor rules aren't made very clear, there's some urban paths that could essentially turn them into commercial delivery routes. For example, pedal assist rules currently limit speed, but so far no regulation of weight, which is inviting to heavy cargo bikes.
Likes For Road Fan:
#91
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 5,970
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2475 Post(s)
Liked 722 Times
in
513 Posts
America's federally mandated minimum wage is the lowest in the developed world by far. That is the reason these things have not made any real inroads here. Humans are cheaper. Like it or not this IS political and I'm not sure what the point of discussing it at all is if we aren't going to take it all the way home and confront the 800lb. gorilla. I'll say no more.
#92
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Southern California
Posts: 487
Bikes: Historical: Schwinn Speedster; Schwinn Collegiate; 1981 Ross Gran Tour; 1981 Dawes Atlantis; 1991 Specialized Rockhopper. Current: 1987 Ritchey Ultra; 1987 Centurion Ironman Dave Scott Master; 1992 Specialized Stumpjumper FS
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 207 Post(s)
Liked 178 Times
in
111 Posts
Won't that be great to see? Two robots each sitting between the bollards and waiting for the other to get out of the way. Worse than the Chip-n-Dale routine the drivers around here do, trying to give me the right of way when I'm not expecting it. "after you!" ... "no, after you!..."
(Oh, wait, there are all the other posts I wanted to quote from a few hours ago. Sheesh.)
#93
Senior Member
In Michigan the law reads, pedestrians have the right-of-way in all marked and unmarked crosswalks. So like Minnesota, there's a virtual crosswalk at every intersection and in a few other likely spots where sidewalks empty into streets mid-block. Generally the interpretation is that a pedestrian controls his/her current lane plus a half-lane in either direction. IOW, don't walk out suddenly into the path of a car that can't stop even if the driver wants to.
I'm assertive enough to step out as soon as drivers who see me can stop, but careful enough to keep wary watch out of the corner of my eye.
And yes, I've had to pull my feet back at the last instant before. One of those times, a police was right behind the driver and immediately pulled him over. Instant karma!
I'm assertive enough to step out as soon as drivers who see me can stop, but careful enough to keep wary watch out of the corner of my eye.
And yes, I've had to pull my feet back at the last instant before. One of those times, a police was right behind the driver and immediately pulled him over. Instant karma!
#95
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Northampton, MA
Posts: 1,909
Bikes: 36" Unicycle, winter knock-around hybrid bike
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 930 Post(s)
Liked 393 Times
in
282 Posts
You might still not want to, but once you are off the bike you are definitely a pedestrian, so drivers trying to allow you to go first may be doing no more than the law requires for what they perceive (albeit incorrectly) your intent to be.
Last edited by UniChris; 07-19-19 at 09:42 AM.
#96
Cycleway town
Except where there's a traffic signal with a walk phase, at places where it is legal for a pedestrian to cross, that is in fact pretty much the law in civilized countries.
Ironically the first place I really experienced drivers obeying that was in London. Sorry to hear things have fallen so far behind.
Ironically the first place I really experienced drivers obeying that was in London. Sorry to hear things have fallen so far behind.
We also have a lot of islands in between lanes. So you've only got to wait for a gap in one lane at a time. It makes more sense for a pedestrian to work around traffic than traffic to work around pedestrians - that coming from someone who doesn't even drive..
#97
Cycleway town
Here, for example, is a summary of a good set of pedestrian crossing laws from Minnesota:
Note that in particular there is no distinction between intersections that do and do not have a painted crosswalk unless there is a pedestrian signal, in which case that governs. This isn't yet the law everywhere, but it's a direction in which things are moving in practice, and likely eventually law.
And note that even in places where the law does not require drivers to preemptively yield to pedestrians who want to cross, it does require them to yield to pedestrians who are in the act of crossing, when that crossing is legal and was begun safely. If a car stops and you begin crossing, they are now obligated to yield to you. As are any other cars that then approach with reasonable time to react. Though that doesn't mean you should cross their paths before being sure they are doing so.
The more I look at this, the more surprised I am that it does not have a painted crossing. Then I notice it does not have a line between the two directional lanes, either. Is that normal in this location? It seems odd for that to be missing on a road with the kind of speed that has been implied. The paving looks very fresh, I cannot help but wonder if it has recently been resurfaced and none of the usual paint or stick-on markings yet re-applied.
Note that in particular there is no distinction between intersections that do and do not have a painted crosswalk unless there is a pedestrian signal, in which case that governs. This isn't yet the law everywhere, but it's a direction in which things are moving in practice, and likely eventually law.
And note that even in places where the law does not require drivers to preemptively yield to pedestrians who want to cross, it does require them to yield to pedestrians who are in the act of crossing, when that crossing is legal and was begun safely. If a car stops and you begin crossing, they are now obligated to yield to you. As are any other cars that then approach with reasonable time to react. Though that doesn't mean you should cross their paths before being sure they are doing so.
The more I look at this, the more surprised I am that it does not have a painted crossing. Then I notice it does not have a line between the two directional lanes, either. Is that normal in this location? It seems odd for that to be missing on a road with the kind of speed that has been implied. The paving looks very fresh, I cannot help but wonder if it has recently been resurfaced and none of the usual paint or stick-on markings yet re-applied.
The omission of lines slows traffic. Give someone a lane and they'll take it, full assault, no matter what! Blank areas promote caution. Also, the pedestrians and cyclists are told to stop. Because it's a road. They cross when it's safe. No confusion.
#100
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 39,059
Mentioned: 210 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18320 Post(s)
Liked 15,299 Times
in
7,231 Posts
Daffy Duck's voice was a mock of producer Leon Schlessigner, who had a lisp and was, according to Jones, a real a-hole. Jones was still an animator when the character was being created. Jones and a few others went to Mel Blanc and asked him if he could do Leon as a screwball duck. The day came for the first screening. Leon came into the screening room and said, as he often did, "Roll the junk." They all expected to be fired on the spot. Instead, Leon especially loved the voice, having no idea he was being mocked.