...trolling the net

As I've said before, due in part to the sad state of the financial sector, I spend much of my time at "work" surfing online, keeping tabs on the ridiculousness of the world we live with. Thus, I routinely dedicate at least a solid hour of my day to reading and finding good blogs in the other world we occupy.

Some that I read most frequently can be found to your right, below pitifully small list of followers.

To be frank, all bloggers eventually write something that just rubs me the wrong way. If the issue is one that I am empassioned about, and the offending words were composed just so, I have a hard time ever reading that blog again. And in the continued spirit of frankness, BLDG BLOG is a good example; I find what it reports on/about reasonably interesting, but because its an architecture-centric blog by a dude from LA, I doubt I'll ever again muster the fortitude to read his blog which is known to be rife with glowing appraisals of my arch-nemesis...


One that I return to at least weekly is Copenhagenize, a blog which, I surmise, is dedicated to cycling news in Copenhagen. I must confess, I found and read this blog the first 10 or so times more so because I'm Danish and really like Copenhagen as a city, than due to its subject matter or opinion. Now I read the blog cause I've found that, unlike Its sister site, Copenhagen Cycle Chic (which is starting to really bug me for some reason), Copenhagenize is more geared toward advocacy and cyclist's issues, not just in Danmark, but the world over, which piques my curiosity.

Anywho, the subject of today's post at Copenhagenize tests the limits of rediculosity. According to The Daily Camera (which I've never heard of 'til just now) , a new law in colorado is being put into effect that essentially raises the penalties for motorists that behave maliciously toward cyclists.

In wording, I think it essentially brings them to where we are in New York with road-sharing rules. Among the rights cyclists in New York enjoy are: the right to not ride in the shoulder or bike lane if it is deemed unsafe by the cyclist. This means that because the bike lane is, as i've said before, the worst place on the road to ride a bike, you have the ability to take a lane over by riding in the middle of it.


Apparently because cyclists are being afforded rights to life and liberty, one maniacal resident of Boulder, CO is trying to organize a car sit-in of sorts, calling on residents along the route of a popular colorado century ride to drive slowly and "break down" along a designated stretch of the ride, in effort to annoy the cyclists and i guess "give 'em a taste of their own medicine".

“On July 25, in celebration of driver’s rights, many cars will use the Left Hand Canyon Road, drive slowly and many may break down unexpectedly, blocking areas to the cyclists on the return leg of the ‘Sunrise Century,’” the anonymous, one-page note reads. “Many cars and safe drivers all working together can send a message to the Statehouse to restrict cycling on our roads which are our only alternatives during family emergencies, commuting and required duties.”

So let me get this straight, they intend to block traffic to "send a message" about needing the road clear of what they regard to be obstacles?? Forgive my levity, but that's about as smart of a plan as you could expect from those suburban morons, most aren't clever enough to see how self defeating something like that is.

Then again, its not all peaches and cream for cyclists in Australia, their government has just enacted laws that significantly raise the penalties for "rouge riders" that cause problems.

"The maximum penalties under the new act include:
Dangerous riding - $13,610 or prison for twelve months or both.
Careless riding of a bike - $681 for a first offence and $1361 for a subsequent offence
If a person is killed or seriously injured by a cyclist and the rider has not immediately stopped and offered assistance - $68,052 or five years in prison IF property is damaged by a cyclist and the rider has not immediately stopped and offered assistance - $284 or seven days in prison for a first offence and $567 or prison for between seven and 14 days for a subsequent offence."

I totally agree that people have to be held accountable for their actions and most of these laws sound quite fair and even-handed, with the exception being the nearly $14k fine for "dangerous riding." I only hope that the fine would be imposed on a cyclist because they actually did something really fucking dumb and casued injury to someone or something; and not for simply being a cyclist unfortunate enough to run into a hard-ass, bike-hating cop. Maybe the risk of that is lower in Victoria, but in NYC, a law like that would just be another obvious attempt by the Bloomberg administration to have the poorest societal strata pay down the public debts incurred by the city's wealthiest.

Also worth a look is this crazy altercation between a toronto bike courier and a littering motorist. An old article but daaaaaaaamn, people need to chill the fuck out... seriously.

Stay calm, friends, and ride drama-free this weekend!

...keepin' it real Thursdays

Here are a number spectacular fails for you viewing pleasure:

1. The Revolution 2 velodrome crash from 2007.... gruesome.

...at least the dude in last place prior to the pile-up probably won afterward, I don't think they stop these races unless a crash blocks the whole track.

2. This one shows why I'm not a mountain-biker:

...ouch

3. Here's a series showing why its dumb to hold an umbrella while cycling:



Strangely, I see people doing this all the time on my commute. Gotta remember, when its raining, all puddles should be treated as though they are pot-holes.

Ride safely friends...

update: I apologize that the youtube videos get cut off on the right side of the page... I'm working it out and should have it lookin' seamless and cool by the time i post next.
erk

...Raining on optimism

As you may or may not be aware, the weather recently has been pretty strange in this neck of the woods...

I know its probably no simple task to "accurately" report the weather given the amount of historical data and recordings available to our meteorologists, but whatever that task is, its one that must be repeated daily to sate the demands of public curiosity. Surely this has been completely automated now to the point where relatively few people at the [tv network, website, corporation, newspaper, etc...] actually know anything about atmospheric science, and I have no doubt that weathermen are little more than grinning marionettes who don't know a pyrocumulus from a pyromaniac.

Anyway, the root of my beef with weather forcasting today isn't so much their accuracy as it is the way they relay the info. For instance, here's the 10-day forcast from a few minutes ago:


As someone who studies visual representations of ideas in all their forms, I'm apalled by the inconsistency this chart is populated with! Lets take next tuesday as an example shall we?

So let me get this straight... there are gonna be isolated t-storms with peeking sun, though only at a thirty percent chance.. what's it gonna be if fate falls on the 70% side which, for all we know, could be anything!

For fuck's sake, which geniuses came up with this method? Since when do we report what probably isn't going to happen? If you're gonna tell me theres a thirty percent chance of rain, at least have the picture depict what might happen if it doesn't rain... Its the honest truth that when people look at charts like these, they don't ponder silly shit like the inaccuracies that threaten knowledge; and furthermore, it is our responsibility as ethical members of society to not knowingly lead people astray, especially under the guise of accuracy.

The geeky, zit riddled, kid in me wonders if theres a conspiracy going down here... Do they deliberately show spooky icons of tempests to boost umbrella sales? Maybe its GM or the government trying to zap life back into the corpse of the american auto-industry by discouraging the public from cycling or walking to work more frequently... hmmm