mjr

joined 5 months ago
[–] mjr 2 points 2 months ago

Cyclists SHOULD be wearing/using all of these at night/in the rain, for everyone's safety.

Wouldn't it make walkers and animals less safe because they're not wearing them and motorists will be looking for hi-vis instead of ordinary people and animals. It might make motorists less safe too, because fallen trees and shed loads won't have hi-vis on but hitting them will still kill some drivers and passengers.

[–] mjr 0 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (4 children)

It always amazes me how more helmet-pushers claim to have had their lives saved than the total of all cyclists to die from non-collision head injuries (as cycle helmets aren't intended or tested for collisions) since bikes was invented.

[–] mjr 2 points 2 months ago

Yeah, the "urban camouflage" theory. Or they expect us to be slow or static like a roadworker or emergency worker and so botch the overtake.

[–] mjr 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (9 children)

We are not invisible. The problem is that motorists aren't looking or aren't caring. Put some plain-clothes cops on bikes as bait and catch the incompetent.

[–] mjr 28 points 2 months ago (14 children)

There are also a lot of photos of hi-vis roadworks and emergency vehicles that motorists have crashed into. It's almost like it's not visibility that's the problem…

[–] mjr 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Trac has backlog and milestones (for epics and sagas) and plugins offer kanbans. It's been OK when I've used it, including hosting one.

[–] mjr 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Ah, but he could have had the high-tech circumvention duct tape fitted.

[–] mjr -2 points 2 months ago

This politician is a jackass

I would have upvoted if you'd stopped there instead of being an "almost been smoked" apologist for them.

[–] mjr 1 points 2 months ago

They did not cite tire and brake dust specifically

No, I mentioned it, after checking that it's still one of the main sources of PM2.5.

[–] mjr 12 points 2 months ago

Maybe or it could be worse than that:

The so-called “precautionary principle”, abolished when product safety legislation was redrafted after Brexit, allowed the government to restrict products thought to pose a serious threat to health, without having to acquire scientific evidence.

So they can't be required to recall unless regulators have both a confirming test result and they prove asbestos sand harms kids. I don't know if that's proven to legal standard, even if we think it very likely. Do you? More importantly, does an officer in Borsetshire Council Trading Standards know?

Thank you Brexiters, yet again 🤦

[–] mjr 8 points 2 months ago (6 children)

brief mention of PM2.5 particles.

So tyre and brake dust, wood fires/stoves, badly-controlled industry, and so on. Don't underestimate this stuff. Replacing the burner with a heat pump really eased my asthma, so lord knows what it was doing to my lungs.

[–] mjr 3 points 2 months ago

Enterprise has been supplying most of the cars to the ICE agents invading Minneapolis; Hilton kicked a hotel out of their franchise for refusing to rent to ICE; Target has been allowing ICE to stage in their parking lots and has done a crap-ass job of protecting their employees (who they should know are all either citizens, or documented, they checked their I-9s).

I heard about the hotel booting ICE out. I hadn't heard that Hilton then cancelled the hotel for it.

view more: ‹ prev next ›