Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)OM
Posts
0
Comments
251
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • The safety of a region is fairly predictable even if the individual disasters aren't as predictable. If you don't build on fault lines, earth quakes aren't generally going to be a risk. If you don't build in tornado alley, or on the coast, tornadoes and hurricanes aren't going to be a risk. If you build at higher elevations, flooding isn't going to be a risk, etc.

    And even with those nuclear disasters (that we've now learned from and can design reactors to prevent), nuclear has a far, far, far lower death rate per kWh of energy than all fossil fuels. The cost of continued fossil fuel use is already killing the planet, and already too high of a cost. We need to be switching away as fast as we possibly can, and nuclear is a viable alternative among many.

  • It’s that they cost so damn much

    The cost of continued fossil fuel use is far higher.

    rarely profitable

    Profit should not be the motivation of preventing our climate disaster from getting worse. If the private sector isn't able to handle it, then the government needs to do so itself.

    And besides, the only reason fossil fuels are so competitive is because we are dumping billions of dollars in subsidies for them. Those subsidies should instead go towards things that aren't killing the planet.

  • and you cant access more than one at a time

    I assume you're talking about libraries here, and if so this isn't true. Libraries allow you to check out multiple books at a time within reason.

    and once printed they’re static/unchangable until reprinting.

    Which is a good thing because it makes it harder to censor them. This is a security feature, now a flaw. Plus physical books don't come with DRM.

  • Freedom is inherently dangerous

    Only to a degree. Letting your child run free on a playground is significantly less dangerous than letting them run free in a hazardous waste landfill. We can absolutely design safe and free places. We just need to stop designing our cities for the sole use of hazardous waste (cars).

  • We need to allow more mixed zoning so that we don’t have to travel 20 minutes by bike to get to the store, alleviating the drive to ride as fast as possible.

    Not only would that eliminate the need for speed, but it would also reduce the overall number of trips taken by bike. Less trips means less crashes. Same goes for cars.

    Add it to the never ending list of benefits to mixed use zoning.

  • In addition to RiderExMachina's point, an e-bike will get you to your destination quicker, and with less effort. With how hot things are getting, it's much more preferable to not arrive sweaty as hell due to how much work it can take, plus it's better to spend less time in the heat.

  • I don’t think safety courses and licensing are a huge barrier to entry though, unless we let them be.

    Training and licenses generally aren't free, and e-bikes are already pretty expensive. It would add quite enough of a barrier to entry to dissuade more people from switching to them, which is something the environment cannot afford. We honestly need to be doing everything in our power as quickly as possible.

    And yes, training and a license would indeed make a difference with how riders conduct themselves. Including wearing a helmet or paying attention.

    I've seen plenty of car drivers on the road who presumably have a license, yet they don't wear seat-belts, don't pay attention, turn in places they shouldn't, speed, etc. The first step should be infrastructure changes to increase the number of protected/dedicated bike trails (which in turn allow accidents to happen safely), built in speed limiters, rules on helmets and speed, mixed use zoning to reduce trip count/speed/cars, etc. Such changes don't have an impact on barrier to entry or and only a negligible effect on our freedom.

    Traveling by bike is one of the few ways you can travel without having the government involved in some way, or at least minimally involved. I'd like it to stay that way.

    And like I said earlier, most of these injuries are to the rider themselves, which means they were probably doing something stupid in the first place. People are going to be stupid even with a license and training, so we may as well design around it as a first step.


    I have a cat. It likes to get into things I don't want it to. I could theoretically teach it not to do so, but the far simpler option is to keep the layout of my house and my things such that it can't get into things in the first place. If I keep the closet doors shut, it isn't getting in. People are stupid, and similarly, we should design our infrastructure to account for that. It's why speed bumps exist after all.

  • We are at a point in time in which we can't afford to wait any longer to switch away from fossil fuels, and e-bikes are one of the ways to do so. The barriers to entry should be minimal.

    The majority of e-bike injuries are to the rider themselves, and due to inattention/falling off. That's not something that training or a license will really help with. Speeding and not wearing a helmet on the other hand, those are things easier to catch/deal with.

  • Georgia law requires the names of jurors to be public for the sake of transparency. So while Trump is a traitor, the juror's names thing isn't his doing.

    His supporters though, they're absolutely going to be responsible once one of the jurors gets shot. And Trump will hold some of that responsibility for not keeping his cultists at bay.