RLJ - What's the big deal?

Headhuunter

bomberesque wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

If this happens, all cyclists will be forced to queue behind the slowest.

again .... no

it will be this way whilst cycle lanes are made the width of one bike but there are several cities (old ones with narrow windy streets too) which show that this need not be the case.

I share the cycle lanes with all and sundry. old ladies, suits, kids, TDF wannabes and even the odd moped. I rarely get held up and while I'm not the fastest out there, I dare to say I'm top 1/4. The difference is that the cycle lanes have been made about 2.5m wide where at all possible, so there's space for 2 abreast easy and 3 at a squeeze. Of course this means prioritising bike lanes in some case at the expense of car traffic lanes, something the UK isn't very progressive at. Gets the bikes off the road though, which is what the drivers seem to want so it's win-win from where I stand.

Given the choice between filtering through traffic and having my own bike lane, my choice is clear. I really hope that the Superhighway scheme in London fulfills its potential but having seen some of the "artist's impressions" I suspect it will be a rather symbolic effort

Hmmm. I can still imagine blockages but would gladly be proved wrong. I can imagine people spreading themselves quite liberally across the width of these lanes. I'm sure you'd get a couple pottering along having a chinwag then another person just offset near them and bang, the lane is blocked and anyone going faster has to slow adding to the blockage etc. There are a lot of bikes on London's roads, particularly at rush hour, I can't imagine them all happily fitting together along a track 2.5m wide.

I haven't looked at the artist mock ups of the cycling superhighways, but I'm sure they will be largely symbolic. Boris simply doesn't have the balls to push through a cycling friendly policy as his voting heartland is wealthy west London where mummy wants to be able to drive Tarquin and Emilia to school in the Hummer.

Paulie W

jimjamyaharr wrote:

the tree stiil makes a niose

does an RLJer?

They do if they are hit by car!

blu3cat

Bassjunkieuk wrote:

jimjamyaharr wrote:

the tree stiil makes a niose

does an RLJer?

They make a bloody loud noise when they get hit by the boy racer chav in his Nova @ 3am in the morning!

But then you have an observer, without an observer it is impossible to ascertain any outcomes, or effects. And the nature of observation influences the outcome of the interaction at a microscopic level

(christ too much Quantum mechanics - I'll get me coat)

Kieran_Burns

lost_in_thought wrote:

pangolin wrote:

lost_in_thought wrote:

Bassjunkieuk wrote:

lost_in_thought wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

LiT, do you play Command and Conquer?

I used to, haven't done in years.

Tesla coils rock.

They only rock up until the point where I waste your power stations, instant power deficit turns your tesla coils into street furniture :-D

You won't get anywhere near my power stations... not with this many tesla coils. I'll be all like BZZZZZZZT ZAP and you'll be all like 'oh no'! :P

I used to make the most ridiculously elaborate defences out of teslas and flame towers. Bridges were the best - nothing survived.

Ooooh yeah, flame towers! The teslas were more effective but still. I wonder if you can download red alert like you can GTA1 and 2...

Don't forget the Tesla troops who could boost the range of the towers if they stood near them.

Bassjunkieuk

lost_in_thought wrote:

pangolin wrote:

lost_in_thought wrote:

Bassjunkieuk wrote:

lost_in_thought wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

LiT, do you play Command and Conquer?

I used to, haven't done in years.

Tesla coils rock.

They only rock up until the point where I waste your power stations, instant power deficit turns your tesla coils into street furniture :-D

You won't get anywhere near my power stations... not with this many tesla coils. I'll be all like BZZZZZZZT ZAP and you'll be all like 'oh no'! :P

I used to make the most ridiculously elaborate defences out of teslas and flame towers. Bridges were the best - nothing survived.

Ooooh yeah, flame towers! The teslas were more effective but still. I wonder if you can download red alert like you can GTA1 and 2...

Google is failing me atm, but googling abandonware should get you in the right area......

DonDaddyD

Final Fantasy X was the best game ever. Next to Zelda. If you try to deny it you're ghey.

The love between Tidus and Yuna made me cry this was all the more so in Final Fantasy X-2 with this scene: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XhGU_sOr6s8

I love me a computer game that builds the characters up and makes you connect to them emotionally.

@jimjamyaharr: The tree doesn't make a sound because you don't know the if the tree exists. In fact the tree is both standing and have fallen over until you see it....

blu3cat

Final Fantasy X was the best game ever. Next to Zelda. If you try to deny it you're ghey.

FF7, much better tham FFX IMHO.

Headhuunter

DonDaddyD wrote:

Final Fantasy X was the best game ever. Next to Zelda. If you try to deny it you're ghey.

The love between Tidus and Yuna made me cry this was all the more so in Final Fantasy X-2 with this scene: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XhGU_sOr6s8

I love me a computer game that builds the characters up and makes you connect to them emotionally.

@jimjamyaharr: The tree doesn't make a sound because you don't know the if the tree exists. In fact the tree is both standing and have fallen over until you see it....

What is this "ghey" business? Just say "gay" and be done with it. It's not a naughty word.

Bassjunkieuk

blu3cat wrote:

Final Fantasy X was the best game ever. Next to Zelda. If you try to deny it you're ghey.

FF7, much better tham FFX IMHO.

FFX was awesome, X-2 was good and added some variety. Unfortunately my parents got me a SNES when they should have been buying a PSX so I haven't experienced FF7 and have experienced Zelda (have it now for my Wii on the Virtual Console.......)

One of my favourite cutscenes in FFX (I think it was X, don't flame me to hard if I'm wrong) was Yuna's Thousand Words song.......

DonDaddyD

@blu3cat, I can accept that the FF7 (the guy you could never beat until omni-slash) was nd is regarded as the best Final Fantasy ever, I can't even argue that. By my personal choice is FFX.

Auron is also the coolest character ever.

Bassjunkieuk

DonDaddyD wrote:

Auron is also the coolest character ever.

+1

blu3cat

DonDaddyD wrote:

@blu3cat, I can accept that the FF7 (the guy you could never beat until omni-slash) was nd is regarded as the best Final Fantasy ever, I can't even argue that. By my personal choice is FFX.

Auron is also the coolest character ever.

yep, fair enough. Super Mario Kart anyone.....

Bassjunkieuk

blu3cat wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

@blu3cat, I can accept that the FF7 (the guy you could never beat until omni-slash) was nd is regarded as the best Final Fantasy ever, I can't even argue that. By my personal choice is FFX.

Auron is also the coolest character ever.

yep, fair enough. Super Mario Kart anyone.....

We have really hijacked this thread..........

Which SMK tho, SNES, N64 or Wii ;-) Got hold of the Wii version recently and loving playing through that but have many fond memories of the summer holidays after finishing high school spent with 3 mates playing SMK and Goldeneye on the N64 :-D

blu3cat

Which SMK tho, SNES, N64 or Wii[/url]

Snes, original and best.

As for RLJers, well that's their choice, shame as cyclists we all get lumped together. I no longer get wound up by them, unless they endanger me or others around them.

I suspect most people who do RLJ will not listen to the most articulate and well thought out arguments and change their ways. (oh cr*p now I'm stereotyping) :roll:

lost_in_thought

Bassjunkieuk wrote:

blu3cat wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

@blu3cat, I can accept that the FF7 (the guy you could never beat until omni-slash) was nd is regarded as the best Final Fantasy ever, I can't even argue that. By my personal choice is FFX.

Auron is also the coolest character ever.

yep, fair enough. Super Mario Kart anyone.....

We have really hijacked this thread..........

Which SMK tho, SNES, N64 or Wii ;-) Got hold of the Wii version recently and loving playing through that but have many fond memories of the summer holidays after finishing high school spent with 3 mates playing SMK and Goldeneye on the N64 :-D

Ooooh N64 is a classic, obviously, I also have it on the gamecube, which is a pretty fun version! Not tried it on the Wii though. After playing it on the gamecube for a few hours the other day, plugged the N64 in to have a go at retro SMK, and we were all complaining about sore eyes after about 20 minutes from the poor resolution!

As for goldeneye, classic. I played it enough that I could predict where people would respawn on multiplayer, so go there and kill them!

Headhuunter

blu3cat wrote:

Which SMK tho, SNES, N64 or Wii[/url]

Snes, original and best.

As for RLJers, well that's their choice, shame as cyclists we all get lumped together. I no longer get wound up by them, unless they endanger me or others around them.

I suspect most people who do RLJ will not listen to the most articulate and well thought out arguments and change their ways. (oh cr*p now I'm stereotyping) :roll:

I would say the opposite, people who DON'T RLJ are just going with the norm without any consideration. It takes more effort to think it through and put a case opposing the general consensus of opinion

d21dga

lost_in_thought wrote:

Bassjunkieuk wrote:

blu3cat wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

@blu3cat, I can accept that the FF7 (the guy you could never beat until omni-slash) was nd is regarded as the best Final Fantasy ever, I can't even argue that. By my personal choice is FFX.

Auron is also the coolest character ever.

yep, fair enough. Super Mario Kart anyone.....

We have really hijacked this thread..........

Which SMK tho, SNES, N64 or Wii ;-) Got hold of the Wii version recently and loving playing through that but have many fond memories of the summer holidays after finishing high school spent with 3 mates playing SMK and Goldeneye on the N64 :-D

Ooooh N64 is a classic, obviously, I also have it on the gamecube, which is a pretty fun version! Not tried it on the Wii though. After playing it on the gamecube for a few hours the other day, plugged the N64 in to have a go at retro SMK, and we were all complaining about sore eyes after about 20 minutes from the poor resolution!

As for goldeneye, classic. I played it enough that I could predict where people would respawn on multiplayer, so go there and kill them!

Definitely the N64 for Mario Kart.
This is making me nostalgic, think I'll go home and dig out the Megadrive and have a blast on Sonic and MicroMachines!! :P

jimjamyaharr

blu3cat
do you really belive that any effect has to have an odserver to make it reallity?
There is no sound unless there is someone there to hear it and all that?




did you read it on the interweb?

Headhuunter

jimjamyaharr wrote:

blu3cat
do you really belive that any effect has to have an odserver to make it reallity?
There is no sound unless there is someone there to hear it and all that?




did you read it on the interweb?

Blucat is referring one of life's great philosophical conundrums - If a tree falls over in a forest and there is no one or no animal around to witness or hear it. Does it make a sound? Think about it. Sound is just the effect of vibrations in the atmosphere on your eardrums. If you are not there to feel these vibrations, is there any sound?

Porgy

Headhuunter wrote:

MatHammond wrote:

I'm all for the status quo - ride alongside the traffic, use our greater manoeverability to filter when the traffic gets jammed and take advantage of the fact that the laws on red lights aren't really enforced, thereby allowing us to get through (when its safe to do so) and get ahead of the motorised traffic. The idea of "cycling super-highways" etc doesn't really appeal to me. I like the fact that I can move at speed through the current system and would hate to be marginalised on a separate cycle path, stuggling to get past slow moving kids and old women on shoppers. Would pretty much kill any kind of road cycling within any city where it was introduced.

I appreciate the above is all very selfish - not everybody is happy to deal with the dangers of traffic in a big city and for a lot of people the idea of separate dedicated cycle lanes is a good one, but I kind of like things how they are.

I agree completely. I really don't want to be segredated behind some wall or fence or even a ridge on the road surface. If this happens, all cyclists will be forced to queue behind the slowest. I relish the ability to filter quickly thruogh gridlocked traffic and jump reds when nothing is going on.

I refer you to my previous post which states that nothing of this sort is being proposed.

http://www.bikeradar.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=15518423&highlight=#15518423

jimjamyaharr

sorry i no its not hard but im confused

not about RLJing

but about the hole trees and noise thing

blu3cat

jimjamyaharr wrote:

blu3cat
do you really belive that any effect has to have an odserver to make it reallity?
There is no sound unless there is someone there to hear it and all that?




did you read it on the interweb?

no, Uni.

The tree falling over, no noise thingy is an illustration of the effect of the observer on the measurement or effect they are observing. In Quantum Mechanics it is impossible to disentangle the role of the observer from the experiment, and they can be seen to be causing the effect measured (see Schroedinger's cat).

Porgy

bomberesque wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

If this happens, all cyclists will be forced to queue behind the slowest.

again .... no

it will be this way whilst cycle lanes are made the width of one bike but there are several cities (old ones with narrow windy streets too) which show that this need not be the case.

I share the cycle lanes with all and sundry. old ladies, suits, kids, TDF wannabes and even the odd moped. I rarely get held up and while I'm not the fastest out there, I dare to say I'm top 1/4. The difference is that the cycle lanes have been made about 2.5m wide where at all possible, so there's space for 2 abreast easy and 3 at a squeeze. Of course this means prioritising bike lanes in some case at the expense of car traffic lanes, something the UK isn't very progressive at. Gets the bikes off the road though, which is what the drivers seem to want so it's win-win from where I stand.

Given the choice between filtering through traffic and having my own bike lane, my choice is clear. I really hope that the Superhighway scheme in London fulfills its potential but having seen some of the "artist's impressions" I suspect it will be a rather symbolic effort

I attended a presentation on this last week. We're getting two next year - and they will probably not be very good - in effect a rush job.

However, TfL are proposing 12 for 2010. There will be a consultation process. It is our chance to raise exactly what we want to happen - the LCC won't endorse something that segregates cyclists or forces us to queue behind the slowest cyclist, and neither will I.

The best chance that the Superhighways have of succeeding is if as many cyclists as possible get involved in the discussion, becasue if they don't we may end up with a huge pile of kack being forced upon us, and £165m will have been wasted.

Headhuunter

jimjamyaharr wrote:

sorry i no its not hard but im confused

not about RLJing

but about the hole trees and noise thing

Think harder. If noise is simply the reaction of vibrations in the air on your eardrum, if your eardrum is not present, does the noise exist? Does noise exist outside human (or animal) perception? Surely if no one is present to "hear" the tree falling, there is simply a rushing of air but no noise.

Think about noise outside human hearing. If you set off one of those rat deterrent noise thingumys you don't hear anything. So to you the noise does not exist.

I suppose you could say the same about taste. Does chocolate taste of chocolate? Taste is simply your perception. There may be whole spectrums of taste associated with chocolate that human's simply cannot experience.

DonDaddyD

OK jim, think of it this way. What noise am I making now? How can you even know I'm making a noise if you can't see me and have never seen me. You can because your mind can imagine me making a noise out of familar past experiences of the noise humans can make.

The idea behind the tree is to make us aware that we are are capable of thinking in abstracts. It's this ability (so would argue at the sacrifice of instinct) that has enabled us to explore and create build structures.

The real answer is that the tree does and does not make a sound until you've seen it on the floor.

Porgy

blu3cat wrote:

jimjamyaharr wrote:

blu3cat
do you really belive that any effect has to have an odserver to make it reallity?
There is no sound unless there is someone there to hear it and all that?




did you read it on the interweb?

no, Uni.

The tree falling over, no noise thingy is an illustration of the effect of the observer on the measurement or effect they are observing. In Quantum Mechanics it is impossible to disentangle the role of the observer from the experiment, and they can be seen to be causing the effect measured (see Schroedinger's cat).

No - it's older than that - it's a question Bishop Berkley asked in his enquiries regarding observation and knowledge of reality.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/If_a_tree_falls_in_a_forest

DonDaddyD

Think harder. If noise is simply the reaction of vibrations in the air on your eardrum, if your eardrum is not present, does the noise exist? Does noise exist outside human (or animal) perception? Surely if no one is present to "hear" the tree falling, there is simply a rushing of air but no noise.

Sigh... but headhunter, the noise both exists and doesn't.

It does because we know what tree falling over sounds like.

It doesn't becuase we didn't hear it.

There doesn't have to be on right answer, that is the whole point behind quantum possibilities.

blu3cat

Porgy wrote:

blu3cat wrote:

jimjamyaharr wrote:

blu3cat
do you really belive that any effect has to have an odserver to make it reallity?
There is no sound unless there is someone there to hear it and all that?




did you read it on the interweb?

no, Uni.

The tree falling over, no noise thingy is an illustration of the effect of the observer on the measurement or effect they are observing. In Quantum Mechanics it is impossible to disentangle the role of the observer from the experiment, and they can be seen to be causing the effect measured (see Schroedinger's cat).

No - it's older than that - it's a question Bishop Berkley asked in his enquiries regarding observation and knowledge of reality.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/If_a_tree_falls_in_a_forest

I stand corrected, although it does illustrate the point beautifullly.

bigmat

How about colour - do we all see it the same? You might see what I see as red, as blue. How can you ever know we all see colour the same way? That probably sounds like nonsense, but I had a drunken debate about this with an optometrist friend once...

Headhuunter

DonDaddyD wrote:

Think harder. If noise is simply the reaction of vibrations in the air on your eardrum, if your eardrum is not present, does the noise exist? Does noise exist outside human (or animal) perception? Surely if no one is present to "hear" the tree falling, there is simply a rushing of air but no noise.

Sigh... but headhunter, the noise both exists and doesn't.

It does because we know what tree falling over sounds like.

It doesn't becuase we didn't hear it.

There doesn't have to be on right answer, that is the whole point behind quantum possibilities.

Yes, I see that, I was going with the simplest explanation which acc to Porgy's link was Bishop wassisname's original thought. Metahysics and quantum mechanics has since made it all a bit messy. Can we go back to RLJ-ing now?