Statisitics

[Dan O]

Rather than pick any of the ~infinite threads to reply to, or, heaven
forbid, mention the word for the thing that goes on some people's
heads, I will just put it straight out.

(Re)reading some Sherlock Holmes today, came across this in "The Sign
of the Four":

"Winwood Reade is good upon the subject," said Holmes. "He remarks
that, while the individual man is an insoluble puzzle, in the
aggregate he becomes a mathematical certainty. You can, for example,
never foretell what any one man will do, but you can say with
precision what an average number will be up to. Individuals vary, but
percentages remain constant. So says the statistician."

(The paragraph preceding that one is more concise and even more
profound.)

[davethedave]

There was also an incident on a train where Watson fell asleep.

Upon waking "Holmes! What a grim dream." He says " And why does my arse
hurt? And why does the whole carriage smell of lemon curd?" He asked
pensively.

"Ahhhh... Lemon entry dear Watson! Lemon entry!" States Holmes with a
smile, as he returns his gaze to his latest copy of the 1889 March
edition of New Safety Bicycle magazine.
--
davethedave

[James]

Speaking of stats.... I just read an interesting paper on research into
why bicyclists frequently ride through red lights. It seems that even
though they do far more often than motorists on average, the act rarely
results in a crash. Motorists don't share the same good fortune - but
is it fortune?

My conclusion is that when bicyclists ride through a red light - for
whatever reason, they do it carefully and consciously, as they realize
it may be dangerous and puts their life at risk. When motorists do it,
they're either dreaming, or speeding to try to beat the red light.

--
JS

[davethedave]

You missed out sensors that don't detect cyclists on the reasons for red
jumping. Some won't even detect a motorcycle in the UK.
--
davethedave

[Jay Beattie]

I am told that in some US states, you can treat the light as though it
were broken -- but not here in Oregon.
http://bikeportland.org/2011/03/11/signal-detection-problems-wash-co-website-says-roll-through-after-waiting-49652

This failure of a sensor or induction loop is usually in the turn
lane, and what you're supposed to do is act like a pedestrian -- go to
the nearest curb and use the cross-walk button. But even that
requires you to break the traffic laws if you are pinned in the left
turn lane. You have to go back across on-coming traffic to get to a
curb. Might as well just turn. This really does need to be addressed
in the UVC.

-- Jay Beattie.

[datakoll]

.....

VISION allows cyclists to cross but here we turn right on red after stopping for uh 40 years now post nationalization.

[James]

How did I miss that? I thought "for whatever reason" would catch all.

--
JS

[James]

I agree. I don't believe there is such a thing as 100% reliable
automatic detection, so there should be adequate provision for what to
do when it fails.

Last night I did a couple of tight circles in the turn lane, to try to
get the sensor to sense me. It did eventually work, that time.

--
JS

[T0m $herman]

On 3/26/2013 4:49 PM, davethedave wrote:
>
> You missed out sensors that don't detect cyclists on the reasons for red
> jumping. Some won't even detect a motorcycle in the UK.
>

None of the traffic signal sensors embedded in the pavement in my
neighborhood will detect a motorcycle in the UK. Nor a lorry. Or even
HMS Illustrious [1] on wheels.

[1] Not a particularly large warship, but then Britannia No Longer Rules
the Waves.
--
T0m $herm@n

[T0m $herman]

Hari Seldon.

--
T0m $herm@n

[Frank Krygowski]

On Mar 26, 6:45 pm, Jay Beattie <jbeat...@lindsayhart.com> wrote:
>
>
> I am told that in some US states, you can treat the light as though it

> were broken -- but not here in Oregon.http://bikeportland.org/2011/03/11/signal-detection-problems-wash-co-...

>
> This failure of a sensor or induction loop is usually in the turn
> lane, and what you're supposed to do is act like a pedestrian -- go to
> the nearest curb and use the cross-walk button.  But even that
> requires you to break the traffic laws if you are pinned in the left
> turn lane.  You have to go back across on-coming traffic to get to a
> curb.  Might as well just turn.  This really does need to be addressed
> in the UVC.

The Ohio Bicycle Federation has a proposal to change the law so as to
specifically treat non-detection as a defective signal. As of a few
days ago, we're pretty sure we've got one lawmaker as a sponsor, and a
couple more looking at co-sponsoring. But yes, that needs to be in
the UVC.

I've had a left turn signal fail to detect my motorcycle. In a way,
it's even more of a problem, since I can't shuffle the motorcycle
around or lie it down over the sensor to better affect the loop.

Last fall, in my car, I was in a line of cars behind a tractor trailer
rig that couldn't trigger a light. Cross traffic was heavy, and we
waited for nearly five minutes before the truck driver got enough
clear space to proceed. As soon as the following car hit the loop
sensor, the light changed. Apparently the truck's metal was too high
to affect the sensing field.

I know one guy who convinced his city's traffic crew to make up a test
rig - an aluminum 20" bike wheel mounted on a 2x4 - to use when
calibrating signals. That really should be in the calibration manual,
and used every time a loop sensor is calibrated. However, it won't
work for the newer camera-based systems. For those, a bicyclist
silhouette is needed, I think.

Ohio DOT now has an email address devoted to the problem. Ohio
cyclists can send email to Bike....@dot.state.oh.us describing
the problem at the sensor. They'll contact the responsible party to
get it adjusted. I've not tried this myself (the ones I pass seem to
work well for me) but I've heard others have had good success. Other
states should do something similar.

- Frank Krygowski

[T0m $herman]

On 3/26/2013 8:51 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> I've had a left turn signal fail to detect my motorcycle. In a way,
> it's even more of a problem, since I can't shuffle the motorcycle
> around or lie it down over the sensor to better affect the loop.

Get a lighter moto [1] and you can drag it sideways. Or put crash bars
on the Beemer so you can tip it over, and do a "reverse" lift [2] to
pick it back up. ;)

Or put the moto on the stand, and walk over and push the pedestrian
crossing button (BTDT).

[1] 280 pounds works for me.
[2] Having the crash bars keep the tires in contact with the ground when
the bike is on its side really, really, really helps here.

--
T0m $herm@n

[Dan O]

> cyclists can send email to Bike.Rep...@dot.state.oh.us describing

> the problem at the sensor. They'll contact the responsible party to
> get it adjusted. I've not tried this myself (the ones I pass seem to
> work well for me) but I've heard others have had good success. Other
> states should do something similar.
>

It's a lot less hassle to just ride across when it's clear.

[Duane Hébert]

Sounds like Seldon's plan.

[�Jones]

On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 08:10:26 +1100, in rec.bicycles.tech James
<james.e...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Speaking of stats.... I just read an interesting paper on research into
>why bicyclists frequently ride through red lights. It seems that even
>though they do far more often than motorists on average, the act rarely
>results in a crash. Motorists don't share the same good fortune - but
>is it fortune?
>
>My conclusion is that when bicyclists ride through a red light - for
>whatever reason, they do it carefully and consciously, as they realize
>it may be dangerous and puts their life at risk. When motorists do it,
>they're either dreaming, or speeding to try to beat the red light.

Actually, it's the tight, black panties... they impart super-human
power, you know.

Jones

[datakoll]

HOW QUAINT...

if yawl had tax $$$ there'd be infrared senors mounted on tech canti light beams carrying LED.

Smells like yawl not up for the Alpine Midnight Exit/Entrance Ram[ Challenge.

[datakoll]

$$$$$$$$$

check your county administrators basement

[Frank Krygowski]

Some people try to fix problems, some people don't.

- Frank Krygowski

[Dan O]

What problem?

[James]

I've not noticed motorists wearing tight black panties.

--
JS.

[Duane Hébert]

Well there was this lady in a rag top cammaro once...

[datakoll]

> I've not noticed motorists wearing tight black panties.

this is the problem

[Jay Beattie]

On Mar 26, 6:51 pm, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:

> cyclists can send email to Bike.Rep...@dot.state.oh.us  describing

> the problem at the sensor.  They'll contact the responsible party to
> get it adjusted.  I've not tried this myself (the ones I pass seem to
> work well for me) but I've heard others have had good success.  Other
> states should do something similar.

Do you have a copy of the proposed legislation? I might see if I could
get something going here.

-- Jay Beattie.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 18:51:32 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
<frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:

>I know one guy who convinced his city's traffic crew to make up a test
>rig - an aluminum 20" bike wheel mounted on a 2x4 - to use when
>calibrating signals. That really should be in the calibration manual,
>and used every time a loop sensor is calibrated. However, it won't
>work for the newer camera-based systems. For those, a bicyclist
>silhouette is needed, I think.

Nope. Watch these videos and note that the cyclists are detected by
their thermal signature almost head on:
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERJklRkh_pc>
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DMrZz-LsM0>
To the best of my knowledge, none of these traffic cameras have any
kind of silhouette pattern matching or detection capabilities.

<http://www.traficon.com/information/news_detail.jsp?id=162>
When the detector sees a bicycle approach the intersection, the
traffic controller increases the green dwell time to allow additional
time for the bicycle to make it through the intersection. Last time I
checked, most cyclists roar through the intersection at maximum speed
to reduce the amount of time they present a target for drivers.
Another way to read it is that the revenue enhancement opportunities
for traffic light timing control isn't ruined by accommodating
cyclists.


--
Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

[Jeff Liebermann]

The local in the road loop detectors work for steel frame bicycles and
bicycle wheels, but fail badly on carbon fiber and bamboo, even with
aluminum rims. Aluminum frames are somewhat of a crapshoot. There
are various styles of loops. Some work better than others.
<http://www.humantransport.org/bicycledriving/library/signals/detection.htm>

The local authorities are aware of the problem and are thinking of
switching to camera based detection. However, nothing has been done,
except in major intersections near skools, where there is a large
bicycle population and an obvious need:
<http://www.bicyclinginfo.org/bikesafe/case_studies/casestudy.cfm?CS_NUM=707>
The section on "Costs" should explain why cameras are unpopular with
the city government.

[datakoll]

GOLLLY GEE WHAT ARE THESE DEVICES DESIGNED FOR ?
surly not bicycle ID with traffic infrastructure just boooooming everywhere.
EG the photo piece I did in Texas Bike Lanes was for oil tankers and here and now or then depending on your position, we have a new state code death alley bike lanes designed for transporting would be heart attack victims.

will post pics.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 20:55:01 -0700 (PDT), datakoll
<data...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>GOLLLY GEE WHAT ARE THESE DEVICES DESIGNED FOR ?

They're usually designed for money. Altruism is a poor motivator for
commercial product designers. Actually, they were officially designed
for your safety, but in reality probably inspire the municipal buyers
more by their possibilities as a revenue enhancer, than by anything as
mundane as traffic safety. Just follow the money...

>surly not bicycle ID with traffic infrastructure just boooooming everywhere.

Well, if a traffic camera can seperate the motor vehicles from the
bicyclists, then it could issue tickets in the mail to bicyclists, as
they currently do for motor vehicles. With a bit of tracking
software, they can detect unsafe bicycle maneuvers and send you a
warning or pre-emptive ticket in the mail. Have your invisibility
cloak ready.

>EG the photo piece I did in Texas Bike Lanes was for oil tankers and
>here and now or then depending on your position, we have a new state code
>death alley bike lanes designed for transporting would be heart attack
>victims.

Not needed. Presumably, bicyclists are in better physical shape than
the average motorist. A heart attack is unlikely.

>will post pics.

Be sure to cover up or blur the license plates.

[Sir Ridesalot]

Ah yes! The two most dangerous places for a bicyclist to ride are intersections and parking lots. I remember 40+ years ago reading literature on bicycle commuting. Everone seemed to agree that developing a strong sprint even if it was of short duration was a great idea so that you could get through intersections in the least amount of time thereby reducing your time in a danger zone.

Cheers

[T0m $herman]

On 3/27/2013 10:44 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 20:03:28 -0500, "T0m $herman"
> <twsherman@REMOVE_THISsouthslope.net> wrote:
>
>> On 3/26/2013 4:49 PM, davethedave wrote:
>>>
>>> You missed out sensors that don't detect cyclists on the reasons for red
>>> jumping. Some won't even detect a motorcycle in the UK.
>>>
>> None of the traffic signal sensors embedded in the pavement in my
>> neighborhood will detect a motorcycle in the UK. Nor a lorry. Or even
>> HMS Illustrious [1] on wheels.
>
>> [1] Not a particularly large warship, but then Britannia No Longer Rules
>> the Waves.
>
> The local in the road loop detectors work for steel frame bicycles and
> bicycle wheels, but fail badly on carbon fiber and bamboo, even with
> aluminum rims. Aluminum frames are somewhat of a crapshoot. There
> are various styles of loops. Some work better than others.
> <http://www.humantransport.org/bicycledriving/library/signals/detection.htm>
>
> The local authorities are aware of the problem and are thinking of
> switching to camera based detection. However, nothing has been done,
> except in major intersections near skools, where there is a large
> bicycle population and an obvious need:
> <http://www.bicyclinginfo.org/bikesafe/case_studies/casestudy.cfm?CS_NUM=707>
> The section on "Costs" should explain why cameras are unpopular with
> the city government.
>

But you live in the 120-125°W range, making it very unlikely that even
the best sensors could detect any vehicle one-third of the way around
the world in the UK. :)


--
T0m $herm@n

[Dan O]

On Mar 27, 8:44 pm, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 20:03:28 -0500, "T0m $herman"
>
> <twsherman@REMOVE_THISsouthslope.net> wrote:
> >On 3/26/2013 4:49 PM, davethedave wrote:
>
> >> You missed out sensors that don't detect cyclists on the reasons for red
> >> jumping. Some won't even detect a motorcycle in the UK.
>
> >None of the traffic signal sensors embedded in the pavement in my
> >neighborhood will detect a motorcycle in the UK. Nor a lorry. Or even
> >HMS Illustrious [1] on wheels.
> >[1] Not a particularly large warship, but then Britannia No Longer Rules
> >the Waves.
>
> The local in the road loop detectors work for steel frame bicycles and
> bicycle wheels, but fail badly on carbon fiber and bamboo, even with
> aluminum rims. Aluminum frames are somewhat of a crapshoot. There
> are various styles of loops. Some work better than others.

> <http://www.humantransport.org/bicycledriving/library/signals/detectio...>

>
> The local authorities are aware of the problem and are thinking of
> switching to camera based detection. However, nothing has been done,
> except in major intersections near skools, where there is a large
> bicycle population and an obvious need:

> <http://www.bicyclinginfo.org/bikesafe/case_studies/casestudy.cfm?CS_N...>

> The section on "Costs" should explain why cameras are unpopular with
> the city government.
>

The city where I work *claims* that their cameras accomodate bicycles;
but the one just up the road from the sheriff's station does not, nor
does the loop detector at the road edge seem to work. So I just ride
through when it's clear (shoulder check for cops since there are many
around there). No problem.

There is *one* camera in that town that *does* work for me on my bike,
although it works most reliably if I leave the bike lane, move to the
middle of the main traffic lane, and zig-zag to make myself appear
"bigger". Just like I said above: It's a lot less hassle to just
ride through when it's clear. No problem.

For very busy intersections, I generally try to plan my route such
that I don't need to go straight through them, and can take to the
sidewalk or something to parallel the busy road I need to cross while
heading in the direction I need to go, and make my way across as I can
(in stages if necessary). The ones that I *do* need to go straight
across, and don't catch the light (or don't have a good gap to blow
through), I'll often roll up to the pedestrian crosswalk button,
'cause I can hold onto the pole and don't have to unclip; but these
are very rare - maybe one or two on my 25+ mile commute, and I go many
days without ever having to stop.

The nice thing about being on a bike is there are *so* many options.
I'm fortunate to ride in an area where the cops don't take us
seriously.

[datakoll]

shucks I wuznt aware I was on camera maybe onto the bridge...

http://www.opticsplanet.com/military-store.html

are we going thru another defense cutback ? Federal...

but commercially TI is up as flywheel economics continues down, recent shootins

our new bike path is ON the main beach via with new tar new paint...like the new road needed new sealer seperated from the world class 26 mile paved bike path with the world class grass lawn. Holy cow, derz two ! countem TWO new steel bridges over Cow Slough once owned by Sam Bass hisself mindblowing one not!on a path TBA ?

I assume the work is pork and advert attracting primo heart patients as the lanes lead to where ? the cementery ? naw the hospital. INCROYABLE .

we have hourly death wagons most noticeably in the earl fall when itsa HOT. The long trip down killsemoff.

if there's a big bike venture look elsewhere for the focus.

hear at the Georgia bacteria ? Ima gonna order a sack of dehyde from Carolina Bio Supply formuh cycle mounted Lyden jar

[AMuzi]

On 3/27/2013 11:06 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 20:55:01 -0700 (PDT), datakoll
> <data...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> GOLLLY GEE WHAT ARE THESE DEVICES DESIGNED FOR ?
>
> They're usually designed for money. Altruism is a poor motivator for
> commercial product designers. Actually, they were officially designed
> for your safety, but in reality probably inspire the municipal buyers
> more by their possibilities as a revenue enhancer, than by anything as
> mundane as traffic safety. Just follow the money...
>
>> surly not bicycle ID with traffic infrastructure just boooooming everywhere.
>
> Well, if a traffic camera can seperate the motor vehicles from the
> bicyclists, then it could issue tickets in the mail to bicyclists, as
> they currently do for motor vehicles. With a bit of tracking
> software, they can detect unsafe bicycle maneuvers and send you a
> warning or pre-emptive ticket in the mail. Have your invisibility
> cloak ready.
>
>> EG the photo piece I did in Texas Bike Lanes was for oil tankers and
>> here and now or then depending on your position, we have a new state code
>> death alley bike lanes designed for transporting would be heart attack
>> victims.
>
> Not needed. Presumably, bicyclists are in better physical shape than
> the average motorist. A heart attack is unlikely.
>
>> will post pics.
>
> Be sure to cover up or blur the license plates.
>

Corruption in high priced city contracts? Is that news?

http://chicagoist.com/tags/johnbills

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

[Duane Hébert]

http://globalnews.ca/news/433957/mr-three-per-cent-tells-charbonneau-commission-he-never-took-a-cut-from-companies/

Here they've decided to spend millions on a commission to investigate
corruption in the construction industry. Not sure what it will
accomplish other than the slew of mayors and other elected officials
that have resigned. They will probably pick a few clowns like M. 3%
here and give him a few months in a resort prison or something and then
the new politicians can get back to the old business with new crooks.

[Jeff Liebermann]

Nothing new.
Where there is food, there are flies.
Where there's money, there is corruption.

The order of the day is revenue enhancement. Paying the necessary
bribes is just part of the overhead and is usually built into the
contract as some kind of "research" expense or "negotiation fee".

[Q] What's the difference between a bribe and a commission?
[A] A bribe is paid in advance. A commission is paid afterwards.
Otherwise, they're the same. In many parts of the world, it's
considered stupid to risk one's profit by waiting until it's paid as a
commission. Therefore, getting one's profit in advance via a bribe is
standard practice.

[Frank Krygowski]

The section below is, I believe, what was submitted to the Legislative
Services Committee at the statehouse. The bulk of it is verbatim
existing law. Only the portion I put between quadruple asterisks is
proposed as new. (Note, bicycles are legally vehicles in Ohio.)

- Frank Krygowski

===========================================================

Section 1. That sections 4511.132 ... of the Revised

Code be amended 1:0 read as follows:

Sec. 4511.132. (A) The driver of a. vehicle, Streetcar, or

trackless trolley who approaches an intersection where traffic is

controlled by traffic control signals Shall do all of the

following, if the signal facing the driver e-i-Eheaf exhibits no

Colored lights or Colored lighted arrows e-sL exhibits s.

Combination of such lights or arrows that fails to clearly

indicate the assignment of right-of-way, **** or the signals are

otherwise malfunctioning, including the failure of a vehicle

detector to detect the vehicle****;

(l) Stop at a Clearly marked stop line, but if none, Stop

before entering the crosswalk on the near side of the

intersection, or, if none, stop before entering the intersection;

(2) Yield the right-of-way to all vehicles, streetcars, or

trackless trolleys in the intersection or approaching on an

intersecting road, if the vehicles, streetcars, or trackless

trolleys will constitute an immediate hazard during the time the

driver is moving across or within the intersection or junction of

roadways;

(3) Exercise Ordinary care while proceeding through the

intersection,

(B) Except as otherwise provided in this division, whoever

violates this section is guilty of a minor misdemeanor. If, Within

one year of the offense, the offender previously has been

convicted of or pleaded guilty to one predicate motor vehicle or

traffic offense, whoever violates this section is guilty of a

misdemeanor of the fourth degree. If, within one year of the

offense, the offender previously has been convicted of two or more

predicate motor vehicle or traffic offenses, whoever violates this

section is guilty of a misdemeanor of the third degree.

[Frank Krygowski]

On Mar 27, 11:31 pm, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 18:51:32 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
>

> <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >I know one guy who convinced his city's traffic crew to make up a test
> >rig - an aluminum 20" bike wheel mounted on a 2x4 - to use when
> >calibrating signals.  That really should be in the calibration manual,
> >and used every time a loop sensor is calibrated.  However, it won't
> >work for the newer camera-based systems.  For those, a bicyclist
> >silhouette is needed, I think.
>
> Nope.  Watch these videos and note that the cyclists are detected by
> their thermal signature almost head on:
> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERJklRkh_pc>
> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DMrZz-LsM0>
> To the best of my knowledge, none of these traffic cameras have any
> kind of silhouette pattern matching or detection capabilities.
>
> <http://www.traficon.com/information/news_detail.jsp?id=162>
> When the detector sees a bicycle approach the intersection, the
> traffic controller increases the green dwell time to allow additional
> time for the bicycle to make it through the intersection.  Last time I
> checked, most cyclists roar through the intersection at maximum speed
> to reduce the amount of time they present a target for drivers.
> Another way to read it is that the revenue enhancement opportunities
> for traffic light timing control isn't ruined by accommodating
> cyclists.

Those examples did look like they worked well. But locally, I've had
cyclists tell me about a camera-controlled intersection where they
were not detected. And a well-connected cycling activist in a distant
city was the one who told me about using a cutout to calibrate the
camera.

Maybe different camera companies use different technology? I note
that the "window" on your examples spanned the entire intersection. I
like that; but ISTR seeing calibration images online from (apparently)
a different camera vendor, which showed multiple and separate windows,
one "looking at" the front of each lane.

I also note that the one you've pointed to uses infrared. I wonder if
there are any using visible light instead? In one discussion, a
cyclist talked about opening his jacket wide to increase the size of
his visible image, to aid in detection. Of course, that would also
make him appear "hotter" to an infrared camera.

I guess I should track down the various vendors and see how their
technologies vary.

- Frank Krygowski

[Dan O]

A lot less hassle to just blow the light.

[Dan O]

If you want to "fix the problem" (it's not a problem for me; it
actually sort of supports and reinforces my inner anarchist), you have
to _make bikes matter_. Examples are out there (e.g. Holland).

[datakoll]

yeah but there's entropic merit in bribery, decreasing values. Sand.

[T0m $herman]

On 3/28/2013 4:21 PM, Dan O wrote:
> A lot less hassle to just blow the light.

RPG?

--
T0m $herm@n

[Dan O]

On Mar 28, 6:28 pm, "T0m $herman"

<twsherman@REMOVE_THISsouthslope.net> wrote:
> On 3/28/2013 4:21 PM, Dan O wrote:
>
> > A lot less hassle to just blow the light.
>
> RPG?
>

Well, twice (I think it was), I said, "it's a lot less hassle to just
ride across when clear", but the argument about researching causative
parameters and writing letters to your congressman and working to
implement infrastructure and I don't know what else (TLDR) persisted,
so by now I am repeating my point using the concise vernacular.

[Frank Krygowski]

I think there's correlation between statements like "TLDR" and "What's
the problem?"

Some folks work to solve problems; some folks don't. But I'm
surprised that any cyclist would think that a traffic control that
doesn't work for a legally riding cyclist is just fine.

- Frank Krygowski

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 23:31:49 -0700 (PDT), Dan O <danov...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>The city where I work *claims* that their cameras accomodate bicycles;
>but the one just up the road from the sheriff's station does not, nor
>does the loop detector at the road edge seem to work.

If you could identify the system vendor and hopefully find a model
number, it should be possible to determine if it has the capability. A
photo of the camera might also be helpful. Of course, you could ask
the public works department for the maker and model.

>There is *one* camera in that town that *does* work for me on my bike,
>although it works most reliably if I leave the bike lane, move to the
>middle of the main traffic lane, and zig-zag to make myself appear
>"bigger".

Let me guess... the camera is not in line with the lanes, but off to
the side, where the parallax error and depth of field (focus) problems
conspire to ruin the sensitivity. the cameras use contrast to
seperate objects from the background. If the image is otto focus, the
resulting blurr has little contrast. What you're doing by zig-zagging
across the camera field of view is to accidentally ride through the
small area where the camera is actually in focus.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 12:05:10 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
<frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERJklRkh_pc>
>> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DMrZz-LsM0>
>> <http://www.traficon.com/information/news_detail.jsp?id=162>

>Those examples did look like they worked well.

Amazingly well. It would detect a bicyclist almost instantly when it
entered the detection zone (as marked). The trapezoid outline is
probably the valid detection window or area of interest, where the
system will look for input. I have the same feature on my motion
detecting security camera, where I can eliminate motion from areas
inhabited by critters (near the floor), or are visible through
windows. I played the video enough times to see how it works. It
looks for contrast, not brightness, and then checks if the contrast
area is moving.

>But locally, I've had
>cyclists tell me about a camera-controlled intersection where they
>were not detected.

The ones in the above videos are IR cameras that cost a small fortune.
They also have to be cooled (Peltier junction) and include a heater to
prevent condensation on the optics.

>And a well-connected cycling activist in a distant
>city was the one who told me about using a cutout to calibrate the
>camera.

If they were using a dummy, the camera system is using visible light,
and not IR. Unless the dummy was pre-heated to skin temperature, it
would not be detected by an IR system.

>Maybe different camera companies use different technology?

Yep. There's IR, IR plus Doppler radar, pattern matching, outline
matching, background subtraction, flying spot scanner (to cover the
entire intersection with one device), etc. I dug through Google
Patents and found more than I want to cite.

>I note
>that the "window" on your examples spanned the entire intersection. I
>like that; but ISTR seeing calibration images online from (apparently)
>a different camera vendor, which showed multiple and separate windows,
>one "looking at" the front of each lane.

My guess(tm) is that an IR system can more easily recognize objects
than a visible light system. It can therefore look at the entire
intersection without worrying about clutter from pedestrians, birds,
critters, wind blown debris, rain reflections, etc. However, the
visible light system need all the help they can get. So, they outline
the probable location of where vehicles and detected objects are
expected to be seen. If the bicycle isn't in the expected location,
it's going to be missed.

>I also note that the one you've pointed to uses infrared. I wonder if
>there are any using visible light instead?

Certainly there are visible light systems. Here's you basic speed
trap camera system:
<http://www.google.com/patents?id=P1wLAAAAEBAJ>

See the references under:
<http://www.google.com/patents/US5041828>
for far more examples. IR isn't very common because it's VERY
expensive.
<http://www.bicyclinginfo.org/bikesafe/case_studies/casestudy.cfm?CS_NUM=707>
Loops are approximately $500 each; for bike detection, there
are typically two loops per direction of travel. Video detection
is approximately $35,000 for a complete intersection installation.
Pedestrian/bicyclist push buttons with the conduit and conductor
to the controller cabinet is approximately $1500; each pole with
push button is about $300.
That's $35,000 for 4 visible light cameras. My guess(tm) is the IR
cameras are about 2-3 times as expensive.

>In one discussion, a
>cyclist talked about opening his jacket wide to increase the size of
>his visible image, to aid in detection. Of course, that would also
>make him appear "hotter" to an infrared camera.

Nope. I've done some IR imaging. Again, it's the contrast between
the IR source and the background that makes it work. There's plenty
of contrast between a skin temperature of 37C and a background temp of
about 20 to 25C. However, some body heat leaking through a jacket
will be about the same temperature as the background. I just verified
this with my IR thermometer. My shirt temperature was only about 5C
warmer than the room background. Perhaps if the rider took off his
shirt, it might work, but not while wearing anything.

>I guess I should track down the various vendors and see how their
>technologies vary.

<http://www.trafficcontrolcorp.com/manufacturers.html>
Not great, but a good start.

[Dan O]

On Mar 28, 7:46 pm, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 28, 10:38 pm, Dan O <danover...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 28, 6:28 pm, "T0m $herman"
>
> > <twsherman@REMOVE_THISsouthslope.net> wrote:
> > > On 3/28/2013 4:21 PM, Dan O wrote:
>
> > > > A lot less hassle to just blow the light.
>
> > > RPG?
>
> > Well, twice (I think it was), I said, "it's a lot less hassle to just
> > ride across when clear", but the argument about researching causative
> > parameters and writing letters to your congressman and working to
> > implement infrastructure and I don't know what else (TLDR) persisted,
> > so by now I am repeating my point using the concise vernacular.
>
> I think there's correlation between statements like "TLDR" and "What's
> the problem?"
>

Did I leave out any of your approach in my sentence?

> Some folks work to solve problems; some folks don't. But I'm
> surprised that any cyclist would think that a traffic control that
> doesn't work for a legally riding cyclist is just fine.
>

I think there's correlation between "surprised" and your
intelligence. (Really, Frank? By now you're surprised?")

A bicyclist that chooses to obey a light that won't change for them is
fine with me, but I think he's an idiot. You go ahead on and keep
tweaking the law (trying to), and/or tweaking the infrastructure
(trying to) - good luck with that. Makes no never mind to me. My
solution is quantum times more expedient, and it's already built into
my whole approach to the activity :-)

[Dan O]

On Mar 28, 7:49 pm, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 23:31:49 -0700 (PDT), Dan O <danover...@gmail.com>

> wrote:
>
> >The city where I work *claims* that their cameras accomodate bicycles;
> >but the one just up the road from the sheriff's station does not, nor
> >does the loop detector at the road edge seem to work.
>
> If you could identify the system vendor and hopefully find a model
> number, it should be possible to determine if it has the capability. A
> photo of the camera might also be helpful. Of course, you could ask
> the public works department for the maker and model.
>

I could, but I have no problem getting across there. In fact, I very
often cross without bothering the signal, and I know there are many
cagers who would get bent out of shape if I did (reasonableness
notwithstanding).

> >There is *one* camera in that town that *does* work for me on my bike,
> >although it works most reliably if I leave the bike lane, move to the
> >middle of the main traffic lane, and zig-zag to make myself appear
> >"bigger".
>
> Let me guess... the camera is not in line with the lanes, but off to
> the side, where the parallax error and depth of field (focus) problems
> conspire to ruin the sensitivity. the cameras use contrast to
> seperate objects from the background. If the image is otto focus, the
> resulting blurr has little contrast. What you're doing by zig-zagging
> across the camera field of view is to accidentally ride through the
> small area where the camera is actually in focus.
>

That sounds like a good understanding of how those things work, but I
don't think that's the situation with this particular light (maybe the
one above - which *might* sometimes work if I did the zig-zag in the
lane thing, but I other circumstances there make it less attractive).
This light actually works - even for a bike in the bike lane
(sometimes). It works more reliably (though not 100%) if I get out in
the lane and make a big spectacle of myself for the camera. Even
then, I'm mostly just playing with it ("ooo - magic!" :-), and don't
really care if it changes or not as long as the road is clear to
cross. (One more psychological factor that may motivate me trying for
the green light here is that one block ahead of there is the *only*
place I've ever even been warned by a cop about obeying traffic
controls.)

[Dan O]

So what do you think of Reade (OP above) on statistics and the
individual?

Doyle: "Dirty-looking rascals, but I suppose every one has some
little immortal spark concealed about him. You would not think it, to
look at them. There is no a priori probability about it. A strange
enigma is man."

[Dan O]

One more angle: I didn't say the traffic control was fine, but that's
the way things are. I simply have approaches to dealing with it such
that it is not a significant problem amongst the many circumstances
that bear on my bicycling experience. YMMV; Vroom-vroom! ;-)

(Good luck at the capitol and public works.)

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 20:47:19 -0700 (PDT), Dan O <danov...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>One more psychological factor that may motivate me trying for
>the green light here is that one block ahead of there is the *only*
>place I've ever even been warned by a cop about obeying traffic
>controls.

Yeah, I can see why there might be problem obeying the traffic lights:
<http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b7/Funny_traffic_lights.jpg>

Don't forget to stop at the red light:
<http://dl.ziza.ru/other/112009/19/pics/photopodborka_095.jpg>

[Dan O]

On Mar 28, 9:21 pm, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 20:47:19 -0700 (PDT), Dan O <danover...@gmail.com>

> wrote:
>
> >One more psychological factor that may motivate me trying for
> >the green light here is that one block ahead of there is the *only*
> >place I've ever even been warned by a cop about obeying traffic
> >controls.
>
> Yeah, I can see why there might be problem obeying the traffic lights:

> <http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b7/Funny_traffic_ligh...>

>
> Don't forget to stop at the red light:
> <http://dl.ziza.ru/other/112009/19/pics/photopodborka_095.jpg>
>

*Too* awesome! :-)

I realize that my approach (shades of Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome - but
mostly avoiding the places where cagers congregate) does present a
problem from a pure PR / conformist point of view; but when I see
those problem solvers in Orlando parading down the middle of the lane
in formation...

[Dan O]

... or when I see law-abiding good citizen "cyclists" standing still
in front of a light for no other reason than it's red...

[Frank Krygowski]

On Mar 28, 11:35 pm, Dan O <danover...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> A bicyclist that chooses to obey a light that won't change for them is
> fine with me, but I think he's an idiot.  You go ahead on and keep
> tweaking the law (trying to), and/or tweaking the infrastructure
> (trying to) - good luck with that.  Makes no never mind to me.  My
> solution is quantum times more expedient, and it's already built into
> my whole approach to the activity :-)

I'd never say a cyclist should sit indefinitely at a traffic light
that doesn't detect his presence and turn green.

However, there are certainly places where a "Shit, I'll just run it"
attitude doesn't work well. One is a left turn signal at an extremely
busy intersection (which has happened to me on my motorcycle). When I
say "extremely busy," I mean I was worried about clearing the multi-
direction traffic despite plenty of horsepower. Had I been on my
bicycle, running that light would have been no simple matter.

And I've seen traffic being held up for five minutes at another heavy
traffic road where a loop detector didn't detect a tractor trailer
rig.

So whether or not this non-detection is a problem to a guy who claims
to live in "Mayberry," and who brags about flouting any and all road
rules, I think the problem needs attention. I think a traffic control
device should work for all legal traffic. Perhaps that has something
to do with the 40,000 ADT road that I frequently have to deal with on
my bike.

I also think that for every person who works to fix a problem, there
are hundreds of slackers who say "That's not a problem." What the
slackers really mean is, it's not enough of a problem to motivate
them. That speaks to the slacker tendency at least as much as to the
magnitude of the problem.

- Frank Krygowski

[Frank Krygowski]

It's high school math, and it's fundamental to the finances of the
insurance industry, the casino industry and much else. But it's
poorly understood by many.

- Frank Krygowski

[AMuzi]

On 3/28/2013 11:21 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 20:47:19 -0700 (PDT), Dan O <danov...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> One more psychological factor that may motivate me trying for
>> the green light here is that one block ahead of there is the *only*
>> place I've ever even been warned by a cop about obeying traffic
>> controls.
>
> Yeah, I can see why there might be problem obeying the traffic lights:
> <http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b7/Funny_traffic_lights.jpg>
>
> Don't forget to stop at the red light:
> <http://dl.ziza.ru/other/112009/19/pics/photopodborka_095.jpg>
>
>
>
>

Is that the one Tom lit up with an RPG?

[Dan O]

On Mar 29, 7:39 am, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:

<snip>

>
> I also think that for every person who works to fix a problem, there
> are hundreds of slackers who say "That's not a problem." What the
> slackers really mean is, it's not enough of a problem to motivate
> them. That speaks to the slacker tendency at least as much as to the
> magnitude of the problem.
>

Whatever you say Strickland (or is it Rooney? :-)

[Dan O]

On Mar 29, 7:43 am, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 29, 12:09 am, Dan O <danover...@gmail.com> wrote:

<snip>

>
> > So what do you think of Reade (OP above) on statistics and the
> > individual?
>
> It's high school math, and it's fundamental to the finances of the
> insurance industry, the casino industry and much else. But it's
> poorly understood by many.
>

So you really don't get it. (But we knew that well already.)

[Dan O]

On Mar 29, 7:39 am, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 28, 11:35 pm, Dan O <danover...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > A bicyclist that chooses to obey a light that won't change for them is
> > fine with me, but I think he's an idiot. You go ahead on and keep
> > tweaking the law (trying to), and/or tweaking the infrastructure
> > (trying to) - good luck with that. Makes no never mind to me. My
> > solution is quantum times more expedient, and it's already built into
> > my whole approach to the activity :-)
>
> I'd never say a cyclist should sit indefinitely at a traffic light
> that doesn't detect his presence and turn green.
>

Even if a motorist may be expected to come along and trip the light
eventually? How long should the cyclist wait? I know of lights that
will make a *detected* motorist wait a full 90 seconds even when there
is no cross traffic.

> However, there are certainly places where a "Shit, I'll just run it"
> attitude doesn't work well. One is a left turn signal at an extremely
> busy intersection (which has happened to me on my motorcycle). When I
> say "extremely busy," I mean I was worried about clearing the multi-
> direction traffic despite plenty of horsepower. Had I been on my
> bicycle, running that light would have been no simple matter.
>

However, if you were on a bicycle, and weren't so hung up on sidewalks
(or salmoning), it would be obvious to me to turn left *before* the
intersection and "salmon" up the sidewalk (or possibly even the
"wrong" bike lane, or th egrasy median, or... ) and keep checking for
traffic developments that will let me work my way (if necessary)
across - all as I said earlier in this thread and others.

> And I've seen traffic being held up for five minutes at another heavy
> traffic road where a loop detector didn't detect a tractor trailer
> rig.
>

And I've seen idiots that will sit there behind it even where it's
feasible to just go around him; and I've seen idiots that will stand
there next to him on their bicycle - waiting.

> So whether or not this non-detection is a problem to a guy who claims
> to live in "Mayberry," and who brags about flouting any and all road

> rules...

"Brags" and "flouting" is in your mind (rather inflammatory
contortion, don't you think? ... though I'll acknowledge *sometimes*
bragging, and flouting *some* road rules, which are ridiculous applied
to bicycling), as is "any and all" (though I suppose any and all may
be subject to my flouting - depending on the circumstances).

>, I think the problem needs attention. I think a traffic control
> device should work for all legal traffic. Perhaps that has something
> to do with the 40,000 ADT road that I frequently have to deal with on
> my bike.
>

Perhaps. I generally avoid - quite successfully - the cager
clusterfucks, myself (tried that culvert yet, dude? ;-), but do ride
*regularly* in the full spectrum of traffic conditions, including very
heavy city traffic.

<snip>

[Frank Krygowski]

On Mar 29, 3:40 pm, Dan O <danover...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 29, 7:39 am, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> > I'd never say a cyclist should sit indefinitely at a traffic light
> > that doesn't detect his presence and turn green.
>
> Even if a motorist may be expected to come along and trip the light
> eventually?

"Eventually" = "indefinitely" in this case. You're once again arguing
against someone inside your imagination.

> How long should the cyclist wait?  I know of lights that
> will make a *detected* motorist wait a full 90 seconds even when there
> is no cross traffic.

(Oh my God! 90 seconds! The horror! Why, if only such travesties
could be prevented, Dan O could save the world!)

Look, the technology of traffic detection is specifically designed to
save the world from such horrors. It's supposed to distribute the
green lights where they're most needed. Sometime it's not well
implemented. Those are some of the things I try to address. Of
course, there's no reason _you_ need to work to improve things. You
can continue bitching here, instead.

> > However, there are certainly places where a "Shit, I'll just run it"
> > attitude doesn't work well.  One is a left turn signal at an extremely
> > busy intersection (which has happened to me on my motorcycle).  When I
> > say "extremely busy," I mean I was worried about clearing the multi-
> > direction traffic despite plenty of horsepower.  Had I been on my
> > bicycle, running that light would have been no simple matter.
>
> However, if you were on a bicycle, and weren't so hung up on sidewalks
> (or salmoning), it would be obvious to me to turn left *before* the
> intersection and "salmon" up the sidewalk (or possibly even the
> "wrong" bike lane, or th egrasy median, or... ) and keep checking for
> traffic developments that will let me work my way (if necessary)
> across - all as I said earlier in this thread and others.

A) I wasn't on a bicycle. I was on a motorcycle. It was a problem,
one that should be fixed. I'll test it again soon, and if it's still a
problem, I now know who to contact to have it fixed.

B) The closest sidewalk to that intersection is at least half a mile
away. There's no bike lane, nor greasy nor grassy median. Sometimes,
Dan, you have to ride where the big boys ride.

> > And I've seen traffic being held up for five minutes at another heavy
> > traffic road where a loop detector didn't detect a tractor trailer
> > rig.
>
> And I've seen idiots that will sit there behind it even where it's
> feasible to just go around him; and I've seen idiots that will stand
> there next to him on their bicycle - waiting.

I wasn't on a bike that time either, but: There was no feasible way
to go around him, unless you count driving down the road playing
chicken with oncoming traffic as "feasible." (Admittedly, you might.)

> > So whether or not this non-detection is a problem to a guy who claims
> > to live in "Mayberry," and who brags about flouting any and all road
> > rules...
>
> "Brags" and "flouting" is in your mind (rather inflammatory
> contortion, don't you think? ... though I'll acknowledge *sometimes*

> bragging, and flouting *some* road rules...

That's close enough to QED for me. It would be interesting to see a
list of road rules you don't flout, though. I hadn't heard of any.

> >, I think the problem needs attention.  I think a traffic control
> > device should work for all legal traffic.  Perhaps that has something
> > to do with the 40,000 ADT road that I frequently have to deal with on
> > my bike.
>
> Perhaps.  I generally avoid - quite successfully - the cager
> clusterfucks, myself (tried that culvert yet, dude? ;-),

Nope. I'm not a culvert-bunny. I've got a legal right to the road,
and I use that right very successfully.

- Frank Krygowski

[T0m $herman]

On 3/28/2013 10:23 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> Yep. There's IR, IR plus Doppler radar, pattern matching, outline
> matching, background subtraction, flying spot scanner (to cover the
> entire intersection with one device), etc. I dug through Google
> Patents and found more than I want to cite.

How about DEW?

--
T0m $herm@n

[datakoll]

eeeow I imagined costs lass than burial. This would be the reason to intsall.

Orca come in AAA swimming in Haro Straight.

[Jeff Liebermann]

How do you DEW? Sorry, but I'm not familiar with the acronym in
reference to traffic control, unless you're referring to the Distant
Early Warning system of the cold war era, in which case your
sense-o-humor needs a tuneup. To the best of my limited knowledge,
there were no speeding tickets issued to any incoming Russian
ballistic missiles:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distant_Early_Warning_Line>

[AMuzi]

On 3/29/2013 7:36 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 18:59:43 -0500, "T0m $herman"
> <twsherman@REMOVE_THISsouthslope.net> wrote:
>
>> On 3/28/2013 10:23 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>> Yep. There's IR, IR plus Doppler radar, pattern matching, outline
>>> matching, background subtraction, flying spot scanner (to cover the
>>> entire intersection with one device), etc. I dug through Google
>>> Patents and found more than I want to cite.
>>
>> How about DEW?
>
> How do you DEW? Sorry, but I'm not familiar with the acronym in
> reference to traffic control, unless you're referring to the Distant
> Early Warning system of the cold war era, in which case your
> sense-o-humor needs a tuneup. To the best of my limited knowledge,
> there were no speeding tickets issued to any incoming Russian
> ballistic missiles:
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distant_Early_Warning_Line>

That was long ago when serious people defended the nation
seriously. Here's our new plan for DPRK nukes:

http://drusilla.hsrc.unc.edu/imagelib/mediumimages/lincolnes-db-63.jpg

[T0m $herman]

On 3/29/2013 7:36 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

> On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 18:59:43 -0500, "T0m $herman"
> <twsherman@REMOVE_THISsouthslope.net> wrote:
>
>> On 3/28/2013 10:23 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>> Yep. There's IR, IR plus Doppler radar, pattern matching, outline
>>> matching, background subtraction, flying spot scanner (to cover the
>>> entire intersection with one device), etc. I dug through Google
>>> Patents and found more than I want to cite.
>>
>> How about DEW?
>
> How do you DEW? Sorry, but I'm not familiar with the acronym in
> reference to traffic control, unless you're referring to the Distant
> Early Warning system of the cold war era, in which case your
> sense-o-humor needs a tuneup. To the best of my limited knowledge,
> there were no speeding tickets issued to any incoming Russian
> ballistic missiles:
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distant_Early_Warning_Line>
>

Directed Energy Weapon.

--
T0m $herm@n

[Dan O]

On Mar 29, 4:58 pm, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 29, 3:40 pm, Dan O <danover...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 29, 7:39 am, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > I'd never say a cyclist should sit indefinitely at a traffic light
> > > that doesn't detect his presence and turn green.
>
> > Even if a motorist may be expected to come along and trip the light
> > eventually?
>
> "Eventually" = "indefinitely" in this case. You're once again arguing
> against someone inside your imagination.
>

Hey, if a tree falls in the forest...

> > How long should the cyclist wait? I know of lights that
> > will make a *detected* motorist wait a full 90 seconds even when there
> > is no cross traffic.
>
> (Oh my God! 90 seconds! The horror! Why, if only such travesties
> could be prevented, Dan O could save the world!)
>

The point is, how does the waiting cyclist know the detector is
working for them or not? (More importantly, how long before it begins
to dawn on them standing there like a dork.)

> Look, the technology of traffic detection is specifically designed to
> save the world from such horrors. It's supposed to distribute the
> green lights where they're most needed. Sometime it's not well
> implemented. Those are some of the things I try to address. Of
> course, there's no reason _you_ need to work to improve things. You
> can continue bitching here, instead.
>

So your answer to "How long should the cyclist wait?" is
"indefinitely"?

> > > However, there are certainly places where a "Shit, I'll just run it"
> > > attitude doesn't work well. One is a left turn signal at an extremely
> > > busy intersection (which has happened to me on my motorcycle). When I
> > > say "extremely busy," I mean I was worried about clearing the multi-
> > > direction traffic despite plenty of horsepower. Had I been on my
> > > bicycle, running that light would have been no simple matter.
>
> > However, if you were on a bicycle, and weren't so hung up on sidewalks
> > (or salmoning), it would be obvious to me to turn left *before* the
> > intersection and "salmon" up the sidewalk (or possibly even the
> > "wrong" bike lane, or th egrasy median, or... ) and keep checking for
> > traffic developments that will let me work my way (if necessary)
> > across - all as I said earlier in this thread and others.
>
> A) I wasn't on a bicycle. I was on a motorcycle. It was a problem,
> one that should be fixed. I'll test it again soon, and if it's still a
> problem, I now know who to contact to have it fixed.
>

OT

> B) The closest sidewalk to that intersection is at least half a mile
> away. There's no bike lane, nor greasy nor grassy median. Sometimes,
> Dan, you have to ride where the big boys ride.
>

"Oh, Fraaank," [the girls all swoon], "You're sooooo brave." ;-)

> > > And I've seen traffic being held up for five minutes at another heavy
> > > traffic road where a loop detector didn't detect a tractor trailer
> > > rig.
>
> > And I've seen idiots that will sit there behind it even where it's
> > feasible to just go around him; and I've seen idiots that will stand
> > there next to him on their bicycle - waiting.
>
> I wasn't on a bike that time either, but: There was no feasible way
> to go around him, unless you count driving down the road playing
> chicken with oncoming traffic as "feasible." (Admittedly, you might.)
>

Isn't that what four-way flaashers are for? ;-)

> > > So whether or not this non-detection is a problem to a guy who claims
> > > to live in "Mayberry," and who brags about flouting any and all road
> > > rules...
>
> > "Brags" and "flouting" is in your mind (rather inflammatory
> > contortion, don't you think? ... though I'll acknowledge *sometimes*
> > bragging, and flouting *some* road rules...
>
> That's close enough to QED for me. It would be interesting to see a
> list of road rules you don't flout, though.

The vast majority of them you dipstick!

> I hadn't heard of any.
>

Or any stolen generator lights, it seems. Therefor, by Frank's logic,
there are none. Case closed.

> > >, I think the problem needs attention. I think a traffic control
> > > device should work for all legal traffic. Perhaps that has something
> > > to do with the 40,000 ADT road that I frequently have to deal with on
> > > my bike.
>
> > Perhaps. I generally avoid - quite successfully - the cager
> > clusterfucks, myself (tried that culvert yet, dude? ;-),
>
> Nope. I'm not a culvert-bunny. I've got a legal right to the road,
> and I use that right very successfully.
>

Well then, continued good luck with the legislature and public works.
I'll Ride Bike!

[Frank Krygowski]

I think that's adequate for keeping North Korean nukes out of the
U.S.

Of course, I was one of the guys who thought Saddaam had no
significant weapons of mass destruction, so what do I know?

- Frank Krygowski

[Dan O]

On Mar 29, 4:58 pm, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:

<snip>

>
> ... Those are some of the things I try to address. Of

> course, there's no reason _you_ need to work to improve things. You
> can continue bitching here, instead.
>

"Bitching"?? I think what I said was, "What problem?"

<snip>

[T0m $herman]

On 3/29/2013 6:58 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> B) The closest sidewalk to that intersection is at least half a mile
> away. There's no bike lane, nor greasy nor grassy median.

Grassy knoll?

--
T0m $herm@n

[Frank Krygowski]

90 whole seconds!!!!!

- Frank Krygowski

[T0m $herman]

On 3/29/2013 11:01 PM, Dan O wrote:
> On Mar 29, 4:58 pm, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> [...]

>> I wasn't on a bike that time either, but: There was no feasible way
>> to go around him, unless you count driving down the road playing
>> chicken with oncoming traffic as "feasible." (Admittedly, you might.)
>>
>
> Isn't that what four-way flaashers are for? ;-)
>

Most motorcycles do not have 4-way flashers (not sure about Frank's
airhead).

>>>> So whether or not this non-detection is a problem to a guy who claims
>>>> to live in "Mayberry," and who brags about flouting any and all road
>>>> rules...
>>
>>> "Brags" and "flouting" is in your mind (rather inflammatory
>>> contortion, don't you think? ... though I'll acknowledge *sometimes*
>>> bragging, and flouting *some* road rules...
>>
>> That's close enough to QED for me. It would be interesting to see a
>> list of road rules you don't flout, though.
>
> The vast majority of them you dipstick!

> [...]

As J. Brandt might ask, how vast is this majority?

--
T0m $herm@n

[Dan O]

Idiot, you were arguing that people should wait for a light, but not
forever. I asked how long they should wait. (Well? How long? And
what are the considerations for action after that.)

My point about the 90 seconds for a *detected* vehicle was, how long
before you begin to think you're not detected, before you begin to
consider disobeying the signal.

Personally, I *consider* the signal, but don't necessarily obey it in
the first place; so this detection thing is simply not a problem for
me,

[Dan O]

On Mar 29, 9:15 pm, "T0m $herman"

Did you miss my earlier reference? ;-)

[Dan O]

What don't you know?

[Dan O]

On Mar 29, 4:58 pm, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 29, 3:40 pm, Dan O <danover...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 29, 7:39 am, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > I'd never say a cyclist should sit indefinitely at a traffic light
> > > that doesn't detect his presence and turn green.
>
> > Even if a motorist may be expected to come along and trip the light
> > eventually?
>
> "Eventually" = "indefinitely" in this case. You're once again arguing
> against someone inside your imagination.
>

That doesn't sound like "an extremely busy intersection". And if
iit's extremely busy with cross traffic and virtually *none* crossing
and no manual crosswalk signal*, well, it sounds like a sort of arcane
worst possible route selection to me. Not exactly a good example
supporting the need.

(*Some of which don't work, either, and I once *considered* calling up
the public works about one, but as you say about us "slackers", it
simply wasn't enough of a "problem" to motivate me for the hassle.)

<snip>

[Dan O]

... "It would be interesting to see a list." :-)

But seriously, I've got to stop picking on you or I'll have the dept
of human services "mentally disabled" abuse investigators knocking.

[Dan O]

On Mar 29, 4:58 pm, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:

<snip>

>
> You're once again arguing
> against someone inside your imagination.
>

http://www.bicyclinglife.com/SafetySkills/FrankNFred001.htm

<snip>

[Dan O]

On Mar 29, 12:40 pm, Dan O <danover...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 29, 7:39 am, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 28, 11:35 pm, Dan O <danover...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > A bicyclist that chooses to obey a light that won't change for them is
> > > fine with me, but I think he's an idiot. You go ahead on and keep
> > > tweaking the law (trying to), and/or tweaking the infrastructure
> > > (trying to) - good luck with that. Makes no never mind to me. My
> > > solution is quantum times more expedient, and it's already built into
> > > my whole approach to the activity :-)
>
> > I'd never say a cyclist should sit indefinitely at a traffic light
> > that doesn't detect his presence and turn green.
>
> Even if a motorist may be expected to come along and trip the light
> eventually? How long should the cyclist wait? I know of lights that
> will make a *detected* motorist wait a full 90 seconds even when there
> is no cross traffic.
>

http://www.bicyclinglife.com/SafetySkills/FrankNFred015.htm

"... a reasonable amount of time. I sat there for several minutes... "

("Blast, I'm going to have to make another phone call to get it
adjusted.")

<snip>

[Frank Krygowski]

On Mar 30, 1:01 am, Dan O <danover...@gmail.com> wrote:
>  And if
> iit's extremely busy with cross traffic and virtually *none* crossing
> and no manual crosswalk signal*,

It's unreasonable to expect a cyclist to leave a left turn lane and
waddle across multiple lanes of traffic to press a button intended for
_pedestrians,_ even if such a button exists.

> well, it sounds like a sort of arcane
> worst possible route selection to me.  Not exactly a good example
> supporting the need.

Sometimes you have to ride where the big boys ride, Dan.

That particular intersection isn't one I frequently ride through. But
if I'm passing through a certain neighborhood, by far the most direct
route home involves turning left at that intersection.

Normally, there's enough left turning car traffic that the signal
lights up green. However, I believe it should turn green for a
solitary bicyclist or motorcyclist. That's true whether you give a
damn or not.

> (*Some of which don't work, either, and I once *considered* calling up
> the public works about one, but as you say about us "slackers", it
> simply wasn't enough of a "problem" to motivate me for the hassle.)

Right. Because dialing 10 numbers and talking for three minutes is
SUCH a hassle!

Dan, do you _ever_ voluntarily do _anything_ for your community?

- Frank Krygowski

[Frank Krygowski]

Gosh, Dan, why did you leave out the very next phrase? You know: "...
just to see what would happen..."

- Frank Krygowski

[Dan O]

On Mar 30, 8:34 am, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 30, 1:01 am, Dan O <danover...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > And if
> > iit's extremely busy with cross traffic and virtually *none* crossing
> > and no manual crosswalk signal*,
>
> It's unreasonable to expect a cyclist to leave a left turn lane and
> waddle across multiple lanes of traffic to press a button intended for

> _pedestrians,_ ...

I expect nothing. They can stand there like a dork if they want to.

If, as you say, "eventually is indefinitely" and the signal is
defective, how about riding straight through (unless there are also no
straight through cars to trip the sensor in which case what are you
whining about waddling across again?)... why not straight through to
the far side and join the cross street traffic once you get over
there. Sure, it's a two-step process and I'd probably never mess with
such a process myself), but it's a soluton.

It would be just swell if all the infrastructure worked perfectly; but
guess what - it's not going to.

> ... even if such a button exists.
>

Hey, I'm just trying to help out you fellows who seem to need the
infrastructure ;-)

> > well, it sounds like a sort of arcane
> > worst possible route selection to me. Not exactly a good example
> > supporting the need.
>
> Sometimes you have to ride where the big boys ride, Dan.
>

I ride anywhere and everywhere you would. You wouldn't ride half of
the places that I do. I do not aspire to be like you, so that attempt
at a put down won't work.

> That particular intersection isn't one I frequently ride through. But
> if I'm passing through a certain neighborhood, by far the most direct
> route home involves turning left at that intersection.
>

There are ways to do it without just sitting out there like a dork for
several minutes.

> Normally, there's enough left turning car traffic that the signal
> lights up green. However, I believe it should turn green for a
> solitary bicyclist or motorcyclist. That's true whether you give a
> damn or not.
>

Oh I do sort of care a little bit... sometimes... I guess; I'm just
not so hung up on playing Traffic Parcheesi to badger the public
works, petition the legislature, "... track down the various vendors
and see how their technologies vary", etc. I have my own exceedingly
simple, easy ways of dealing with such things.

> > (*Some of which don't work, either, and I once *considered* calling up
> > the public works about one, but as you say about us "slackers", it
> > simply wasn't enough of a "problem" to motivate me for the hassle.)
>
> Right. Because dialing 10 numbers and talking for three minutes is
> SUCH a hassle!
>
> Dan, do you _ever_ voluntarily do _anything_ for your community?
>

Would responding to "public assistance" calls, 911 emergency medical
calls, and going into burning buildings count? (Just to list a few of
the most immediately obvious.)

[Dan O]

So how long should a cyclist wait at a signal before considering
proceeding against it?

[Frank Krygowski]

On Mar 30, 2:54 pm, Dan O <danover...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 30, 8:34 am, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 30, 1:01 am, Dan O <danover...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >   And if
> > > iit's extremely busy with cross traffic and virtually *none* crossing
> > > and no manual crosswalk signal*,
>
> > It's unreasonable to expect a cyclist to leave a left turn lane and
> > waddle across multiple lanes of traffic to press a button intended for
> > _pedestrians,_ ...
>
> I expect nothing.  They can stand there like a dork if they want to.
>
> If, as you say, "eventually is indefinitely" and the signal is
> defective, how about riding straight through (unless there are also no
> straight through cars to trip the sensor in which case what are you
> whining about waddling across again?)... why not straight through to
> the far side and join the cross street traffic once you get over
> there.  Sure, it's a two-step process and I'd probably never mess with
> such a process myself), but it's a soluton.

It is a solution. Many cyclists who are less confident in traffic make
left turns that way. In the case of the intersection I've been
talking about (two very busy four-lane roads with either single or
double left turn lanes), the cyclist would need to know ahead of time
that the left turn signal didn't work for him. That's because getting
stuck in LT lane in the center of that mess, then deciding to go
straight, would involve making moves that the affected motorists
wouldn't be expecting at all. Surprising motorists isn't generally
wise.

But the question is, if the cyclist found that solution was necessary,
why NOT pick up the phone and report the problem? After all, that's
really what I was proposing. Your two-step left turn generally delays
the cyclist's left turn. Why, you might have to wait an extra 90
seconds every time you passed through there! And we know how valuable
your time is!

Think of it as an investment. Make the phone call. It will take less
than five minutes. If they fix the problem, you'll recover the lost
phone time within a very few trips. And others will benefit as well.

> > > well, it sounds like a sort of arcane
> > > worst possible route selection to me.  Not exactly a good example
> > > supporting the need.
>
> > Sometimes you have to ride where the big boys ride, Dan.
>
> I ride anywhere and everywhere you would.  You wouldn't ride half of
> the places that I do.  I do not aspire to be like you, so that attempt
> at a put down won't work.

You were claiming you solve such problems by riding on sidewalks or
riding in culverts. Some times those aren't an option. And
generally, they're worse options than riding as a competent vehicle
operator. You know, like the big boys.

- Frank Krygowski

[Frank Krygowski]

It's a judgement call, obviously. In the case of a left turn lane
signal, I'd say one light cycle. In the case of a two-lane road
intersecting another larger two-lane where the smaller road gets a
green light only when "tripped" by a vehicle (which used to be the
case on my normal route to work), I knew the "normal" wait time was 30
seconds. I went through the light when about a minute had passed and
it was clear.

But the problem was short lived, because I took the time to phone the
county. They turned up the loop sensitivity and the light worked
thereafter. I still ride that way on occasion, and it still works.
You should try that.

- Frank Krygowski

[Dan O]

> really what I was proposing. Your two-step left turn...

Hold the phone, Frank - I said:

"Sure, it's a two-step process and I'd probably never mess with such a

process myself... "

... and...

"I'm just trying to help out you fellows who seem to need the
infrastructure"

> ... generally delays

> the cyclist's left turn. Why, you might have to wait an extra 90
> seconds every time you passed through there! And we know how valuable
> your time is!
>

Damn straight! :-)

> Think of it as an investment. Make the phone call. It will take less
> than five minutes.

Engage City Hall? No, thanks. (BTDT)

> If they fix the problem, you'll recover the lost
> phone time within a very few trips.

Dickhead! I'm not waiting around in the first place.

> And others will benefit as well.
>

Well, actually that's the only reason I considered it for that broken
crosswalk button. Didn't much matter to me, but I pictured the
pregnant lady with bags of groceries trying to keep the little ones
herded under her wing for like ten minutes with cars and trucks
blasitng past...

... considered it but when it came down to picking up the phone to
engage City Hall over it... well, I figured it would be either
eventually be enough of a problem for somebody else to get attention
(and/or the pregnant grocery mom would figure out that intersection
was a no go and use another crossing).

> > > > well, it sounds like a sort of arcane
> > > > worst possible route selection to me. Not exactly a good example
> > > > supporting the need.
>
> > > Sometimes you have to ride where the big boys ride, Dan.
>
> > I ride anywhere and everywhere you would. You wouldn't ride half of
> > the places that I do. I do not aspire to be like you, so that attempt
> > at a put down won't work.
>
> You were claiming you solve such problems by riding on sidewalks or
> riding in culverts. Some times those aren't an option.

There are always options. Open your mind.

> And
> generally, they're worse options than riding as a competent vehicle
> operator. You know, like the big boys.
>

Sorry, not working. I'm sure you think it's an effective put down
(and we know that's how you approach resistance to your "persuasion"),
but it's not even a nice try. Fail :-)

[Dan O]

Yes, it is; and you're disparaging my judgement. Nice.

> In the case of a left turn lane
> signal, I'd say one light cycle.

In my experience these systems sometimes skip a turn for reasons other
than faulty detection. It seems to me you either have to observe a
repeated pattern that indicates the fault, or take a scofflaw approach
(which you might as well just do in the first place if you're going
to).

> In the case of a two-lane road
> intersecting another larger two-lane where the smaller road gets a
> green light only when "tripped" by a vehicle (which used to be the
> case on my normal route to work), I knew the "normal" wait time was 30
> seconds. I went through the light when about a minute had passed and
> it was clear.
>

You already knew; and I must say, your behavior sounds decidedly
scofflaw (Frank knows best).

> But the problem was short lived, because I took the time to phone the
> county. They turned up the loop sensitivity and the light worked
> thereafter. I still ride that way on occasion, and it still works.

The city I'm talking about *claims* their detectors work for bikes.
Personally, I couldn't care less, and there are many other bicyclists
who can complain about it if they do.

> You should try that.
>

http://boks-funnyfarm.blogspot.com/2008/07/cognitive-distortion-8-should.html

[datakoll]

I DUNNO. While looking for oncoming smell the air for gendarme. 'Like' if reality is so slop the 12 lane is clear out to the horizon then 'things' may be spo slow you're dead meat.

Local noise sez local hurricane proof hahhahhahhha long reah and veerrrry gracefull no wind drag LED GRY intersection assemblies carry $12000 in visible light camera switches aimed at a spec spot. I doah belive any consideration ois given to a bike at 12K.

There are backlit green with white letters
street ID signs large enough for a 20/250 at 200'

The area is state coded for no screwups.

[Frank Krygowski]

On Mar 30, 4:16 pm, Dan O <danover...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 30, 12:58 pm, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > why NOT pick up the phone and report the problem?  After all, that's

> > really what I was proposing.  ...

>
> > Think of it as an investment.  Make the phone call.  It will take less
> > than five minutes.
>
> Engage City Hall?  No, thanks.  (BTDT)
>
> >  If they fix the problem, you'll recover the lost
> > phone time within a very few trips.

> 'm
> Dickhead! ...

Classy, Dan. Yet somehow you read perfectly normal language I write
and declare it to be rude.

> >  And others will benefit as well.
>
> Well, actually that's the only reason I considered it for that broken
> crosswalk button.  Didn't much matter to me, but I pictured the
> pregnant lady with bags of groceries trying to keep the little ones
> herded under her wing for like ten minutes with cars and trucks
> blasitng past...
>
> ... considered it but when it came down to picking up the phone to

> engage City Hall over it... well, I figured...

You figured to slack out, as usual, and let others do the work.

- Frank Krygowski

[Frank Krygowski]

On Mar 30, 4:43 pm, Dan O <danover...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 30, 1:04 pm, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 30, 3:08 pm, Dan O <danover...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > So how long should a cyclist wait at a signal before considering
> > > proceeding against it?
>
> > It's a judgement call, obviously.
>
> Yes, it is; and you're disparaging my judgement.  Nice.

You've described your riding very thoroughly on many occasions.
You've made it clear that "your judgement" includes violating traffic
lights if it will save you just a few seconds, riding facing traffic
when the mood hits you, riding at night without lights, riding while
drunk, zooming onto and off of sidewalks at whim, startling motorists
by your chaotic moves and sneering about it, and generally riding like
a 12-year-old on cocaine.

You've also made clear that "your judgement" includes mocking those
who ride according to the rules of the road, or whose competence has
allowed them to avoid your frequent crashes. And now you mock those
who work to fix something as basic as a traffic detector that doesn't
work for two-wheeled vehicles.

So yes, I disparage your judgement.

- Frank Krygowski

[Dan O]

On Mar 30, 5:32 pm, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 30, 4:16 pm, Dan O <danover...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 30, 12:58 pm, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > why NOT pick up the phone and report the problem? After all, that's
> > > really what I was proposing. ...
>
> > > Think of it as an investment. Make the phone call. It will take less
> > > than five minutes.
>
> > Engage City Hall? No, thanks. (BTDT)
>
> > > If they fix the problem, you'll recover the lost
> > > phone time within a very few trips.
> > 'm
> > Dickhead! ...
>

Just another term for imbecile. How can I recover the lost phone time
from a fixed problem that was not a problem in the first place?

> Classy, Dan. Yet somehow you read perfectly normal language I write
> and declare it to be rude.
>

Perfectly normal. Perfect. And Normal. You're a peach!

> > > And others will benefit as well.
>
> > Well, actually that's the only reason I considered it for that broken
> > crosswalk button. Didn't much matter to me, but I pictured the
> > pregnant lady with bags of groceries trying to keep the little ones
> > herded under her wing for like ten minutes with cars and trucks
> > blasitng past...
>
> > ... considered it but when it came down to picking up the phone to
> > engage City Hall over it... well, I figured...
>
> You figured to slack out, as usual, and let others do the work.
>

Oh, so now it's "work"? But no hassle?

Let others jerk themselves off on their own behalf.

[Dan O]

Got 'em all fixed yet? (Didn't think so.) Now you're talking about
"... track[ing] down the various vendors
and see how their technologies vary". Dude, knock yourself out.
Someday they'll erect a statue. Do whatever floats your boat (dork).

> So yes, I disparage your judgement.
>

You know best, of course. You are the arbiter of "right". Everyone
"should" be just like you, Mr. "Purple Pants".

[Dan O]

The transportation infrastructure is built for cars and trucks, with
only token accommodation for pedestrians and bicyclists. It's so
funny that people equate driving a car with freedom. Ha! - such all-
encompassing constraints.

As a pedestrian, I'm footloose and fancy free. Rules? What rules?
(That prohibition on jaywalking is just car culture affirmation, and
I've never had it matter to me in half-a-century of walking around.)

The bicycle mode of transportation is very much an in-between kind of
thing - in between the pedestrian mode and the car mode. On that
continuum, and particularly in terms of reason to be constrained by
rules, the bicycle is much nearer the pedestrian than the car.

Why should a bicycle subject me to such dire constraints as a car?
Because some authoritarian fruitcake is offended by society's regard
for bicycles and needs to rationalize *his* bike riding as serious
business? (That there is a league of these fruitcakes only makes it
worse.) As something requiring formal education and/or extensive
influence of authority to do "properly"? I would leave him to his
delusions of grandeur and purple pants and what not; but I won't have
my free will constrained by arbitrary rules because he's a big boy and
needs a *new* sort of card-in-the-spokes to feed his agonizing
unfulfilled need for respect. Vroom-vroom!

I *consider* the rules and such as I make my way on my bicycle, and
since I and my bike are composed of perceptible and impactful matter
and all that, and in the midst of the transportation infrastructure, I
wind up sensibly acting in compliance with a large part of the rules a
large part of the time, and in some accord with their perceived intent
essentially all of the time.

But as I make my way in this life and this world I see the human
society's transportation infrastructure and the vehicles it is
designed for as a single functional entity, and I see it from a mostly
external perspective, which is pretty much how the birds do it. Fly.

[J.B.Slocomb]

Didn't someone say something like "Ask not what you can do for your
community; ask what your community can do for you".

Of have I got that wrong :-?

--
Cheers,

John B.

[J.B.Slocomb]

On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 12:08:36 -0700 (PDT), Dan O <danov...@gmail.com>
wrote:

One thing about waiting for the green Light; it gives you a leg up on
your opponent when you sue him for running over you at the cross roads
:-)
--
Cheers,

John B.

[datakoll]

Frank, you are blessed with language ability honed in THE SHOP.

People often miss the beauty of this.

[Dan O]

In the spirit of the first new week after the first full moon after
the Vernal Equinox, colored eggs and candy canes and all that, I (sort
of) regret mocking you. Yes, I was mocking you, it was unnecessary,
and that's kind of ugly. (The motivation has been given over and over
again - not just by me.) What you do with your life is your business,
and engaging City Hall or whatever as the hero of all that is good and
right is a fine way to spend the time you have here on earth (just not
for me).

Now, can you work on saying those four little words?

[Dan O]

On Mar 31, 5:39 am, J.B.Slocomb <J.B.Sloc...@invalid.addr> wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 12:08:36 -0700 (PDT), Dan O <danover...@gmail.com>

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/msg/aa953e6c3d214d8e

[Dan O]

... if that's not long enough, rehash:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.tech/msg/ac975ee53026b5f1

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/msg/505130db279ecb3a

[AMuzi]

-snip-

Frank Krygowski wrote:

> But the question is, if the cyclist found that solution was necessary,
> why NOT pick up the phone and report the problem? After all, that's
> really what I was proposing. Your two-step left turn generally delays
> the cyclist's left turn. Why, you might have to wait an extra 90
> seconds every time you passed through there! And we know how valuable
> your time is!
>
> Think of it as an investment. Make the phone call. It will take less
> than five minutes. If they fix the problem, you'll recover the lost
> phone time within a very few trips. And others will benefit as well.

-snip-

Because the downside is that some guy among the powers that
be will label you a troublemaker and proceed to get even.
You will have no recourse to the endless travails of that.

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

[datakoll]

yo - I moved to get the sign put into the intersection.

[AMuzi]

-snip-

Dan O wrote:

> Now, can you work on saying those four little words?
>

Four words:
" Dan, I love you"

How was that?

[Frank Krygowski]

I doubt that's likely for the case I'm describing, which is a loop
detector adjusted too low to spot a bicycle or motorcycle.

I've not yet tried the Ohio DOT phone number recently instituted to
report such problems. That's
(614) 387-0722
see www.dot.state.oh.us/news/Pages/ODOTimprovingTrafficSignalSafetyforMotorcyclesandScooters.aspx
or http://tinyurl.com/d5akrqz

But if a person were really worried about communicating with a
government official, I suppose they could give a false name.

- Frank Krygowski