The overwhelmingly most common one I see is cyclists not stopping at STOP signs (or worse, red lights), and the real crazy ones appear to not even slow down.
It is illegal to run a stop sign, and it is certainly possible a car (crossways or turning) will arrive first and have right of way. So a car is turning, why should it expect a cyclist to come plowing through on a whim?
Again: it is ILLEGAL for cyclists to run stop signs. You have to stop, just like a car. (And in case you think it’s no big deal, I see plenty of cars that aren’t too good at stopping either. You want to hit them?)
It actually depends on the state laws in the US. More states are starting to adopt the Idaho stop. Though I agree that cyclists who abandon all situational awareness when arriving at intersections are just future organ donors.
> ...overwhelmingly most common one I see is cyclists not stopping at STOP signs
It's common, yes, but it's not even close to the primary cause of any of the accidents in the article.
For whatever reasons, many folks have a serious problem with cyclists pragmatically taking certain liberties that they, as motorists, don't have. You would be correct in situations where cyclists blindly zip through intersections without awareness, but that's almost never the case. What actually happens is that cyclists assess the intersection from a point of view that's far better than a motorist who is lower and can't hear or see as well as a cyclist because of their position/enclosure. Cyclists choose to take the risk to proceed because it takes physical exertion to come to a full stop and then start-up again. That's very taxing on a commute.
> ... Again: it is ILLEGAL for cyclists to run stop signs
Sure it is, if you're one of those "letter of the law" people (and your usage of CAPS suggests that you are). In practice, it's allowed with a common sense judgement call. I've done it more times that I can remember in front of police. I have heard of police enforcing this occasionally to "send a message" but it's never sustained.
It's also "ILLEGAL" to run red lights on a bike, but that is done anyways for pragmatic reasons. If you're a cyclist, the most dangerous time is when traffic starts moving again. Motor vehicles can be going at speed just as you're getting clipped in and starting to move. In certain cases, it's just better to get yourself through the intersection and to the other side before the cars start moving. That way, you can position yourself and be visible to them. There's fewer surprises that way for everyone.
In some situations, it is empirically safer for cyclists to clear intersections against red/stop signs. Usually because there's no other traffic crossing their path at those times.
Of course, the egregious cases you've witnessed are probably not those situations, so this is more as a reminder that sometimes the dichotomy of the law is not what matters most to the individual.
Speeding is ILLEGAL as well. Yet car drivers don't seem that bothered. Funny how a car driver doing something ILLEGAL which substantially increases the risk of death for other road users is acceptable, but a cyclist doing something ILLEGAL which doesn't increase the risk of death for other road users is completely unacceptable.
Everyone breaks laws. Cars and cyclists just break different laws. For example it is also illegal to drive so close to the car in front of you that you can't brake, and yet we have lots of rear-end accidents.
And it hasn’t evolved with cloud/sandboxing/magic-paths/whatever. Like today on the Mac I used the popup directory path to try to navigate to the parent directory (since it showed it to me, and it was selectable) and it couldn’t; it just threw me to my home folder as if that was my request. I can only assume it was some weird cloud thing but when path navigation itself is a question mark we have problems.
This is also one of the many cases of Apple not following their own guidelines. They suggested that Touch Bar items should act statically like keyboard keys and not be used to display status, etc. (In reality, plenty were abused for that, I guess the allure of a dynamic colorful display was too great.)
So in this case, all they had to do was make it key-like and it wouldn’t have had any of the features that could trigger this problem.
Apple no longer has the hunger to get things right. It's sad as I've enjoyed the ride since 1995 but without Steve and Jony, and without having a "early acceptance stage" leaders like, but instead having a "late acceptance stage" leader (Tim the accountant), this is par for the corporate lifecycle - nothing lasts forever and Apple is now just as bureaucratic as IBM, Sperry, DEC, etc. The key thing about bureaucracies that reach this point is they become more interested in preserve bureaucratic power and privilege than focusing on customer mission. It's been repeated so many times you'd think someone would finally figure out and implement the formula to prevent it, but not ever Apple has.
Brings back memories; the Apple Platinum look appeared around the time when 90% of the UI was black-and-white or at least boring so it really seemed to instantly transform the Mac into a professional-looking tool.
I can’t wait until they release it (oh wait, they did, decades ago; now we just have — whatever — the Mac is now).
A really cool example of good debugging especially without the source.
Also a good reminder that the slow thing may not be what you think and if you aren’t profiling you don’t really know what’s going on.
And an even better reminder that typical “metrics” trying to assess developer value can be pretty meaningless. This is the kind of code change that would drastically improve everything but show up as a blip on some of the pathetic measurements out there, e.g. hardly any lines of code or whatever.
Proper up-front never occurred because Apple refuses to implement a simple free-trial-period mechanism. And it is impossible to filter store searches in a way that tells you which apps would behave roughly in that way (therefore anything with IAP I just assume must be a gambling/gem-bags/garbage model).
Really no video game lets you do a free trial. To me the start of all this was Google. Google completely changed the way we interact with services and technology. It’s amazing and completely “free”.
Back when games were distributed as a physical media, there were demo version you could get with a game magazine for free, or early downloads via Internet. Plus Google Play in the beginning let you try any purchased app for, what? 48 hours? I don't recall exactly now.
The only way to really deter this stuff is to make it cost the sender something per spam. Bonus points if the user can feed back into the system to discourage truly unpopular notifications.
Like any organization, things have to be reliable and some open-source doesn’t really have the support model figured out.
And if cost is an issue, that is more an indictment of how schools are funded: if there doesn’t seem to be room in the budget for buying software and/or support, why is that the budget?
“…in that order” is the full quote, and omitting that from the title really changes the point.
Ultimately if you don’t work on the first two, it isn’t enough to have the third. Persuasion is really important because you’re usually not working in a vacuum.
It is illegal to run a stop sign, and it is certainly possible a car (crossways or turning) will arrive first and have right of way. So a car is turning, why should it expect a cyclist to come plowing through on a whim?
Again: it is ILLEGAL for cyclists to run stop signs. You have to stop, just like a car. (And in case you think it’s no big deal, I see plenty of cars that aren’t too good at stopping either. You want to hit them?)