Tar_Alcaran

Fair point. I was more concerned about dropping it in, and then catapulting a small metal disc into some very expensive electronics.

There’s a bit of difference doing it on a gameboy, and doing it in a running PC with spinning fans and such.

New towns are areas are ALSO designed poorly. It’s not just existing areas that have been made wrong, new areas are still being designed by idiots with blinders on.

Because of how so many American towns and cities are built, you’d have to bulldoze entire cities to do things like eliminate small traffic lights from residential neighborhoods.

Weird how other countries manage just fine without bulldozing. What they actually do is switch up road lanes and on-street parking, and it fits just fine.

Having multiple lanes in between level intersections adds pretty much nothing to the capacity anyway, so you may as well use it for something useful.

We’re not going to tear down the entire fucking nation for some retards on bicycles.

Terminal carbrain: not realizing that getting more people on bikes means fewer cars, less traffic and a nicer trip for literally everyone, including cars.

Your parents didn’t even try to educate you, did they?

I have a bachelor’s in civil engineering, and that’s part of the reason why I’m able to pierce through the deep coating of carbrain induced status-quo thinking.

You’re making all the wrong assumptions right from the start.

At a small stop-go light, like you might find in a residential neighborhood

These shouldn’t even exist. A residential neighborhood shouldn’t have traffic lights, and it should have a low enough speed and low enough volume of cars (only the people who live there should be driving there) that accidents should be rare and low risk.

The fact that you assume there’s a traffic light here starts from the basic assumption that there is so much car traffic that it needs managing. You’ve already designed your residential street wrong then.

A more medium size intersection

Skipping this, because these intersections shouldn’t have ANY bicycle interactions at all. If bikes are crossing your 4-lane divided highway, you’ve already designed your roads wrong. I would argue if you’re putting a full streetlevel crossing in, you’re also not doing great unless you get paid per traffic jam.

Note that these are two different environments; at an intersection in a city center, the speed limits are often 20mph, and frankly, bicycles should not have their own lanes there. By law they’re vehicles, they should be in traffic behaving the same as cars and have the right of way that cars do. Where they get themselves killed is trying to weave in and out of traffic, or insisting on putting in a parallel bike lane pretending it turns off friendly fire. “Just add to every driver’s cognitive load and make them responsible for my safety.” Fuck off.

A protected bike path and protected intersection REDUCE everyone’s mental load because it makes it practically impossible to hit a bike. And it separates bikes from traffic too, so they can’t weave.

The problem with American bike gutters with painted lines is that cars enter them constantly, by design. Cars cross the bike lane to park, they cross it to turn right, and something they just drive in it because the drivers are idiots. Or cars park in it because they’re idiots. And every time a car enters the bike path, the bike needs to move or die. So they move, creating more risks.

All of those problems go away with a raised barrier between the bikes and the cars. You can just stop thinking about them, because they’re in an entirely different lane that you physically can’t even get to. And if you turn right, you can treat them like any other vehicle again, where they’ll have the right of way or there’s a traffic light.

Meanwhile, back out on Some Road and Another Street, these have 45 and 55 mph speed limits, you’re traveling from town to town here, and these places pretty much should not see bicycle traffic.

Depends. A 20km bike ride is totally fine, an 80km one isn’t. But if there’s cars going 55mph right next to me, I won’t be taking a bike because that’s super dangerous. There should be a seperate bike path there as well, removing all risks.

Of course, only if it’s actually inhabited in that distance.

Bike lanes as I have seen them implemented are a lot like sidewalks; slower traffic is placed to the right of traffic lanes…except they do not expect to treat every intersection as a stop sign, and they interpret green lights for straight through as for them, even in conflict with right turning traffic.

Why the fuck would you have right turns on the same signal as straight? Why the shit wouldn’t you make protected intersections.

Your argument is basically “poorly designed roads are dangerous”. Yeah, they are, stop making them

Edit: Also, Dutch pedestrians have the right of way over cars in the same road. If you’re turning right, and someone is walking there, the car stops. This works fine, because we actually know how to design roads.

All of those are policy choices though. None of that (except the old cities) happened by accident

There are AR-15s that use 7.62, jokingly called “AR-47”. They’re not using 7.62 NATO though.

I’m sure there’s a .308 Winchester version of an AR-15 out there though, which is basically the same thing.

Electrocuting anyone who comes in contact with the power line, i.e. a lineman who might assume the line is de-energized

This is one of the reasons why your solar panels don’t function during a power outage.

Wait, if you buy a 10 dollar scratch card, you can deduct 9 dollars from you income for tax purposes?

You can set up a genetic engineering lab for under 5000 bucks in your garage, and I would prefer you not being able to google how to DIY some super-ebola, thank you very much.

I’ve been saying it for a while, even if we figured out fusion, it wouldn’t see the light of day.

Fusion reactors would be absolutely massive, centralized facilities that provide something of great value for very little labour input. They’re the PERFECT tool of capitalism.

1: every professional knows LNT is wrong, but there isn’t an agreed alternative.

2: there are safe limits set for people who work with radiation, so the LNT model isn’t actually used there at all.

The loss condition is a lot less fun, and the quicksave sucks

EA being on the recieving end of what they’ve been doing to others for years

We don’t need to know that at all, since it’s nonsense.

He compared it to Human Revolution. When is the last time you heard anyone compare anything to Human Revolution???

It was also really weird that he compared Cyberpunk, as a setting, to a whole bunch of other media that are all older than Cyberpunk. Only Blade Runner predates it.

Ah, the “we have StarCraft at home” RTS

I get mine from weird Chinese sites, soooo…

Anything “Lego” sold on aliexpress.