#191
|
|||
|
|||
More About Lights
On Wed, 15 Mar 2017 14:08:44 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote: Thing is, nobody's demonstrated any need for so much stationary "be seen" light, beyond the usual "well, it _could_ happen" safety inflation mentality. True, but you're thinking like engineering, not marketing. Modern devices and electronics are crammed full of useless features. For example, my smartphone has hidden features that I don't know exist, much less know how to use them. Same with my fancy scientific calculator, where 99% of my use is simple arithmetic. If you could customize a product to do only what you need, only what's necessary, or only what is useful, it wouldn't sell. People buy products based on features, even if they're useless, not needed, and un-necessary. In some market sectors, marketing a product is an exercise in feature pollution. In the trade press, products are compared with tables of features. Failure to check the a box because some useless feature is missing will produce an inferior reviewer rating. A standlight, flashing light, blinding intensity, programmable settings, battery indicator, laser bug zapper, etc are all useless features that nobody needs. Yet, they sell products, so they are included. If you read the Oculus patent (BarryBeams): https://patents.google.com/patent/US8662697B2/en you'll find that he threw in a horn and siren, items which are of dubious value. Why? Because they provided the necessary product differentiation that makes his light different from the competitors. If there is a feature of dubious value, it won't be the safety statistics that determine whether it gets included or trashed. It will be the sales statistics. If it sells, it's good, no matter how dumb or useless. It appears that the Pet Rock of bicycling may eventually be the bicycle lighting system. I can't wait. We're facing the same mentality regarding our local forest preserve. Some people want to cut down every dead or dying tree within 100 feet of any trail because, well, it _could_ fall on somebody and kill them. Sheesh. Yep. We had a popular local river park closed because it was deemed hazardous even though the only injury was a drunk transient who tried to cross the river by doing a balancing act on the very narrow steel dam. It's not the falling tree that does the damage. It's the subsequent litigation. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
Ads |
#192
|
|||
|
|||
More About Lights
On Wed, 15 Mar 2017 15:45:13 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote: Sure. Safety inflation is a real thing. Ten years ago, walking on a sidewalk did not trigger a need for a luminous vest. Now I see people wearing those things even on sidewalks. So why the change? I blame the internet. One of the benefits of the internet is the sheer volume of news available. Before the internet, people would get their news from newspapers, magazines, radio, and TV. There was quite a bit there, but nothing compared to the volume and detail provided by the internet. News items that would have been relegated to the back pages of a newspaper and delays sufficient to make an item irrelivent were common. Now, we get it all, including the trivia, instantly. In the past, if someone got hit while walking in the dark, it would never even make the back pages. It was a non-event that nobody was interested in reading. Today, it's front page news, along with an associated conspiracy theory, a call for safer streets, quotes from unknown experts, and Google Ads for various safety products. In other words, even minor news sells products. Vest, festooned with reflectors and flashing LEDs are selling nicely because the GUM (great unwashed masses) are not aware that walking in the dark is risky. While the vests are unlikely to solve the problem, they do help and are cheap enough. Is it because it's really gotten so much more dangerous? I doubt it. Pedestrian fatalities did jump up a bit in the last year for which I find NHTSA data (2014) but they jumped up to a number less than the one for 2004. This is older but it looks like the trend is toward fewer pedestrian fatalities: https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/pssp/background/psafety.cfm "About two-thirds (67 percent) of pedestrian fatalities occurred at night." Probably dropping because more people are driving these days than walking. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
#193
|
|||
|
|||
More About Lights
On 3/18/2017 2:29 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Wed, 15 Mar 2017 14:08:44 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: Thing is, nobody's demonstrated any need for so much stationary "be seen" light, beyond the usual "well, it _could_ happen" safety inflation mentality. True, but you're thinking like engineering, not marketing. I do have too strong of a tendency to do that. See http://dilbert.com/strip/2014-12-18 That has a place of honor on our refrigerator door. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#194
|
|||
|
|||
More About Lights
On Saturday, March 18, 2017 at 3:12:02 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 3/18/2017 2:29 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote: On Wed, 15 Mar 2017 14:08:44 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: Thing is, nobody's demonstrated any need for so much stationary "be seen" light, beyond the usual "well, it _could_ happen" safety inflation mentality. True, but you're thinking like engineering, not marketing. I do have too strong of a tendency to do that. See http://dilbert.com/strip/2014-12-18 That has a place of honor on our refrigerator door. -- - Frank Krygowski Many many years ago I read an article and also books on bicycling that stated thatthe two most dangerous p;aces to ride a bicycle was #1 a parking lot and #2 an intersection. So, you guys are saying that having a bright standlight right where a lot of bicycling accidents happen (at an intersection) is a bad thing? I don't know about you but I like to know that a driver coming towards me at night whilst I'm stopped at an intersection can at least see my bicycle light. YMMV Why not paint your bike flat black and wear flat black clothing or camouflage clothing if being visible to other road users is of so little consequence even when you're stopped and they are moving? Cheers |
#195
|
|||
|
|||
More About Lights
On 3/18/2017 11:46 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
snip While the vests are unlikely to solve the problem, they do help and are cheap enough. Will they 100% solve the problem? Of course not. Will they help? Definitely. We've had fatalities in Silicon Valley of pedestrians walking at night on roads with drivers that have not been charged because they legitimately claimed that they just did not see the pedestrians. There's this false narrative out there of "if there's not been a double-blind study done, then we should ignore common sense, because no one has conclusively proven XYZ." There's no study that proves that making yourself more conspicuous at night (or in the daytime for that matter) makes it less likely that someone will inadvertently run you over, though in this case you might want to accept the empirical evidence, extrapolate data from related relevant studies, and use some common sense. Or not--if you have an agenda that you're pushing. In fact there has been at least one study on DRLs for bicycles, https://www.bikelight.ca/pages/safety-first-study. If someone is expecting a graph of lumens or lux versus bicycle crashes, then they will be waiting a long time. The bottom line is what this article states: "You Have No Excuse Not to Bike with a Light, Day or Night." https://www.outsideonline.com/2064501/you-have-no-excuse-not-bike-light-day-or-night. |
#196
|
|||
|
|||
More About Lights
On Saturday, March 18, 2017 at 3:57:34 PM UTC-4, sms wrote:
Snipped The bottom line is what this article states: "You Have No Excuse Not to Bike with a Light, Day or Night." https://www.outsideonline.com/2064501/you-have-no-excuse-not-bike-light-day-or-night. Except that on a sunny day most nearly every bicycle DRL is TOTALLY INVISIBLE compared to the bicycle + the rider. Heck at night I've seen bicycle bright red rear lights vanish from viwen in a queue of car lights. DRL for a bicycle might be useful on a dull or overcast day or in other dim light but they are NOT all that useful in bright or full daylight light. What's worse is that many who do use a DRL have a very false sense of security because they think a driver will see their light when in fact most lights are not bright enough to be seen easily in daylight and are only seen well AFTER the driver has seen the rider on the bicycle. Do you get a kickback for selling DRL for bicycles? Cheers |
#197
|
|||
|
|||
More About Lights
On 3/18/2017 2:02 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Saturday, March 18, 2017 at 3:57:34 PM UTC-4, sms wrote: Snipped The bottom line is what this article states: "You Have No Excuse Not to Bike with a Light, Day or Night." https://www.outsideonline.com/2064501/you-have-no-excuse-not-bike-light-day-or-night. Except that on a sunny day most nearly every bicycle DRL is TOTALLY INVISIBLE compared to the bicycle + the rider. That is demonstrably untrue. |
#198
|
|||
|
|||
More About Lights
On Saturday, March 18, 2017 at 5:21:00 PM UTC-4, sms wrote:
On 3/18/2017 2:02 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Saturday, March 18, 2017 at 3:57:34 PM UTC-4, sms wrote: Snipped The bottom line is what this article states: "You Have No Excuse Not to Bike with a Light, Day or Night." https://www.outsideonline.com/2064501/you-have-no-excuse-not-bike-light-day-or-night. Except that on a sunny day most nearly every bicycle DRL is TOTALLY INVISIBLE compared to the bicycle + the rider. That is demonstrably untrue. HAH! I've seen many a bicycle DLR in use in the daytime and I've ONLY noticed the light AFTER I saw the bicycle and the rider. Thus, your assertion is demonstrably FALSE. Cheers |
#199
|
|||
|
|||
More About Lights
On 3/18/2017 2:25 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Saturday, March 18, 2017 at 5:21:00 PM UTC-4, sms wrote: On 3/18/2017 2:02 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Saturday, March 18, 2017 at 3:57:34 PM UTC-4, sms wrote: Snipped The bottom line is what this article states: "You Have No Excuse Not to Bike with a Light, Day or Night." https://www.outsideonline.com/2064501/you-have-no-excuse-not-bike-light-day-or-night. Except that on a sunny day most nearly every bicycle DRL is TOTALLY INVISIBLE compared to the bicycle + the rider. That is demonstrably untrue. HAH! I've seen many a bicycle DLR in use in the daytime and I've ONLY noticed the light AFTER I saw the bicycle and the rider. Thus, your assertion is demonstrably FALSE. LOL, the world does not revolve around what YOU have noticed personally. In the Odense study, cyclists with daytime bicycle lights had 32% fewer accidents than the control group. The effect was particularly noticeable during the summer season when the reduction is up to 40%. So it's when the sun is brighter that there is even more of an advantage to DRLs. You can see the same thing in your own town. It's especially noticeable when cyclists are in a bicycle lane, closer to the curb than in a traffic lane. They tend to blend in with the other stuff on the right side of the road, such as parked cars. |
#200
|
|||
|
|||
More About Lights
On Saturday, March 18, 2017 at 5:38:36 PM UTC-4, sms wrote:
On 3/18/2017 2:25 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Saturday, March 18, 2017 at 5:21:00 PM UTC-4, sms wrote: On 3/18/2017 2:02 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Saturday, March 18, 2017 at 3:57:34 PM UTC-4, sms wrote: Snipped The bottom line is what this article states: "You Have No Excuse Not to Bike with a Light, Day or Night." https://www.outsideonline.com/2064501/you-have-no-excuse-not-bike-light-day-or-night. Except that on a sunny day most nearly every bicycle DRL is TOTALLY INVISIBLE compared to the bicycle + the rider. That is demonstrably untrue. HAH! I've seen many a bicycle DLR in use in the daytime and I've ONLY noticed the light AFTER I saw the bicycle and the rider. Thus, your assertion is demonstrably FALSE. LOL, the world does not revolve around what YOU have noticed personally. In the Odense study, cyclists with daytime bicycle lights had 32% fewer accidents than the control group. The effect was particularly noticeable during the summer season when the reduction is up to 40%. So it's when the sun is brighter that there is even more of an advantage to DRLs. You can see the same thing in your own town. It's especially noticeable when cyclists are in a bicycle lane, closer to the curb than in a traffic lane. They tend to blend in with the other stuff on the right side of the road, such as parked cars. BUNK! |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Dynamo Lights viz Battery Lights in snow qand slush? | Sir Ridesalot | Techniques | 6 | March 4th 15 10:36 PM |
No lights, dark clothing, no reflectives, no street lights. | Mrcheerful | UK | 153 | November 4th 14 09:19 AM |
Maybe it's safer to run red lights than to wait for green lights. | SMS | General | 16 | September 24th 08 09:51 PM |
Light Theft (solutions — small pocket lights, or heavy duty well secured lights?) | David Johnson | UK | 24 | August 29th 07 02:32 PM |
Break lights turn lights and handle bar lights | Truepurple | Techniques | 30 | November 17th 03 04:02 AM |