linberl

But bike thieves suck and bank thieves are cool

Rollfast

They do make for really good crime shows on some cable or DTV channel.

Rollfast

And you would think that if Uber had pulled it's furnished system to test it's own that they would have done more off-course testing first. A bit ridiculous if so, deadly so.


As long as she's alive I'll settle for a Mom-driven car.

I-Like-To-Bike

Wasn't necessary in the unregulated environment previously permitted by the AZ governor.

CliffordK

What if they offered a free power meter/GPS tracker... with a transponder? A free EPS or Di2 upgrade with a transponder?

Hopefully the self-driving cars will be forced to have better accident stats than average drivers. But, we still have about 700 or 800 fatalities and a bunch of injury accidents a year related to bike car interactions.

For bicycle/car injury accidents... what are we... somewhere between 1:100 and 1:1000 avid cyclists per year? More? What if the transponder dropped the current risk by a factor of 10? a factor of 100?

It could well save more lives and prevent more brain injuries than helmets.

Still saying no way?

I use a red taillight on my bike... not because I think it makes me look cool. Not because I'm developing film behind my bike... but because it makes me SAFER. And, if someone convinced me that a taillight/transponder combo would make me 10x or 100x safer, I'd probably go that route. Not a separate device, but have it embedded in a device that I'm already using and charging.

mr_bill

Flip that. Buy a bike computer/gps, and get the B2X for nearly free. Buy a smartphone, get the B2X/P2X for nearly free. Buy a smartwatch, get the B2X/P2X for nearly free. Buy headphones, get the B2X/P2X for nearly free.

On what’s in it for you, your bike computer will know when the light will change, let you know car back or car up, or alert you to the pedestrian about to step between cars into the lane.

-mr. bill

tyrion

I have "battery anxiety" with my lights in the winter. I would prefer the cars avoid me without me worrying about another battery.

I think this whole idea of transponders (or beacons) is the wrong solution, that it's just not feasible to get a beacon on every bike. And I don't get why people on bikes might need one, but people not on bikes wouldn't need on. (I understand bikes might interact with cars more than pedestrians do, but still...)

Maelochs

No you go it fine.

stone-Age simple. A pedestrian is only on the road (legally and safely) in very specific situations---crosswalks, with the lights, obeying traffic signals ......

Bikes can Always be on the road, anywhere at any time. in most cases either a pedestrian has to get really stupid, or a driver has to get even stupider, for the two to come together. most pedestrians don't walk in the street and most drivers don't drive on the sidewalks (where I live.)

Car drivers don't look for bikes on the road. But ... they are there. and since they are on (usually) the side of the road, not dead center in the lane, it is easy to overlook cyclists as "stuff not on the roadway" or 'stuff not in my path of travel."

Even a big "Take the Lane!" cyclist will eventually have to let cars by ... or get run over.

Anther thing is hills. There are a couple of routes I used to ride with a climb, a descent, and a turn I wanted to take. Always a compromise. if I move left to make the right turn with pace, i am in the lane ... and a car cresting the peak won't see me. if I stay hard right I have to brake hard. if there is anything on the edge of the road which might force me left into the lane, i am back in front of the car who is speeding downhill before his eyes see the road ahead, and the cyclist in the road.

I wouldn't complain if the driver got an alarm before cresting the hill.

Either way I won't complain but you did answer your own question. Bikes are often in the road, pedestrians are Rarely in the road.

CliffordK

Can I get the Emergency Vehicle version that will make the light change for me?

Actually, the ability to prevent cross traffic from getting a green until an intersection clears would be a huge plus.

Of course, there is a risk of hitting a light late in the green, but I have a couple of lights that will short-cycle me, so I can start up as soon as I get the green, and get a yellow, then red, and cross-traffic gets a green before I clear the intersection. Usually it isn't a big problem, but there is one light that I hit from a bike path that is downright dangerous. And, one of the categories in some accident summaries is "trapped", where a cyclist gets a red while still in the intersection and gets exposed to cross-traffic.

tyrion

You can't rely on a "legally and safely" requirement of pedestrian behavior. Ask Uber. A car must be able to see all humans that might be in its path. People cross streets outside of crosswalks all the time.

tyrion

Now that I would buy and keep its battery charged.

Hypno Toad

Joe Bikerider

I was recently stopped at one of my city’s long red lights when I noticed a technician with his head in the control box. So I asked him if he could just trip the green so I could go. He laughed and pointed up to the top of the pole and said “You need to get the thing that triggers that detector and you’ll always get a green light”. Gotta love a traffic engineer with a sense of humor. Makes me think....

KraneXL

Actually your cell phone already does that quite satisfactorily. This ain't 1984.

Branko D

If autonomous cars don't end up significantly safer than driven ones without requiring the rest of road users (and even pedastrians walk on the road where I live on account of there not being a sidewalk) to carry transponders, then it's obviously not yet time for fully autonomous cars. Even if some industries would profit madly from them.

Sure, I can worry about keeping a transponder device charged, ready, and in good working order. My kids ride their bikes around the neighboorhood (which, as I mentioned, doesn't have a sidewalk) whenever they like, and they sure as hell won't be checking whether their transponder is working every time they start a ride.

Maelochs

And thus should the discussion be ended.

MikeyMK

Sometimes.

mr_bill

V2X and/or C-V2X has little to do with autonomous automobiles.

In fact, V2X and/or C-V2X are rolling out now in non-autonomous vehicles - see platooning.
They'll also roll out in high end luxury vehicles, because, cool.

And the premise of the click-bait in the OP is FALSE, "they" aren't requiring you to install a "detection beacon" on your bike, let alone "chipping" you.


Now back to our regular utopian/distopian fantasies and range anxiety.

-mr. bill

noisebeam

14Hz

Coasterbrakefan

This is so stupid. If a self driving car can't work like a car that's driven buy a human (excluding the road rage ), than it's not to be allowed on the roads. Period.

The fact that they're even discussing this is ludicrous. They might as well say: "Our self driving cars can detect pretty much anything except for bicyclists. But bicyclists don't matter, so we'll stop short of designing our cars to detect bicyclists."



BikesnobNYC sums it up pretty well.

Alas, as the driverless era dawns, it’s hard not to suspect it will be more of the same for us cyclists. See, we’re a “problem” for this technology, which struggles to detect us. Therefore, various companies are developing “bicycle-to-vehicle communications.” This is a polite way of saying that in addition to the helmet and reflective clothing and lights and hand signals you’re already supposed to be using, you’ll also have to incorporate some sort of personal locator beacon to guarantee that these autonomous systems can “see” you. If you’re a fan of helmet-shaming this is great news, because you’re going to love Victim-Blaming 2.0, which will involve people blaming cyclists for their own deaths because they weren’t riding around with homing devices or subcutaneous microchips.

https://www.outsideonline.com/229290...-save-cyclists

mr_bill

BikeSnobNYC has bought into the fauxrage I see.

Again, *NOBODY* is forcing anybody to ride with homing devices or subcutaneous microchips.

This has almost *NOTHING* to do with automated vehicles. First gen systems just WARN the driver.

You can BUY IT TODAY, because, you have money and you think it's cool (see pp. 240-242).

-mr. bill

OBoile

To be honest, I'd have no problem with having a beacon on my bike, as long as it doesn't cost too much. But, I do think cars shouldn't require this.

italktocats

you mean sonar?

Hypno Toad

I'm not finding the exact application story that I'm looking for... but basically HARTING is using a cable as an antenna. This creates a field along the cable and software can calculate location based on where the RFID is detected on along the cable. This application is a controlled environment in a manufacturing facility - nothing like the roads. This tech is not ready for the autonomous vehicle detecting bikes.

Promo video with info on the tech

KraneXL

Only if you have gills.