Seemingly trivial things that intrigue you

Pross

Why they decided to set the new Death In Paradise spin off in Devon but film it in Cornwall. Good way to upset two sets of people!

First.Aspect

Cost?

Pross

First.Aspect said:

Cost?

Could just set it in Cornwall though.

briantrumpet

Pross said:

Why they decided to set the new Death In Paradise spin off in Devon but film it in Cornwall. Good way to upset two sets of people!

I hope they get the scones right at least.

webboo

Oh my god it’s not going to end up in a jam or cream first debate.
The wife’s thoughts are Kris Marshall seems to have really aged since D in P.

briantrumpet

webboo said:

Oh my god it’s not going to end up in a jam or cream first debate.
The wife’s thoughts are Kris Marshall seems to have really aged since D in P.

It could be where the pasties are crimped... along the side, or on the top.

morstar

rick_chasey said:

masjer said:

The Monty hall problem.
A brain-teaser that probably has been mentioned here before, but I like it.

Suppose you're on a game show, and you're given the choice of three doors: Behind one door is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick a door, say No. 1, and the host, who knows what's behind the doors, opens another door, say No. 3, which has a goat. He then says to you, "Do you want to pick door No. 2?"

Presuming you’d prefer a car to a goat, is it best to stick or change to box 2?

Always change

This. Took me a while to get my head round it when I first heard it. Counterintuitive but simple maths when it comes down to it.

briantrumpet

morstar said:

rick_chasey said:

masjer said:

The Monty hall problem.
A brain-teaser that probably has been mentioned here before, but I like it.

Suppose you're on a game show, and you're given the choice of three doors: Behind one door is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick a door, say No. 1, and the host, who knows what's behind the doors, opens another door, say No. 3, which has a goat. He then says to you, "Do you want to pick door No. 2?"

Presuming you’d prefer a car to a goat, is it best to stick or change to box 2?

Always change

This. Took me a while to get my head round it when I first heard it. Counterintuitive but simple maths when it comes down to it.

Well, it might be simple, but apparently not so simple that a lot of clever people didn't believe the theory until computer modelling got involved.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Hall_problem

Many readers of vos Savant's column refused to believe switching is beneficial and rejected her explanation. After the problem appeared in Parade, approximately 10,000 readers, including nearly 1,000 with PhDs, wrote to the magazine, most of them calling vos Savant wrong.[4] Even when given explanations, simulations, and formal mathematical proofs, many people still did not accept that switching is the best strategy.[5] Paul Erdős, one of the most prolific mathematicians in history, remained unconvinced until he was shown a computer simulation demonstrating vos Savant's predicted result.[6]

The problem is a paradox of the veridical type, because the solution is so counterintuitive it can seem absurd but is nevertheless demonstrably true. The Monty Hall problem is mathematically closely related to the earlier Three Prisoners problem and to the much older Bertrand's box paradox.

rjsterry

Pross said:

Why they decided to set the new Death In Paradise spin off in Devon but film it in Cornwall. Good way to upset two sets of people!

Very odd. They look so different.

kingstongraham

What's the point of a bike lane like this? It's in Putney.



https://www.google.com/maps/@51.4592236,-0.2175598,3a,75y,33.53h,82.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0n4kvdLKM59Nq5IQVjUCVQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

pinno

That irresponsible cyclist should have narrower handlebars.

First.Aspect

That's more dangerous than no cycle lane at all, because it suggests it's okay to pass dangerously close.

Whoever is responsible for that should be forced to use it for a few weeks.

pinno

First.Aspect said:

That's more dangerous than no cycle lane at all, because it suggests it's okay to pass dangerously close.

Whoever is responsible for that should be forced to use it for a few weeks.

Where's the 1.5m rule in that?

rick_chasey

First.Aspect said:

That's more dangerous than no cycle lane at all, because it suggests it's okay to pass dangerously close.

Whoever is responsible for that should be forced to use it for a few weeks.

Used to be a tonne of those in Cambridge when I grew up.

Have been phased out

kingstongraham

This is probably worse, a bit further down the same road.

https://www.google.com/maps/@51.4594046,-0.2174923,3a,75y,3.97h,65.77t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sf-WYfAMRrUtvXvTQvhy3-w!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

First.Aspect

rick_chasey said:

First.Aspect said:

That's more dangerous than no cycle lane at all, because it suggests it's okay to pass dangerously close.

Whoever is responsible for that should be forced to use it for a few weeks.

Used to be a tonne of those in Cambridge when I grew up.

Have been phased out

There are a few in the Borders where they've made ultra wide cycle lanes with a car's width in-between (as well as the road centre line).

I suppose the idea is to show thst only 1 car can pass if there's a cyclist, but the result is about the same as having no road markings whatsoever.

pblakeney

kingstongraham said:

What's the point of a bike lane like this? It's in Putney.

Telling cyclists to stay in the gutter where they belong. 🤬
Worst place to be as it tempts drivers to squeeze by and break current laws.

Pross

kingstongraham said:

What's the point of a bike lane like this? It's in Putney.



https://www.google.com/maps/@51.4592236,-0.2175598,3a,75y,33.53h,82.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0n4kvdLKM59Nq5IQVjUCVQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

There isn't but when it was put in (probably in the 90s or early 00s) it probably ticked a box on a cycle policy. I hate advisory cycle lanes, to most motorists they just mean a cyclist should stick to that area, to inexperienced cyclists it does the same and it is usually the exact area a cyclist shouldn't be positioned.

rjsterry

kingstongraham said:

What's the point of a bike lane like this? It's in Putney.



https://www.google.com/maps/@51.4592236,-0.2175598,3a,75y,33.53h,82.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0n4kvdLKM59Nq5IQVjUCVQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

So that someone can point to infrastructure that they have commissioned to get someone else off their back.

surrey_commuter

I thought I imagined cycle lanes on the A3. For those not familiar it is a two lane dual carriageway with motorway like slip roads which must make cycling exciting

Pross

rjsterry said:

kingstongraham said:

What's the point of a bike lane like this? It's in Putney.



https://www.google.com/maps/@51.4592236,-0.2175598,3a,75y,33.53h,82.64t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0n4kvdLKM59Nq5IQVjUCVQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

So that someone can point to infrastructure that they have commissioned to get someone else off their back.

This is one of the most annoying things in my job. We often get pushed into providing 'infrastructure' that plainly won't provide any benefit like the examples above so someone else can tick a box. I'm all for designing high quality walking and cycling infrastructure but when it plainly won't fit in the space available it is usually better to do nothing than force something sub-standard to pay lip service.

kingstongraham

surrey_commuter said:

I thought I imagined cycle lanes on the A3. For those not familiar it is a two lane dual carriageway with motorway like slip roads which must make cycling exciting

https://www.google.com/maps/@51.180422,-0.6516995,3a,62.6y,12.97h,70.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNstb4jzP0kbuaeERCm_5NA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Pross

kingstongraham said:

surrey_commuter said:

I thought I imagined cycle lanes on the A3. For those not familiar it is a two lane dual carriageway with motorway like slip roads which must make cycling exciting

https://www.google.com/maps/@51.180422,-0.6516995,3a,62.6y,12.97h,70.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNstb4jzP0kbuaeERCm_5NA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

What's even more baffling is that it ends after the slip road. All I can assume is they've put it in to encourage anyone who does cycle on there to cross the slip road rather than staying on the mainline in the path of merging vehicles.

Edit - yes, I'm pretty sure that's why they've done it. They only have the markings immediately either side of slip roads so it is to divert them into crossing on the slip itself instead of riding across the mouth of the merge or diverge areas which does actually make some kind of sense in safety terms. They just haven't done it very well.

kingstongraham

Pross said:

kingstongraham said:

surrey_commuter said:

I thought I imagined cycle lanes on the A3. For those not familiar it is a two lane dual carriageway with motorway like slip roads which must make cycling exciting

https://www.google.com/maps/@51.180422,-0.6516995,3a,62.6y,12.97h,70.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNstb4jzP0kbuaeERCm_5NA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

What's even more baffling is that it ends after the slip road. All I can assume is they've put it in to encourage anyone who does cycle on there to cross the slip road rather than staying on the mainline in the path of merging vehicles.

Edit - yes, I'm pretty sure that's why they've done it. They only have the markings immediately either side of slip roads so it is to divert them into crossing on the slip itself instead of riding across the mouth of the merge or diverge areas which does actually make some kind of sense in safety terms. They just haven't done it very well.

I love the little give way sign on the bike path.

pinno

kingstongraham said:

Pross said:

kingstongraham said:

surrey_commuter said:

I thought I imagined cycle lanes on the A3. For those not familiar it is a two lane dual carriageway with motorway like slip roads which must make cycling exciting

https://www.google.com/maps/@51.180422,-0.6516995,3a,62.6y,12.97h,70.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNstb4jzP0kbuaeERCm_5NA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

What's even more baffling is that it ends after the slip road. All I can assume is they've put it in to encourage anyone who does cycle on there to cross the slip road rather than staying on the mainline in the path of merging vehicles.

Edit - yes, I'm pretty sure that's why they've done it. They only have the markings immediately either side of slip roads so it is to divert them into crossing on the slip itself instead of riding across the mouth of the merge or diverge areas which does actually make some kind of sense in safety terms. They just haven't done it very well.

I love the little give way sign on the bike path.

Pedestrians have this innate and uncanny ability to just step out in front of you without looking, soi therefore, the road designers think we are just as stupid and need signage*.

However (and as a caveat), I think you would have to be a bit stupid to cycle along that stretch of dual carriageway if you had the choice.

*Pross will step in here and say it's just regs but we don't need that level of logic and understanding in here as it's just no fun.

orraloon

There are similar arrangements, divert off main carriageway cross slip road at right angles then carry on, on the A34 and A43. Those are heavy, high speed traffic routes. Would have to be psycho or suicidal to ride on them.

First.Aspect

In any shared use path, even the colour coded ones across Edinburgh, absolutely without exception, pedestrians and joggers use the side with bicycles drawn on it.

pblakeney

kingstongraham said:

Pross said:

kingstongraham said:

surrey_commuter said:

I thought I imagined cycle lanes on the A3. For those not familiar it is a two lane dual carriageway with motorway like slip roads which must make cycling exciting

https://www.google.com/maps/@51.180422,-0.6516995,3a,62.6y,12.97h,70.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNstb4jzP0kbuaeERCm_5NA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

What's even more baffling is that it ends after the slip road. All I can assume is they've put it in to encourage anyone who does cycle on there to cross the slip road rather than staying on the mainline in the path of merging vehicles.

Edit - yes, I'm pretty sure that's why they've done it. They only have the markings immediately either side of slip roads so it is to divert them into crossing on the slip itself instead of riding across the mouth of the merge or diverge areas which does actually make some kind of sense in safety terms. They just haven't done it very well.

I love the little give way sign on the bike path.

Is it just my eyesight or did they really paint part of the bike sign on the verge?

kingstongraham

pblakeney said:

kingstongraham said:

Pross said:

kingstongraham said:

surrey_commuter said:

I thought I imagined cycle lanes on the A3. For those not familiar it is a two lane dual carriageway with motorway like slip roads which must make cycling exciting

https://www.google.com/maps/@51.180422,-0.6516995,3a,62.6y,12.97h,70.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNstb4jzP0kbuaeERCm_5NA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

What's even more baffling is that it ends after the slip road. All I can assume is they've put it in to encourage anyone who does cycle on there to cross the slip road rather than staying on the mainline in the path of merging vehicles.

Edit - yes, I'm pretty sure that's why they've done it. They only have the markings immediately either side of slip roads so it is to divert them into crossing on the slip itself instead of riding across the mouth of the merge or diverge areas which does actually make some kind of sense in safety terms. They just haven't done it very well.

I love the little give way sign on the bike path.

Is it just my eyesight or did they really paint part of the bike sign on the verge?

No, but there is one on a drain.

pblakeney

kingstongraham said:

pblakeney said:

kingstongraham said:

Pross said:

kingstongraham said:

surrey_commuter said:

I thought I imagined cycle lanes on the A3. For those not familiar it is a two lane dual carriageway with motorway like slip roads which must make cycling exciting

https://www.google.com/maps/@51.180422,-0.6516995,3a,62.6y,12.97h,70.43t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sNstb4jzP0kbuaeERCm_5NA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

What's even more baffling is that it ends after the slip road. All I can assume is they've put it in to encourage anyone who does cycle on there to cross the slip road rather than staying on the mainline in the path of merging vehicles.

Edit - yes, I'm pretty sure that's why they've done it. They only have the markings immediately either side of slip roads so it is to divert them into crossing on the slip itself instead of riding across the mouth of the merge or diverge areas which does actually make some kind of sense in safety terms. They just haven't done it very well.

I love the little give way sign on the bike path.

Is it just my eyesight or did they really paint part of the bike sign on the verge?

No, but there is one on a drain.

That'll be what I was looking at. Clearly people simply doing what they are told and not questioning the absurd.