Every single person that stops and looks due to this is a win in my book.

I don't know where you're from, but in Germany for example, there are countless situations where cyclists and pedestrians share the same space, or pedestrians can (or just do…) cross bicycle lanes. I'm a very law-abiding cyclist since witnessing a few horrible accidents, and yet I encounter situations with headphone-wearing pedestrians regularly. Often I'll ring my bell to no avail, until driving right up to them, and they still won't hear me. This is really frustrating; I'm definitely in the market for this.

I am aware that most countries do not have dedicated roads for cyclists, but that doesn't mean that cyclists should be using sidewalks. When I go out and walk on the sidewalk, I expect to be able to just walk safely without having to think about potential riders of bicycles or other things that people ride on sidewalks.

No he meant this: https://www.fahrradstadt-braunschweig.de/wp-content/uploads/...

Left side is for bicycles. Right side for pedestrians. It is a dedicated lane but a shared space.

> I am aware that most countries do not have dedicated roads for cyclists, but that doesn't mean that cyclists should be using sidewalks.

Huh? Germany has signs on same shared pavements that tell you that by law your bike needs to be on there, not on the road.

Are you suggesting people break the law over your preferences?

Then it's a stupid law. But from the image that other commenter gave, it does look like Germany has space that is clearly intended for cyclists, and I have no issue with that. I have issue with instances when people cycle on sidewalks intended for pedestrians.

It's not always as clearly demarcated as on that picture; sometimes there's just a sign.

I would also argue that a reasonably broad way for pedestrians and bicyclists can be shared without any issue, if both parties pay some modicum of attention to their surroundings and treat each other with mutual respect: Pedestrians by keeping to the right side of the path, and cyclists by slowing down when overtaking and ringing the bell to let people know they are approaching.

Also: kids under a certain age are generally required to cycle on the footpath. They need bells, too.

If just slowing down helps to prevent an accident, not sure what the bell would be good for - except for signaling your frustration to everyone around you

> I'm a very law-abiding cyclist since witnessing a few horrible accidents, and yet I encounter situations with headphone-wearing pedestrians regularly. Often I'll ring my bell to no avail, until driving right up to them, and they still won't hear me. This is really frustrating; I'm definitely in the market for this.

I’m guessing some law (law-abiding) gives you the right to bother people who are using their own feet instead of wheels because you want to pass them and they should have to actively watch out for you and yield to you? Okay, that part is fine. But I don’t see how it is nice or, I dunno, ethical.

In my experience (in my locale) as a cyclist you either give pedestrians a wide enough berth, dismount so that you can pass them if it is crowded and there is no passage, or use the vehicular road.

I remember violating this one time when I belled someone that I wanted to pass on the sidewalk. But I was a child at the time. Even more self-centered than I am now.

These seeming rules for yielding to cyclists are worse than the laws and norms when cars interact with bicycles, by the way. At least where I am: cars never honk cyclists. They have to wait for them or find a window to pass them safely. They can’t honk them into the ditch or something.

> I’m guessing some law (law-abiding) gives you the right to bother people who are using their own feet instead of wheels because you want to pass them and they should have to actively watch out for you and yield to you? Okay, that part is fine. But I don’t see how it is nice or, I dunno, ethical.

No. There are just people who will walk on a designated bicycle lane because they haven't seen the signage, are ignorant or careless about it, or will just cross it to get somewhere else. All while wearing ANC headphones. This isn't about bothering someone, but warning them. It's really no different from someone jaywalking without seeing you, and honking to make them aware of that. Or are you supposing you'd just break and wait until they're finished crossing the street?

I totally agree in the context of bicycle lanes.

Sorry. Apparently I didn’t read your comment carefully enough.

I can recommend you to spend some free time to really listen to music again, Beethoven, Hendrix, Gorillaz, Slayer, Sub Focus, whatever floats your boats your boat. Your brain is wired to remember and sing along to music around a campfire, and will pump you full of exquisite drugs if you really give into it, ideally together with other people. Alleviates stress and makes you happy.

Music demoted to just background noise is unrelated to the social concept of music, which is so ingrained in our nature that we all can’t escape it. And that to me is also why I agree with OP—AI-generated music is fundamentally treason to our species.

FCKGW-RHQQ2-…

Those particular neurons of mine haven't seen action in quite some time, thank you.

I worked at Gateway during this era and always saw that in the light of me quitting when XP came out and drove me crazy. FCKGW indeed.

> unless the American government stops them doing it.

Like they had any authority to dictate what Germany can do with their property, but hey

Yes, it's called the nuclear umbrella, Potsdam '45 and the fact that the Soviets are out of the equation. Even with the Soviets in place the Americans had no second thoughts about getting rid of Bretton Woods when it suited them.

There’s nuance and a difference between ownership and possession

As is between authority and ability

Possession is 90% ownership. In this case, especially with Trump, it's 100%

Yeah, thank you. Also, JavaScript today means TypeScript—an arguably extremely capable type system actively developed by Microsoft—and several, modern runtimes with a big standard library and solid asynchronous primitives. There are a lot worse scripting languages out there.

Folks misunderstand the whole point just because I mention TypeScript. Sure it’s a capable and elegant language. Doesn’t change the fact that it’s a bloated monstrosity on the desktop.

Think about it: it transpiles to JavaScript. Even if it’s the most elegant language in the world doesn’t change the fact that it’s a world of bloat.

Stacks on stacks on stacks. And yet people are complaining about .Net? Come on. Lol

Transpilation and bloat are orthogonal. Javascript being bloated or not is also a relative: consider Python, which is much slower than js, and much more memory hungry.

To further argue your original point: chrome & electron are the only reason desktop is still around, both Microsoft and Apple tried their very hardest to build a walled garden of GUI frameworks, rejecting the very idea of compatibility, good design, and ease of use, until they were surpassed by the web, and particularly Google, showing that delivering functioning applications to a computer does not require gigantic widget libraries, outdated looks or complicated downloads & install processes, but is in fact nothing more than a bit of standardization and a couple MBs of text.

All this electron & web hate is so incredibly misplaced I don't even know where to begin. Have you tried making a cross platform mac/win native app? I have, its like being catapulted into the stone age, but you're asked to build a skyscraper.

Why would transpiling change anything? C++ was once transpiled into C. I appreciate that you personally think JavaScript is poorly designed (I mostly agree!) but that doesn't mean it's slow. V8 can do miracles nowadays.

I usually do several passes of "review our work. Look for things to clean up, simplify, or refactor." It does usually improve the quality quite a lot; then I rewind history to before, but keep the changes, and submit the same prompt again, until it reaches the point of diminishing returns.

Are you tired of winning yet?

I recommend dreaming of they day they don't have a secretary of war but defence again

I don't mind the name change because it more correctly signals what the position has always been -- a secretary of war with a "secretary of defense" mask on.