Showroom7561

joined 2 years ago
[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 12 points 2 weeks ago

Return to office = return to distractions for most people.

If you want people to do productive work, you need to put them in an environment that gives them that opportunity.

If that's an office, fine. But if that's at home (a.k.a "Home office"), or at a cafe, or on the beach, that should be fine, too!

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 13 points 2 weeks ago

I see this pretty much every time I ride. Multiple times. 😮‍💨

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 36 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Merz hailed the deal, which was clinched in a ballroom at Trump’s golf resort in Scotland, saying it avoided “needless escalation in transatlantic trade relations” and averted a potentially damaging trade war.

Nothing about this "deal" prevents Trump from being Trump.

EU caved, and that's a massive show of weakness.

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 weeks ago

Less really is more! LOL

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 weeks ago

Dr. Sbaitso never asked me to commit atrocities.

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 weeks ago

Oh, just wait. AI will all be tweaked to sell you shit.

It's only a matter of time before product placement in AI generated photos and videos becomes a thing, too.

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 weeks ago

"Stop the windmills", he said.

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 weeks ago

Wow, what a read!

I was never a Komoot user. What happened to them, and the direction they are taking, is bound to happen to any and all platforms where corporate greed is the driving force.

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 weeks ago

Every single place that mandated helmets (or heavily promoted) saw absolutely no reduction in death/injury.

There are too many variables to go over every country (i.e. mandated only for kids and teens). And even when they are mandated, compliance may still be low (B.C, Canada has helmet laws for all ages, yet compliance is <70%).

That said, every study I've seen, including meta-data analysis, shows benefit.

For instance THIS very recent study:

"The empirical evidence based on the real-world hospital and police data as well as biomechanical studies confirms that wearing a helmet while cycling is beneficial, regardless of age and crash severity, in collisions with others or not. The relative benefit is higher in high-risk situations and when cycling on shared roads. The findings from the meta-analyses studies that have been reviewed in this paper are remarkably consistent."

The classic example is Australia – it had almost no helmet usage prior to passing a nationwide law. The law was strictly enforced with extremely high fines, and yet there was no real change comparing before/after the law.

Wait, what? This Australia?

Quoting Professor Jake Olivier of UNSW’s School of Mathematics and Statistics and Deputy Director of the Transport and Road Safety (TARS) Research Centre:

"There was an immediate 46 per cent reduction in the rate of cycling fatalities per 100,000 population following the introduction of bicycle helmet legislation in Australia,” he says.

“This decline has been maintained since 1990 and we estimate 1332 fewer cycling fatalities associated with the introduction of bicycle helmet legislation to date.”

And you also have to consider that non-injuries (i.e. walking away from a fall because of your helmet) won't be reported, so the benefit may very well be significantly higher.

All I can say is that I'd rather be wearing a helmet than not, in the event that my head hits any object, at any speed. It's such a "set and forget" piece of gear, and I know people who have walked away from crashes (not involving cars, just crashes due to poor surfaces) yet their helmets basically crumbled upon impact. Way better than the alternative.

But you do you. I don't want to force anyone to do something they don't automatically see as a benefit on the bike.

As one study put it, "Unhelmeted injured cyclists were frequent commuter cyclists who generally do not regard cycling as safe yet choose not to wear helmets for reasons largely related to convenience and comfort. " 🤷‍♂️

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 weeks ago

Yup. Spend hundreds of millions so that more people can sit in traffic? No problem, we'll start work tomorrow!

Ask for a 100m multiuse path so that cyclists don't get killed by crazed SUV drivers? "ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR GODDAMN MIND?? Who is going to pay for that? What about the kids? How will seniors survive?! What about my parking space! Cyclists don't follow the rules! Where's your helmet?!! I didn't see you!!!!!" 😒😮‍💨

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 12 points 2 weeks ago

"There is a common goal, to make city streets safe."

Really? It sounds like cyclists are disproportionately being targeted, while the real dangers are being treated lightly.

But I'll also say that I hate the fact that an industry (i.e. food delivery) is ruining cycling for everyone else.

[–] Showroom7561@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 weeks ago

I wonder if a cast iron crock pot would work, too. Those are dirt cheap second hand. They weigh a ton, though 😞

6
submitted 9 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) by Showroom7561@lemmy.ca to c/bikewrench@lemmy.world
 

Hey guys,

I'm looking to possibly upgrade the shifters on my 90s MTB from grip shifters to friction thumb shifters.

I'm currently eyeing the microSHIFT SL-M10 (https://www.microshift.com/models/sl-m10/), which is listed as being compatible with Shimano MTB 2/3×10.

Currently have a 7 cog cassette using an Alivio 7 speed derailleur. I also have a Deore LX M567 (8 speed) derailleur available, which would be a nice upgrade if compatible with the friction shifter.

Here are my questions:

  1. Would that 10 speed shifter work with lower speed derailleurs?

  2. What advantage, if any, would i get with a friction shifter listed for 8 or 9 speed derailleurs?

  3. On the SLM10 shifter, it's got an indexed mode, too. Would that work with 7 speed, and if so, are limits set by the derailleur or do these things have hard stops built into them?

Thanks in advance.

UPDATE: I ended up spending a little (a lot...) more and getting a pair of Rivendell Silver2 shifters + thumbie mounts. Really nice quality and a beautiful ratcheting system. Loving friction shifters!

 

Forget the misleading bike use numbers, the low rate of people using their car is fascinating!

Ford makes it seem like 99% of the Toronto population are driving everywhere with their cars.

While traffic congestion makes it seem like everyone is driving, the reality is that fewer than 40% are in the areas that Ford wants bike lanes removed.

So why on earth do we allocate so many resources to car traffic?????

100% of the people living in the city suffer because of cars, parking lot space, noise pollution, air pollution, lack of safety for pedestrians, congestion causing all other forms of transportation to be slower.

Wouldn't it make more sense to give car traffic less priority, and other forms of transportation more? Between cycling and non-car users, car drivers are the minority, yet they demand every square inch to themselves!

Why do we continue to allow this entitlement?

 

So... I discovered that I can still get parts for my mid-90s MTB, which is the bike I use for everything hauling, winter, and off-road.

Initially, I was thinking of upgrading to more modern parts, but the components have been so good that I'd rather just refresh them.

I did order a "new old stock" crank/chainring, which I'm really excited about. Since I wax my chain, I don't see me ever having a need to replace it again.

But, I'd like to get a front and rear derailleur that are in better condition.

Both are the original Shimano Alivio RD-MC10 and FD-MC10, which I can still buy as used parts (which look like they are much better condition than the ones I've got).

But I'm curious to know if newer models in this series would be directly compatible with my existing cassette/chainrings and grip shifters. Things like the MC11, MC12, etc.

Does anyone have a clue? It's hard enough to find information about vintage bike parts, but I figure it's worth asking before I go with the same ones.

 

Sarkaria (Ontario's transportation minister) said Friday that only 1.2 per cent of people use those bike lanes to commute to work, compared with 70 per cent who drive, and the lanes are taking away nearly half of the infrastructure on those roads, making commutes longer for drivers.

Why hasn't anyone challenged the use of that statistic?

Commuting isn't the only way to use transportation infrastructure and bike lanes, so it's incredibly dishonest to say that "only 1.2%" are using those particular bike lanes.

If I use bike lanes for 100% of my errands and 0% for commuting, does that invalidate those lanes?

By the same token, at what point would they consider removing sidewalks if people aren't using them specifically to walk to work?

 

Why would he stop at removing bike lanes?

The MTO is on his side, and when his plan to reduce and remove bike lanes fails to ease traffic congestion (hint: because they aren't causing it), why wouldn't he go after banning all cycling from major roads using the same reasoning (that cycling itself is the cause of all our traffic problems)?

I don't see any end to his overreach, and it'll be a matter of time before ebikes, then regular bikes, become highly restricted in Ontario.

Convince me otherwise.

 

Samsung has gone hard promoting AI in their phones, and now OnePlus has also announced some heavy AI-based features in their new Android OS. Pretty much every other brand is now doing the same, so you can't escape it.

I've been in the market to upgrade my nearly 6-year-old phone, but seeing all these AI features, especially when they rely on Google's Gemini (or other cloud AI), and it feels deflating.

Will privacy ultimately have to be sacrificed "from now on"?

By not using these AI features, you pay a lot for features you won't be using. And the usefulness of the device becomes limited as nearly all functions now have AI-based components to them.

I'm totally fine with on-device AI, but many features I'm seeing don't seem to be on-device, and I've spent years trying to stop sending my data to companies like Google. I don't want to go backwards for the sake of market trends.

What are your future plans when it comes to smartphones?

 

I wish I could have been there!

And 500+ people attended, at 5pm on a weekday? Imagine how many thousands would have turned up if this took place on a weekend!

Keep up the pressure, guys!

 

I'm totally happy to pay the fee associated with joining, but I'd like to have some idea of how many hosts might be available along certain routes.

Even knowing how many hosts might be in a particular city could be very helpful.

Does this exist?

 

We have bike routes all over, and they are signed with something as shown.

But most of these will have a bike lane or sharrows along with the Bike Route signs.

However, I ran into one road that doesn't, it's just signed.

What's the best way to tag these roads? I don't want to cause confusion, but these unpainted (but signed) roads do actually lead to/from better cycling infrastructure, so they should be known.

UPDATE: Thanks for all the input, guys. Having looked into this further, I'm comfortable using the designated tag, at least for this specific road.

My municipality is a bit bipolar with their application of these signs. Most are signed as bike routes with toad markings, but a few are signed only.

Because these "bike routes" connect to more significant cycling infrastructure, I think its more than valid to tag them as “designated” as opposed to "yes" (which would be pretty much every road).

To add even more confusion to the situation, the official Cycling infrastructure map for my municipality seems to not include several areas that have both bike route signs and road markings, so i will ask them if the data is just lagging or if it needs to be updated.

So, unless there's a critical reason why the "designated" tag shouldn't be used in this context, I will leave it at that.

 

So, when this plan inevitably results in MORE traffic congestion, who will Ford target next? Pedestrians and the removal of sidewalks?

And Transportation Minister Sarkaria should honestly be ashamed of himself for the way he blames and attacks cycling infrastructure. Is he the transportation minister or the cars-only minister?

 

I wanted to share my experience with waxing my bike chains.

I was resistant to waxing my chains because it seems that a lot of people felt it was "too much work".

But having to constantly clean black shit off my chains after every ride, then spend time degreasing and re-lubing, I figured I'd try waxing when I got my gravel bike.

Now, thousands of KM later and having converted all three bikes to waxed, there's no way I'd go back. The time saved could be measured in hours per month.

First, the biggest complaint is chain prep. Yeah, regardless if you're waxing or not, you'll need to prep a new chain by removing the factory grease. With waxed, you do this once, and no more worrying about degreasing ever again. Make like easy and get Silca's chain stripper, and it's a 10 minute, one-step process.

Ongoing chain maintenance couldn't be easier. After every ride, give the chain a quick wipe (or not). My chain stays clean, even after a 200 km ride.

And if you ride in wet or dirty conditions? Guess what, you're in for a LOT of work if you lube your chain. With waxed, keep a second (or third) chain ready to go, and you just swap it out (10 seconds of effort). Take the dirty chain, give it a wipe if it's only been wet, or pour boiled water onto it if you want to "reset" the chain to bare metal. Then drop it into the waxing pot for a re-wax. You don't have to stand at the pot, so there's no real time commitment here. I've spent more time completely dirtying large microfiber cloths trying to get my chain "clean" when lubed (hint: it's never clean if you use a wet lube, not without solvents and an ultrasonic cleaner).

For actual immersion wax, I do it every 1000 km (sooner than you need to), and use a drip wax every 200 - 250 km to keep things fresh.

Honestly, wax is easier, cleaner, and takes less time to maintain vs wet lube.

The only downsides? The initial cost to get started. But this is offset by not having to replace chains or other components prematurely. You actually save money in the long-term when using waxed chains.

Some might argue that "you can't run waxed chains in muddy or constantly rainy conditions". Well, at the same time, your wet lube isn't really helping matters in those situations, either. Waxed is still better, and you can swap chains much faster than you can clean the grinding paste from a wet lubed chain.

Who would I not recommend waxed chains to? Someone who rarely uses their bike. Drip lube will be "good enough" in those cases. But anyone else would benefit from waxing their chain.

 

... and they use YouTube to host their informational videos.

"Please allow us to interrupt your research with intrusive targeted ads, so you can have a superior browsing experience." 🤡

view more: ‹ prev next ›