Shocked by online comments, reporter writes profile of hit-and-run victim(tampabay.com)
tampabay.com
Shocked by online comments, reporter writes profile of hit-and-run victim
http://www.tampabay.com/news/obituaries/hit-and-run-victim-was-quiet-and-dependable-co-workers-say/1124721
9 comments
That is good advice for bike safety, but it really has nothing to do with the point of the article, that people think being just a dish washer is pathetic, but if you look close enough a person is more than just a two word job description.
I would be carful with the application of hyperbole. Reflectors don’t work under certain conditions but they do work very often. They are by no means worthless. I could imagine that especially reflectors in the spokes can help increase visibility.
… and the total lack of bicycle education in the US.
Is there really no road safety education in school? We have pretty extensive road safety education in Germany including a multiple choice and practical bike test [+]. It feels a lot like a dry run for the real driver’s license, at least for the impressionable mind of a fourth grader. I got a nice certificate when I made it.
It’s obviously seen as a first and important introduction to the traffic rules – what do the road signs mean, how does right of way work, and so on. You probably shouldn’t be confronted with all of that only when you are making your driver’s license. If only because you also have to know pretty much all those rules as a biker.
[+] At least in Bavaria. Education is the sole responsibility of the states. A quick search suggests that elementary schools in many if not all states in Germany have some form of road safety education including a bike test.
… and the total lack of bicycle education in the US.
Is there really no road safety education in school? We have pretty extensive road safety education in Germany including a multiple choice and practical bike test [+]. It feels a lot like a dry run for the real driver’s license, at least for the impressionable mind of a fourth grader. I got a nice certificate when I made it.
It’s obviously seen as a first and important introduction to the traffic rules – what do the road signs mean, how does right of way work, and so on. You probably shouldn’t be confronted with all of that only when you are making your driver’s license. If only because you also have to know pretty much all those rules as a biker.
[+] At least in Bavaria. Education is the sole responsibility of the states. A quick search suggests that elementary schools in many if not all states in Germany have some form of road safety education including a bike test.
In the US, bikes are basically considered toys. If you're a kid, you ride one on your sidewalk to enjoy a sunny Saturday afternoon. If you're an adult, you buy one that costs $3000 to impress your friends. You put it on the back of your car, drive it to a fun location, and pedal around for a few hours once a month. It's way too dangerous to even consider thinking about maybe possibly riding it to work or something, because cars are out there with the intent to murder you as efficiently as possible.
Incidentally, I ignore all this and bike to work every day, bike to stores when I go shopping, do all my grocery shopping with my bike, and of course go on long rides for no reason other than that it's enjoyable. Yeah, there are people who will give you mean stares at traffic lights, or engage you in discussion about how dangerous it is and how annoying you are to them. They also seem to enjoy demonstrating the loudness of their horn... which do end up being quite loud.
But what's good about the Internet is that it's allowed me to grow a very thick skin. I can deal with the yelling. I can position myself in a lane position that keeps me safe but slows down one or two drivers. It's hard, but I can do it, and I enjoy cycling a lot (and don't think drivers are bad). But most people don't have the self-confidence that I do, get yelled at, and never ride their bike to work again. Cars aren't ruining the environment, drivers are.
Incidentally, my second-biggest complaint is that it's hard to buy bikes that are set up for what people need them for. I had to buy my own chainguard (from Germany), rack (from Germany), and dynamo hub (from Germany), just because nobody in the US sells any products that are any good. Heaven forbid someone buy a bicycle that could carry a load and wouldn't ruin their clothes.
I love working on my bike and tinkering with things... but most people don't. So they just buy a car, honk at the cyclists that are increasing their commute time by five seconds, and keep the cycle of fear, uncertainty, and doubt alive.
Incidentally, I ignore all this and bike to work every day, bike to stores when I go shopping, do all my grocery shopping with my bike, and of course go on long rides for no reason other than that it's enjoyable. Yeah, there are people who will give you mean stares at traffic lights, or engage you in discussion about how dangerous it is and how annoying you are to them. They also seem to enjoy demonstrating the loudness of their horn... which do end up being quite loud.
But what's good about the Internet is that it's allowed me to grow a very thick skin. I can deal with the yelling. I can position myself in a lane position that keeps me safe but slows down one or two drivers. It's hard, but I can do it, and I enjoy cycling a lot (and don't think drivers are bad). But most people don't have the self-confidence that I do, get yelled at, and never ride their bike to work again. Cars aren't ruining the environment, drivers are.
Incidentally, my second-biggest complaint is that it's hard to buy bikes that are set up for what people need them for. I had to buy my own chainguard (from Germany), rack (from Germany), and dynamo hub (from Germany), just because nobody in the US sells any products that are any good. Heaven forbid someone buy a bicycle that could carry a load and wouldn't ruin their clothes.
I love working on my bike and tinkering with things... but most people don't. So they just buy a car, honk at the cyclists that are increasing their commute time by five seconds, and keep the cycle of fear, uncertainty, and doubt alive.
In the US, bikes are basically considered toys.
You make excellent points, but in US law they are considered vehicles, and subject to the same rules of stop lights, stop signs, and waiting-in-line as automobiles.
Many, many bicyclists don't understand this, however, and run red lights and stop signs seemingly at will.
This never really bothered me until I had kids and was teaching them how to ride. I would always point out (because I knew they saw) when someone would bike illegally, in hopes that they would learn right from wrong.
As a counter-example, just two days ago a man was bicycling with two young children at a time when parents were dropping kids off at school (so, presumably he was taking them to school). I was driving a car down a road and passed them on my way to take a left turn. As I was waiting for traffic to clear for my turn (here in the US, to make a left turn I have to wait for a break in oncoming traffic), he and the kids came up on my right and started to ride in a pedestrian crosswalk (illegal- they are vehicles, not pedestrians) at that intersection that passed in front of my car. The man came within a few (maybe 10) feet of the front of my car before I made my turn. I only saw him at the last instant (a quick, reflexive check to my right, because I had already ascertained that there were no pedestrians).
I hope I scared him. I hope even more that I scared his kids who undoubtedly saw the event. I hope he had a long talk with his kids afterward.
But the real point I want him to understand is that if some child dies because they learned unsafe bicycling from watching his behavior, he is partly responsible for the child's death. Part of our jobs as adults in society is to demonstrate proper behavior for those in the process of learning it.
You make excellent points, but in US law they are considered vehicles, and subject to the same rules of stop lights, stop signs, and waiting-in-line as automobiles.
Many, many bicyclists don't understand this, however, and run red lights and stop signs seemingly at will.
This never really bothered me until I had kids and was teaching them how to ride. I would always point out (because I knew they saw) when someone would bike illegally, in hopes that they would learn right from wrong.
As a counter-example, just two days ago a man was bicycling with two young children at a time when parents were dropping kids off at school (so, presumably he was taking them to school). I was driving a car down a road and passed them on my way to take a left turn. As I was waiting for traffic to clear for my turn (here in the US, to make a left turn I have to wait for a break in oncoming traffic), he and the kids came up on my right and started to ride in a pedestrian crosswalk (illegal- they are vehicles, not pedestrians) at that intersection that passed in front of my car. The man came within a few (maybe 10) feet of the front of my car before I made my turn. I only saw him at the last instant (a quick, reflexive check to my right, because I had already ascertained that there were no pedestrians).
I hope I scared him. I hope even more that I scared his kids who undoubtedly saw the event. I hope he had a long talk with his kids afterward.
But the real point I want him to understand is that if some child dies because they learned unsafe bicycling from watching his behavior, he is partly responsible for the child's death. Part of our jobs as adults in society is to demonstrate proper behavior for those in the process of learning it.
I agree with you in condemning running red lights/stop signs and reckless behavior. However, I recently found out that statutes in my area state that bicycles may treat red lights as stop signs.
On my bike, I occasionally take refuge in cross walks in order to check cross-traffic. After reading your post, I'll look into the specific statues applicable to this practice.
On my bike, I occasionally take refuge in cross walks in order to check cross-traffic. After reading your post, I'll look into the specific statues applicable to this practice.
I'm happy if the bicyclist at least stops (and appropriately yields right-of-way) at stop lights.
I taught my kids to get off of the bike and walk it at cross-walks. I would be very surprised if they still do that because so few folks do.
I taught my kids to get off of the bike and walk it at cross-walks. I would be very surprised if they still do that because so few folks do.
A co-worker at my last job said she even had people go so far as to throw stuff out their windows at her as they passed while she was cycling... ever happened to you?
I've been hit in the head with a mcdonals bag filled with leftover food.
An acquaintance was hit in the eye with an egg from an oncoming car, and lost the vision in his eye :(
An acquaintance was hit in the eye with an egg from an oncoming car, and lost the vision in his eye :(
Nope. Mostly honking and one case of being told I was a bastard. I live in the city, though, and people are used to bikes.
If someone threw something at me, the police would have the license plate number so fast it'd be scary. Littering is a $500 fine.
If someone threw something at me, the police would have the license plate number so fast it'd be scary. Littering is a $500 fine.
I had kids throwing stones and once a brick at me while cycling back from work. With the brick it was at night and I was aware of something passing my head and then I saw it when it hit the road.
In one lf Lance Armstrong's books, he mentions that happening while practicing in Texas, IIRC.
He obtained the license plate number, and the driver was convicted of assult. Also, if you are intentionally run off the road by a vehicle, it can be considered assault with a deadly weapon.
He obtained the license plate number, and the driver was convicted of assult. Also, if you are intentionally run off the road by a vehicle, it can be considered assault with a deadly weapon.
Unfortunately, it's likely that he was taken more seriously by law enforcement because he's Lance Armstrong. If I called the police with a similar complaint, I'd put the odds at less than 50% that it would lead to criminal charges.
As a former bicycle commuter, I have been hit by eggs, sodas, and even a CD. A lot of people just shout things as they speed by, but they're driving too fast for it to be understandable.
I wish I would have got license plate numbers. The cars were usually too far ahead by the time I realized what happened.
I wish I would have got license plate numbers. The cars were usually too far ahead by the time I realized what happened.
One night riding back in my military uniform someone threw a drink cup filled with ice at me. Since it was CA, I'm thinking it was some sort of anti-war thing.
Sad story all around. Both for the guy who was killed and as a commentary on our lack of civility as a people.
On a separate and far less important note: As a relatively newbie bike commuter it would interesting to learn more about your set up and why you chose the accessories you mentioned in your post.
On a separate and far less important note: As a relatively newbie bike commuter it would interesting to learn more about your set up and why you chose the accessories you mentioned in your post.
Not the op but a rack is used to carry a few items on the back of your bike, the dynamo is used to generate electricity for a light and the chain guard stops your pants from entering the chain-to-sprocket pants ruining area.
The chain guard will likely stop you from having a nasty fall too, it' s not just pants that get ruined that way, a fall in traffic could easily kill you.
[deleted]
I moved from the Netherlands to the US nine years ago, and one of the big differences I noticed was the almost complete lack of bicycles on the roads. Not just that, but also the way bikes are used (or not used).
Where I'm from, there are many places with crowded traffic (not just in the bigger cities) and many, many bikes. It's common for kids to ride their bike to school, for example. There is such a thing as a "traffic test" for kids riding bikes, although I'm not sure if all schools do this. As for motorists, driving lessons are mandatory, and some of the things you learn are meant to protect cyclists: if your car has to take a right turn, you have to stop and look in your mirrors and over your right shoulder to check if there's no bikes coming (because they have the right of way!), and when you park you don't just slam open your car door, you look for bikes and other traffic first. (Failing to do so during the (non-trivial) drivers exam will likely earn you a failing grade.)
The Dutch have a lot of crazy traffic rules, but some of them actually make sense. :-) This why there are relatively few accidents with bikes, people accept them as part of the regular traffic, and cyclists don't need to wear helmets. (They do need reflectors so they can more easily be seen at night.)
So, coming from this, when you then move to the US, your first reaction might well be, "why don't people ride their bikes (to school, work, etc)?" One of the reasons is that it's just not a very common or safe way of transportation around here (at least in most areas -- I don't know about downtown SF or something).
Where I'm from, there are many places with crowded traffic (not just in the bigger cities) and many, many bikes. It's common for kids to ride their bike to school, for example. There is such a thing as a "traffic test" for kids riding bikes, although I'm not sure if all schools do this. As for motorists, driving lessons are mandatory, and some of the things you learn are meant to protect cyclists: if your car has to take a right turn, you have to stop and look in your mirrors and over your right shoulder to check if there's no bikes coming (because they have the right of way!), and when you park you don't just slam open your car door, you look for bikes and other traffic first. (Failing to do so during the (non-trivial) drivers exam will likely earn you a failing grade.)
The Dutch have a lot of crazy traffic rules, but some of them actually make sense. :-) This why there are relatively few accidents with bikes, people accept them as part of the regular traffic, and cyclists don't need to wear helmets. (They do need reflectors so they can more easily be seen at night.)
So, coming from this, when you then move to the US, your first reaction might well be, "why don't people ride their bikes (to school, work, etc)?" One of the reasons is that it's just not a very common or safe way of transportation around here (at least in most areas -- I don't know about downtown SF or something).
I lived in Amsterdam for a couple of years, and it was great to be in a country that respected cyclists.
As it was explained to me, the rule was that in the event of any accident between a car and a cyclist, it was automatically the car driver's fault. Which seemed like a pretty good strategy for improving cyclists' safety to me.
I'd always wear a helmet though, since it doesn't matter who's at fault, it's always the cyclist that comes off worst.
As it was explained to me, the rule was that in the event of any accident between a car and a cyclist, it was automatically the car driver's fault. Which seemed like a pretty good strategy for improving cyclists' safety to me.
I'd always wear a helmet though, since it doesn't matter who's at fault, it's always the cyclist that comes off worst.
Anyone can bike on the roads without any license or anything, and they teach you nothing in school about safe biking.
But I think what he meant is that drivers aren't aware of bike-related issues, aren't looking out for bikes, do stupid shit whenever they see bikes, etc. I love biking, and it's a great way to get around, but stupid drivers make it really dangerous.
But I think what he meant is that drivers aren't aware of bike-related issues, aren't looking out for bikes, do stupid shit whenever they see bikes, etc. I love biking, and it's a great way to get around, but stupid drivers make it really dangerous.
No license in the UK, but most kids do the cycling proficiency test http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cycling_Proficiency_Test
Sounds like a good program.
When I first started cycling as an adult, I had no idea how to cycle properly. Fortunately, fear led me to Google which lead me to resources that helped me teach myself how to cycle safely.
Most people, unfortunately, only have the fear, and they give up before the Google search. A bit of education in elementary school about safe cycling could do a lot for the obesity epidemic and that whole global warming thing!
When I first started cycling as an adult, I had no idea how to cycle properly. Fortunately, fear led me to Google which lead me to resources that helped me teach myself how to cycle safely.
Most people, unfortunately, only have the fear, and they give up before the Google search. A bit of education in elementary school about safe cycling could do a lot for the obesity epidemic and that whole global warming thing!
I know my primary school forbid students cycling to school if they hadn't passed the cycling proficiency test, my secondary school officially forbade it, but considering they had around a thousand students it was harder than policing the 40-60 kids my primary school had who were actually old enough to be left alone to cycle to school.
What I liked best about my local town was that the cycling zones were put onto the sidewalk, so as long as you was in the cycle lane you didn't have to yield to pass pedestrians, but you weren't at risk from drivers on the unmarked roads. I don't think I ever heard of a cyclist being hit on the street, one of my friends was hit but that was because someone backed out of a hedged-drive way at a bad time and broke his leg. IIRC the driver got a caution and the council fined him and ordered his hedges be cut down as they violated height restrictions.
What I liked best about my local town was that the cycling zones were put onto the sidewalk, so as long as you was in the cycle lane you didn't have to yield to pass pedestrians, but you weren't at risk from drivers on the unmarked roads. I don't think I ever heard of a cyclist being hit on the street, one of my friends was hit but that was because someone backed out of a hedged-drive way at a bad time and broke his leg. IIRC the driver got a caution and the council fined him and ordered his hedges be cut down as they violated height restrictions.
Just to clarify, you don’t need any kind of license to drive around on a bike in Germany.
As for reflectors; they only work when there is a clear
path from an illumination source to the reflector and back
to your eye. Sometimes that happens, but more often than
not, it doesn't.
It sounds like you are repeating something you heard sometime just because it fits your argument, instead of actually having knowledge of the subject. Your assertions are completely untrue and on a bit of reflection (pun intended), you would see that, which means we are dealing with a lack of reflection on your part concerning this tidbit of 'knowledge'.
I don't drive.
As a pedestrian, I've almost been hit by cyclists running red lights with reflectors. Since my eyes don't emit beams of light, I had no chance to see them until that last second. I assume any cars going through the intersection would have had the same problem, since the obstacle was to the side rather than directly in front of them.
Reflectors do help make the cyclist more visible to overtaking traffic, but they don't help with anything that does not emit light. The cyclist won't be able to see hazards in the road ahead or other cyclists with reflectors.
I do agree that reflectors are better than nothing in the limited case of overtaking or oncoming cars, but they're not as good as lights. And considering how cheap LEDs and AA batteries are compared with the cost of a bicycle, why are we even arguing about this?
As a pedestrian, I've almost been hit by cyclists running red lights with reflectors. Since my eyes don't emit beams of light, I had no chance to see them until that last second. I assume any cars going through the intersection would have had the same problem, since the obstacle was to the side rather than directly in front of them.
Reflectors do help make the cyclist more visible to overtaking traffic, but they don't help with anything that does not emit light. The cyclist won't be able to see hazards in the road ahead or other cyclists with reflectors.
I do agree that reflectors are better than nothing in the limited case of overtaking or oncoming cars, but they're not as good as lights. And considering how cheap LEDs and AA batteries are compared with the cost of a bicycle, why are we even arguing about this?
All true, but the fact of the matter is that most visibility-related deaths involving bikes are from cars that bikes, not bikes hitting or being hit by pedestrians or anything else without headlights. There are a few cases where pedestrians are killed by bicyclists, e,g. NYC messenger bikes, but this is small.
Um, no. Reflectors are normally either cube corners (in molded plastic reflectors) or embedded spherical beads (vinyl ribbons and screen-printed fabrics), and both of those are designed to act as ideal retro-reflectors; slight imperfections allow for a small spread of the reflected light, but the spread is only a couple of degrees. Traffic signs and the paint used for lane markings and crosswalks work the same way. Any other arrangement is a diffuser, not a reflector.
'As many directions as possible was an exaggeration', but 'a couple of degrees'? By that definition, every bicycle here has a diffuser. I can perfectly see reflectors of bicycles a few meters to the right, yet my lights shines there under an angle of at least 10 degrees.
Reflectors are better than nothing, just. An actual light source is so much better it is not funny.
LEDs are cheap, plentiful and actually safe.
LEDs are cheap, plentiful and actually safe.
Reflectors do something, but not much. Cycling at night is fricking dangerous at the best of times, and cycling at night without lights relying on your reflectors is damn near suicidal (and also illegal in Florida where this story takes place):
http://www.floridabicycle.org/rules/bikelaw.html
If this dude was really riding without lights in the middle of the night then his fate seems more Darwin Award-worthy than anything else.
http://www.floridabicycle.org/rules/bikelaw.html
If this dude was really riding without lights in the middle of the night then his fate seems more Darwin Award-worthy than anything else.
I wonder about the blinking things that seem to have become fashionable. I rarely drive cars, but when I did, I always found blinking lights extremely distracting. They make it hard for me to concentrate, to an extent where I wonder if it is still beneficial to the person wearing them. It's fine if a driver notices me, but I want them to still be able to concentrate.
People's perceptions may vary here, for example I also have my eyes when they put on the stroboscope in clubs.
People's perceptions may vary here, for example I also have my eyes when they put on the stroboscope in clubs.
In Germany you must by law have front and rear lights with reflectors on your bike, and most are sold with generators to power them. Blinking lights of any kind aren't even legal for sale, much less use. Headlights with round beams are only legal for MTB use, all lights sold have shaped reflectors that place the beam entirely on the road with the brightest portion at the horizon, and a sharp cutoff above that.
None of these things are normally sold at all in the US. All red LED rear lights blink violently by default, and even fancy expensive headlights have idiotic round flashlight beams. One man has a US monopoly on importing the German products: http://www.peterwhitecycles.com/lightingsystems.htm — but you can import for less than the wholesale price he gives to shops by buying direct from Germany: http://www.starbike.com/php/product_list.php?prodcatid=37...
I own both generations of battery-powerd IXON lights, and a generator-powered IQ Cyo senso plus without reflector. They are amazing — these (and the Schmidt Edelux) are the best lights available by orders of magnitude. Everything else is a piece of shit for road use, even at 5x the price and with brief runtimes on proprietary batteries.
They are the best consumer products I own, and I own some fancy fucking shit. I am dead serious. I've ridden 2500+ miles in pitch black darkness in the last year — and these lights have saved my life dozens of times where nothing else would have.
None of these things are normally sold at all in the US. All red LED rear lights blink violently by default, and even fancy expensive headlights have idiotic round flashlight beams. One man has a US monopoly on importing the German products: http://www.peterwhitecycles.com/lightingsystems.htm — but you can import for less than the wholesale price he gives to shops by buying direct from Germany: http://www.starbike.com/php/product_list.php?prodcatid=37...
I own both generations of battery-powerd IXON lights, and a generator-powered IQ Cyo senso plus without reflector. They are amazing — these (and the Schmidt Edelux) are the best lights available by orders of magnitude. Everything else is a piece of shit for road use, even at 5x the price and with brief runtimes on proprietary batteries.
They are the best consumer products I own, and I own some fancy fucking shit. I am dead serious. I've ridden 2500+ miles in pitch black darkness in the last year — and these lights have saved my life dozens of times where nothing else would have.
>I always found blinking lights extremely distracting. They make it hard for me to concentrate
In the UK I don't think flashing lights are allowed on moving vehicles/cycles unless they're emergency vehicles or otherwise hazardous. Lots of cyclists still use them though.
In the UK I don't think flashing lights are allowed on moving vehicles/cycles unless they're emergency vehicles or otherwise hazardous. Lots of cyclists still use them though.
Flashing LEDs on bicycles are legal, as of October 2005, providing they are of a sufficent intensity. The actual law (The Road Vehicles Lighting (Amendment) Regulations 2005) can be read online here: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2005/2559/contents/made
I also have my eyes when they put on the stroboscope in clubs.
Huh?
Huh?
When I was with my ex-girlfriend her little sister was knocked off her bike, also by a totally reckless driver doing over 80km/h in a 50km/h zone. She suffered serious head trauma, they didn't actually think she'd make it through the night. She did survive but had pretty serious behavioural problems after that, and died a few years later of a cerebral tumour which was almost certainly related.
I'll never forget the surgeon when he first came out of the operating room. He said: "If she had been wearing a helmet, none of this would have been necessary and she'd be fine." You could see clearly in his face that he'd seen this way too many times.
Seriously, just buy the damn helmet and wear it. You might look like a dork but it keeps your brains on the inside where you want them.
I'll never forget the surgeon when he first came out of the operating room. He said: "If she had been wearing a helmet, none of this would have been necessary and she'd be fine." You could see clearly in his face that he'd seen this way too many times.
Seriously, just buy the damn helmet and wear it. You might look like a dork but it keeps your brains on the inside where you want them.
I'm pretty certain that I am only alive today because of a cycling helmet - I had an accident a few years back while mountain biking where I fell off and skidded along on my side (feet still in the SPD pedals) with my head hitting a gate post.
I woke up a while later with the helmet completely disintegrated - if I hadn't been wearing it I'm pretty sure it would have been my skull.
I woke up a while later with the helmet completely disintegrated - if I hadn't been wearing it I'm pretty sure it would have been my skull.
Right, and it sounds like what actually killed this guy was hitting his head on a lamp-post.
I also had a snowboarding accident a couple of years back - it was the first time I'd been in years and I was just starting to get the hang of it again on the first day. Then I woke up in hospital which was a good hour away from the slopes. I'd been concussed, so I was awake the whole time they took me there (snowmobile off the slope, then ambulance to the hospital) but I don't remember any of it. I have photos of me chatting to the red cross which is surreal since I have no memory of it at all.
I now wear a helmet snowboarding too :-)
I also had a snowboarding accident a couple of years back - it was the first time I'd been in years and I was just starting to get the hang of it again on the first day. Then I woke up in hospital which was a good hour away from the slopes. I'd been concussed, so I was awake the whole time they took me there (snowmobile off the slope, then ambulance to the hospital) but I don't remember any of it. I have photos of me chatting to the red cross which is surreal since I have no memory of it at all.
I now wear a helmet snowboarding too :-)
[deleted]
You know, I've heard that bike lanes are more dangerous for years, and many of the arguments are convincing. But the trouble is, 98% of drivers won't realize there's a method to your madness. Riding in the main lane when there's a perfectly good bike lane will just reinforce the preconceptions that bikers ride with lawless abandon, ignore common courtesy, etc...
If bike lanes really are that dangerous, we need to get rid of them.
[Of course I don't want to start a drivers vs. bikers thread. I'm sure the reality is that 95%+ of both drivers and bikers are just fine. It's just that other five percent that we actually remember.]
If bike lanes really are that dangerous, we need to get rid of them.
[Of course I don't want to start a drivers vs. bikers thread. I'm sure the reality is that 95%+ of both drivers and bikers are just fine. It's just that other five percent that we actually remember.]
> If bike lanes really are that dangerous, we need to get rid of them.
That's correct. This is precisely what Forrester has been saying for years. Bicycle lanes that co-exist with vehicular traffic are simply too dangerous. Separate lanes inevitably have to merge with traffic lanes in order for bicyclists to turn left. Therefore, bicycle lanes are simply not practical for most transportation. At best, they reinforce the notion of a bicycle as suited only for recreation. At worst, they lead to fatal accidents.
> bikers ride with lawless abandon, ignore common courtesy,
As opposed to the saints known as motorists?!?
I mostly obey the law, but you'll see me dismounting and walking my bicycle across a crosswalk on the same day that I see you doing this with your passenger car or motorcycle. If there's a conflict between the law and keeping myself (relatively) safe, the law loses every single time. Assuming that other vehicle operators are batshit insane is a very good idea (regardless of whether you are on a bicycle or not!), as is the assumption that the cops can't do much. At the end of the day, the reason SUVs were so popular is that you're pretty much on your own out there.
I much prefer downtown traffic to suburbs or country roads; rush hour is much more predictable and it's hard for drivers to quickly make bad decisions when they're gridlocked. On suburban streets you get to deal with distracted soccer moms in 5-ton SUVs trying to adjust the radio, smack the kids, and pass at the same time. Odds do not favor bicyclists.
That's correct. This is precisely what Forrester has been saying for years. Bicycle lanes that co-exist with vehicular traffic are simply too dangerous. Separate lanes inevitably have to merge with traffic lanes in order for bicyclists to turn left. Therefore, bicycle lanes are simply not practical for most transportation. At best, they reinforce the notion of a bicycle as suited only for recreation. At worst, they lead to fatal accidents.
> bikers ride with lawless abandon, ignore common courtesy,
As opposed to the saints known as motorists?!?
I mostly obey the law, but you'll see me dismounting and walking my bicycle across a crosswalk on the same day that I see you doing this with your passenger car or motorcycle. If there's a conflict between the law and keeping myself (relatively) safe, the law loses every single time. Assuming that other vehicle operators are batshit insane is a very good idea (regardless of whether you are on a bicycle or not!), as is the assumption that the cops can't do much. At the end of the day, the reason SUVs were so popular is that you're pretty much on your own out there.
I much prefer downtown traffic to suburbs or country roads; rush hour is much more predictable and it's hard for drivers to quickly make bad decisions when they're gridlocked. On suburban streets you get to deal with distracted soccer moms in 5-ton SUVs trying to adjust the radio, smack the kids, and pass at the same time. Odds do not favor bicyclists.
> This is precisely what Forrester has been saying for years. Bicycle lanes that co-exist with vehicular traffic are simply too dangerous.
Except Forrester is wrong. You'd be hard pressed to find cyclists here on the SF Peninsula who don't love the bike lanes we have. In other words, reality triumphs theory here. The only time Forrester is right is in those communities that do a poor job of implementing/maintaining their bike lanes (something that is not uncommon).
> As opposed to the saints known as motorists?!?
Yes, I find it (not) amusing when a newspaper article writes about a cyclist's death they feel the need to regurgitate rants about lawless cyclists. As if the cyclist is somehow responsible. And as if "cyclists" are a single entity (an 'other'), rather then being largely composed of weekday commute motorists who when riding are now called cyclists and, when they do something wrong, all cyclists get branded with this. I like to turn those bike rants around and describe how many more dangerous and/or absent-minded moves I see from motorists every week then from people on bikes.
Except Forrester is wrong. You'd be hard pressed to find cyclists here on the SF Peninsula who don't love the bike lanes we have. In other words, reality triumphs theory here. The only time Forrester is right is in those communities that do a poor job of implementing/maintaining their bike lanes (something that is not uncommon).
> As opposed to the saints known as motorists?!?
Yes, I find it (not) amusing when a newspaper article writes about a cyclist's death they feel the need to regurgitate rants about lawless cyclists. As if the cyclist is somehow responsible. And as if "cyclists" are a single entity (an 'other'), rather then being largely composed of weekday commute motorists who when riding are now called cyclists and, when they do something wrong, all cyclists get branded with this. I like to turn those bike rants around and describe how many more dangerous and/or absent-minded moves I see from motorists every week then from people on bikes.
Come on, man. That second quote is out of context. And I even added an end note saying that I don't think the majority of bikers are the crazy ones.
> If you take the lane, you're out of the "door zone", and motorists have no choice but to slow down and pass you like they would pass any other vehicle on the road.
Yes, but all it takes is one that doesn't and you'll be in the same position as the guy in this article. (dead).
Not getting 'doored' is easy, spot which cars have occupants when passing on the left and simply assume that any of them can throw open their doors at any moment.
Driving in a car lane in the middle of the lane is going to get you murdered by the first person that doesn't expect you to be where you are. Being right doesn't matter much when you have a ton-and-a-half of Detroit (or Japanese or German) steel on top of you.
In some countries the laws are such that if you injure a bicyclist or a pedestrian you are automatically in the wrong, this sort of legislation actually helps a lot.
Yes, but all it takes is one that doesn't and you'll be in the same position as the guy in this article. (dead).
Not getting 'doored' is easy, spot which cars have occupants when passing on the left and simply assume that any of them can throw open their doors at any moment.
Driving in a car lane in the middle of the lane is going to get you murdered by the first person that doesn't expect you to be where you are. Being right doesn't matter much when you have a ton-and-a-half of Detroit (or Japanese or German) steel on top of you.
In some countries the laws are such that if you injure a bicyclist or a pedestrian you are automatically in the wrong, this sort of legislation actually helps a lot.
I like this site on safe cycling:
http://bicyclesafe.com/
http://bicyclesafe.com/
The comment on the article reveals completely the lack of intelligence and elitism of the commenter.
It may be wonderful to think that the people who man lower-end jobs are somehow less deserving than you, and somehow should be executed. But without those people filling those low-end jobs, our world would fall apart. No matter what you think of them, you need them, whether you realize it or not.
And on the other hand, if the commenter was thinking "he will most certainly be happier dead than working at that job", that illustrates that he has never been in a position lower on the economic scale. While low-quality jobs are no walk in the park, it is possible to enjoy one's self and take pleasure in life without being at the top of the totem pole.
Either way, it is obvious the commenter is a fool.
It may be wonderful to think that the people who man lower-end jobs are somehow less deserving than you, and somehow should be executed. But without those people filling those low-end jobs, our world would fall apart. No matter what you think of them, you need them, whether you realize it or not.
And on the other hand, if the commenter was thinking "he will most certainly be happier dead than working at that job", that illustrates that he has never been in a position lower on the economic scale. While low-quality jobs are no walk in the park, it is possible to enjoy one's self and take pleasure in life without being at the top of the totem pole.
Either way, it is obvious the commenter is a fool.
Or the commenter was simply a troll. You get them on almost every news site now. Commenting on every article with something that will most likely cause others to argue / start a flamewar. I'm not sure if that needed a response at all. People not used to internet commenters sometimes give in too easily and start feeding the trolls... it only wastes your time and gives someone more chance to have "fun".
Trolls and griefers are a real problem, there is not so much that you could construct that can not be destroyed by a small number of motivated people, online as well as in real life.
Creation takes time, energy, intellect and inspiration, destruction can be done instantly, requires much less energy, zero intellect and pigheadedness will do just fine.
Creation takes time, energy, intellect and inspiration, destruction can be done instantly, requires much less energy, zero intellect and pigheadedness will do just fine.
Trolls used to be normal people too .. http://i.imgur.com/wOY9d.png
I'm a recovering troll myself, so I understand the motivation. Most of them are really just looking for recognition.
I'm a recovering troll myself, so I understand the motivation. Most of them are really just looking for recognition.
I troll on Youtube, generally because I'm curious how people will react.
I see trolling as being akin to taking absurd actions in an RPG just to see what the game designers prepared for you.
I see trolling as being akin to taking absurd actions in an RPG just to see what the game designers prepared for you.
This is the most obvious answer. Taking it too seriously and upvoting articles like this will only ensure /b/tards find out about it and initiate an even bigger trolling.
You're right, but the article isn't really a response to that one comment, it's a response to all such comments.
As a student who worked in a fast food kitchen for 3 years, I can confirm that you can absolutely love a job that is bottom-of-the-pile.
Reminds me of the scene from the movie "American Beauty". After he gets laid off from his soul-sucking office job, Kevin Spacey's character applies at a fast-food burger joint saying "I want a job with the least amount of responsibility."
Sometimes the reason jobs pay more is because they are less enjoyable.
I don't like your first argument because it won't always be true. It seems more an more likely that most of those low-end jobs will be automated away at some point during this century. The argument for the worth of every human being needs to be based on something besides needing to have them around for your convenience. Fortunately, I think there are plenty of arguments that meet that requirement.
I disagree. It shows a lack of taste and tact maybe, but I wouldn't read anything else into it. It's just some guy trying to be funny on the internet.
IMHO It's not clever or witty enough to be very funny, so it's more in the 'infantile humor' bucket.
IMHO It's not clever or witty enough to be very funny, so it's more in the 'infantile humor' bucket.
I actually worked a dead-end job a few years ago, and I didn't think it was so horrible. Even the people who are in our society's lower socioeconomic classes live like 15th-century kings.
I think this reveals something about the commenter's mindset: he probably would never enjoy that job, and he deducts no one else could. Similar to the qualia debate in philosophy, he is generalizing way too much. He's not really guilty of that, it's the way he is. He is incredibly rude and callous though.
I think you're reading way more into this than you should. He just made a stupid obvious mildly funny crass joke.
I often wish I could go back to my "low-end" job I worked at 15 years ago, and yet I still don't believe I'm unhappy. :)
The higher a monkey can climb, the more he shows his tail.
That said this article brought a tear to my eye.
That said this article brought a tear to my eye.
The article illustrates how local editorial control and not-for-profit ownership can allow a newspaper to act as the conscience of a community.
Tampabay.com is the online portal for the The St. Petersburg Times. The Times is one of the few remaining independent newspapers left in the US, It is owned by the Poynter Institute. http://www.poynter.org/
Tampabay.com is the online portal for the The St. Petersburg Times. The Times is one of the few remaining independent newspapers left in the US, It is owned by the Poynter Institute. http://www.poynter.org/
Also, hat tip to PolitiFact (http://politifact.com/), run by SPT, and one of the best political fact checking sites on the net.
How aggravating. "I'll go through 10 people before I find another like him" yet he will continue to pay the man 7.25 an hour. Everything you want out of an employee and nothing else and you can't pay the guy better than dirt cheap minimum wage and somehow lament at his death.
You said it.
Quote:
Dayhoff, his boss at Crab Shack, read the story on the Times website and found himself outraged by unsympathetic comments posted by some readers.
"I just can't get over some of those people reacting the way they did," he said. "This guy was a human being. He might not have meant something to somebody else, but he was like family to us. He meant something to us."
--
Meanwhile:
--
Jeff Lackey, who lives across the street from Mr. Smith's address at Hollywood Park, recalled one of the rare conversations Mr. Smith initiated.
"I was coming back from the Dumpster and he invited me over," said Lackey, 53. "He said, 'Jeff, I've worked at Crab Shack for 10 years. I never got a raise or a Christmas bonus. I never even got a card.' "
--
Yeah, I'm _sure_ he was appreciated in life. /s
TL/DR: Actions speak louder than words.
Quote:
Dayhoff, his boss at Crab Shack, read the story on the Times website and found himself outraged by unsympathetic comments posted by some readers.
"I just can't get over some of those people reacting the way they did," he said. "This guy was a human being. He might not have meant something to somebody else, but he was like family to us. He meant something to us."
--
Meanwhile:
--
Jeff Lackey, who lives across the street from Mr. Smith's address at Hollywood Park, recalled one of the rare conversations Mr. Smith initiated.
"I was coming back from the Dumpster and he invited me over," said Lackey, 53. "He said, 'Jeff, I've worked at Crab Shack for 10 years. I never got a raise or a Christmas bonus. I never even got a card.' "
--
Yeah, I'm _sure_ he was appreciated in life. /s
TL/DR: Actions speak louder than words.
Not really making a political statement either way, but I've been very surprised at how much small gestures can mean in some situations, and how relative status is.
About 5 years ago, some fellow grad students and I had a fairly recent Guatemalan immigrant serving as the janitor in our part of the building. It was basically awkward all around: the janitors normally came in late-ish to vacuum and empty trash cans and such, to avoid being there when most of the employees were, but grad students, especially in CS, work pretty random hours, so we were often there at 11pm or whatever. The guy spoke no English, and none of us spoke more than about 30 words of Spanish, but somehow given our life positions, none of us were comfortable totally ignoring another human who came into our area (I imagine some people are more used to doing so). So there was always this awkward attempt to say hello and make smalltalk, which mostly ended up in Spanish because the grad students knew a tiny bit more Spanish than the guy knew English.
He actually seemed pretty happy about that interaction happening at all. At some point, though, we ended up collecting like $200 and a card for Christmas (perhaps we felt a bit guilty that he came around emptying trash and vacuuming while we were doing a mixture of procrastinating on Bejeweled Blitz and maybe sometimes writing papers), which he found amazingly surprising. From our perspective it was quite strange that we were capable of making a gesture that made someone surprised/grateful, because I mean we were poor grad students, which in our context was a low-money/low-status occupation.
About 5 years ago, some fellow grad students and I had a fairly recent Guatemalan immigrant serving as the janitor in our part of the building. It was basically awkward all around: the janitors normally came in late-ish to vacuum and empty trash cans and such, to avoid being there when most of the employees were, but grad students, especially in CS, work pretty random hours, so we were often there at 11pm or whatever. The guy spoke no English, and none of us spoke more than about 30 words of Spanish, but somehow given our life positions, none of us were comfortable totally ignoring another human who came into our area (I imagine some people are more used to doing so). So there was always this awkward attempt to say hello and make smalltalk, which mostly ended up in Spanish because the grad students knew a tiny bit more Spanish than the guy knew English.
He actually seemed pretty happy about that interaction happening at all. At some point, though, we ended up collecting like $200 and a card for Christmas (perhaps we felt a bit guilty that he came around emptying trash and vacuuming while we were doing a mixture of procrastinating on Bejeweled Blitz and maybe sometimes writing papers), which he found amazingly surprising. From our perspective it was quite strange that we were capable of making a gesture that made someone surprised/grateful, because I mean we were poor grad students, which in our context was a low-money/low-status occupation.
Thank you _delirium. When I arrived to the US 12 years ago one of the many jobs I did was preparing hamburgers and cleaning bathrooms at a McDonald's. Although I had attended college back in my country of origin, my English skills were quite poor. As a consequence, most people used to ignore me. Many times I felt people thought I was stupid because I couldn't communicate properly. A few other people, though, opted to interact with me. These small interactions helped me feel intelligent and closer to the dream I had of understanding US society and becoming a more productive member of it.
Random acts of kindness like yours probably have an effect much larger than what you can imagine at the moment. Their compound effect in the lives of others and their families make them, literally, priceless.
Random acts of kindness like yours probably have an effect much larger than what you can imagine at the moment. Their compound effect in the lives of others and their families make them, literally, priceless.
That's awesome. Good on you and your friends for treating a hard working man like a human being. I'm sure it dramatically changed his perspective on all of you as well.
Hopefully! Honestly it was probably 90% his doing as far as making a connection goes; grad student + cs geek does not make for the most outgoing group of people, and it wasn't like we were actively trying to foster understanding between cultures (we were pretty happy to be getting our stuff done and not hassled). But this guy was super friendly and it was basically impossible not to make some small talk in return, and then to want to do something to acknowledge him. So I could perfectly well see it turning out much differently if the other guy was also a shy/reserved sort of person and didn't make the main initial effort.
Random acts of kindess... evolution at its best.
[deleted]
I like this story a lot. People are people, and it's always nice to be reminded.
A lot of people make this point. I'm not sure I'm ready to pass quick judgement that the restaurant owner should reward loyalty with money. Restaurant owners can be pretty poor and a 50 cent raise would result in the owner having ~$1300 less in his pocket every year. While he appreciates loyalty, he might rather suck up the extra effort of replacing dishwashers than rewarding loyal ones. He could be armpit deep in debt, have a child in college, or otherwise have reasons that money is tight. Or, yeah, he COULD just be a rich asshole (note: restaurants are not cash cows).
The first time I ran a small business, I was shocked at how my thinking turned here. Someone asks for a raise and the money goes straight out of my pocket if I say yes. Which isn't a simple decision if the business isn't a huge profit center.
The first time I ran a small business, I was shocked at how my thinking turned here. Someone asks for a raise and the money goes straight out of my pocket if I say yes. Which isn't a simple decision if the business isn't a huge profit center.
I think that's right. Plus it goes against the spirit of the article to rush to judge the owner. It's only because he cared enough about Neil Smith that the rest of us ever heard of him. And condemning him based only on his class position is pretty much what the original comments did to Neil.
Yea I'm sure the manager who probably makes 10 an hour can just start giving people raises at will. How aggravating indeed.
That he complained that he "never even got a card" meant that he was not appreciated as a friend by his manager-- that's something completely beside the monetary wage. They should have been friends, after 10 years together.
And even if the manager was earning a low amount there's no reason that in just one year out of those 10 he could not have given him a Christmas bonus. Even a small amount, so that Mr. Smith would not have been able to say that he "never got a [...] Christmas bonus."
And even if the manager was earning a low amount there's no reason that in just one year out of those 10 he could not have given him a Christmas bonus. Even a small amount, so that Mr. Smith would not have been able to say that he "never got a [...] Christmas bonus."
>That he complained that he "never even got a card" meant that he was not even appreciated by his manager
"I kind of forced him" to celebrate holidays, Rogers said.
That quote kind of puts a different perspective on it. His roommate had to force holidays on him, so is it a wonder his manager didn't give him cards? Maybe that's just the way he came off.
"He might not have meant something to somebody else, but he was like family to us. He meant something to us." - Dayhoff, his boss at Crab Shack. That sounds like he appreciated him to me. Quit acting like you guys care about Neil Smith more than his no-wage-raising, no-bonus-giving, no-card-giving manager. That guy actually lost somebody, you guys didn't. So don't be so quick to call him uncaring.
"I kind of forced him" to celebrate holidays, Rogers said.
That quote kind of puts a different perspective on it. His roommate had to force holidays on him, so is it a wonder his manager didn't give him cards? Maybe that's just the way he came off.
"He might not have meant something to somebody else, but he was like family to us. He meant something to us." - Dayhoff, his boss at Crab Shack. That sounds like he appreciated him to me. Quit acting like you guys care about Neil Smith more than his no-wage-raising, no-bonus-giving, no-card-giving manager. That guy actually lost somebody, you guys didn't. So don't be so quick to call him uncaring.
He explicitly complained to his friend of not getting a card or getting a raise.
Celebrating holidays or not is a completely separate issue.
Celebrating holidays or not is a completely separate issue.
You're taking a couple complaints and extrapolating that to mean his manager did not appreciate him. You don't know to what extent his manager may have tried to show appreciation in other ways or what their relationship was like.
Out of curiosity, do you feel that 10 years of loyal service should not be rewarded with any kind of raise at all?
Even if he wasn't earning much more than 8 or 9 dollars an hour even then, but it probably would mean quite a bit for someone in that situation.
With inflation, he was actually being paid less 10 years later.
Even if he wasn't earning much more than 8 or 9 dollars an hour even then, but it probably would mean quite a bit for someone in that situation.
With inflation, he was actually being paid less 10 years later.
> With inflation, he was actually being paid less 10 years later.
I looked this up and Neil Alan Smith's wages grew by 41% from 2001 to 2010, outpacing inflation of 23%.
Inflation from Aug. 2001 to Aug. 2010 increased prices by 23% (http://inflationdata.com/inflation/inflation_Rate/historical...).
Neil Alan Smith's wages started in 2001 at the federal minimum wage of $5.15. The federal minimum wage was constant from 1997 to 2007, but Florida passed a minimum wage law increasing its state minimum wage to $6.15 in 2005. Other adjustments to the Florida minimum wage increased his wage to $7.25 by 2010. (http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_Florida_minimum_wage_histo... and http://www.floridajobs.org/minimumwage/index.htm)
I looked this up and Neil Alan Smith's wages grew by 41% from 2001 to 2010, outpacing inflation of 23%.
Inflation from Aug. 2001 to Aug. 2010 increased prices by 23% (http://inflationdata.com/inflation/inflation_Rate/historical...).
Neil Alan Smith's wages started in 2001 at the federal minimum wage of $5.15. The federal minimum wage was constant from 1997 to 2007, but Florida passed a minimum wage law increasing its state minimum wage to $6.15 in 2005. Other adjustments to the Florida minimum wage increased his wage to $7.25 by 2010. (http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_Florida_minimum_wage_histo... and http://www.floridajobs.org/minimumwage/index.htm)
Odds are if the manager really liked him, the manager would have liked to give him a raise.
However, sometimes available finances simply do not warrant a raise. Sometimes higher management who does not know an employee says "why should we pay him more, we can just find another Joe to do the same job", without knowing the measure of the man.
However, sometimes available finances simply do not warrant a raise. Sometimes higher management who does not know an employee says "why should we pay him more, we can just find another Joe to do the same job", without knowing the measure of the man.
A lack of raises in minimum-wage work is the norm. I know people who've worked in franchises for years who've barely been given raises (which are normally cancelled out by a minimum-wage increase a few months later anyway).
Why don't these companies give raises? The same reason Wal-Mart fights viciously to stop unionization; because higher-pay means higher-prices which for bottom-of-the-barrel pricing means less sales. I can buy a burger at McDonalds for a dollar; I have to shop like a pro to find the deals to get burger buns and burgers, cheese slices, pickles, ketchup/relish/etc at a comparable price to make an identical burger. Likely I'll end up spending at least $2 to make my own burger.
McDonalds is making profit off of a food item that costs less than $1. Looking at the economics of it, it's ridiculous. How many burgers in my lifetime would I have to make to equalize the cost of using electricity/gas to heat my stove top to fry a burger, and buying the frying pan in the first place, and the bun, burger, cheese, condiments.
Not giving a raise helps keep these people in a job, it's sad that it has to be this way (for more reasons than one), but thats what this world is. Although to look in the back of most McDonalds if you found one competent worker like Mr. Smith you could fire half of your day-staff. I've seen 3 good workers turn out orders faster than when every station is full and there's 20 workers in a store, because when there's a lot of them they're inevitably students and the managers are like 19 and endlessly chatter.
Why don't these companies give raises? The same reason Wal-Mart fights viciously to stop unionization; because higher-pay means higher-prices which for bottom-of-the-barrel pricing means less sales. I can buy a burger at McDonalds for a dollar; I have to shop like a pro to find the deals to get burger buns and burgers, cheese slices, pickles, ketchup/relish/etc at a comparable price to make an identical burger. Likely I'll end up spending at least $2 to make my own burger.
McDonalds is making profit off of a food item that costs less than $1. Looking at the economics of it, it's ridiculous. How many burgers in my lifetime would I have to make to equalize the cost of using electricity/gas to heat my stove top to fry a burger, and buying the frying pan in the first place, and the bun, burger, cheese, condiments.
Not giving a raise helps keep these people in a job, it's sad that it has to be this way (for more reasons than one), but thats what this world is. Although to look in the back of most McDonalds if you found one competent worker like Mr. Smith you could fire half of your day-staff. I've seen 3 good workers turn out orders faster than when every station is full and there's 20 workers in a store, because when there's a lot of them they're inevitably students and the managers are like 19 and endlessly chatter.
McDs doesn't have to make a profit on that $1 burger. They'll make plenty of profit on the $1.50 soda or $2 fries that they sell alongside it.
The real question you should be asking is if his pay is so low, why didn't he get another job? There's a reason he stayed.
Did he deserve it? Maybe, the article mentioned he started out as a waiter and (moved up?) to dishwasher. Maybe dishwasher paid more, who knows. But my whole point is a manager in a restaurant has less control over raises than you seem to suggest.
Did he deserve it? Maybe, the article mentioned he started out as a waiter and (moved up?) to dishwasher. Maybe dishwasher paid more, who knows. But my whole point is a manager in a restaurant has less control over raises than you seem to suggest.
"Maybe, the article mentioned he started out as a waiter "
I think it was the roommate, Rogers, who had been a waiter.
I think it was the roommate, Rogers, who had been a waiter.
Maybe by "another like him" he meant "another who is willing to work for minimum wage".
personally I found the manager's comment very condescending.
10 is just such a small number.
it's like "yeah this guy is VERY important, I'd have to interview like 2 whole people to find someone as "good" as him"
10 is just such a small number.
it's like "yeah this guy is VERY important, I'd have to interview like 2 whole people to find someone as "good" as him"
Not trying to be snarky, but why is this upvoted?
It's an article about an unfortunate guy that got killed on his bike and died. How is this interesting? What am I missing? Since the article has 100+ points there's obviously something I've sompletely missed. What is it?
It's an article about an unfortunate guy that got killed on his bike and died. How is this interesting? What am I missing? Since the article has 100+ points there's obviously something I've sompletely missed. What is it?
You clearly missed the point of the article which was specifically to respond to the insensitive anonymous online commenters who had dismissed the man as a worthless nobody. The reporter dug into his life to give us a rounded picture of who he was and why every life, no matter how modest, has meaning and value.
I don't believe mixmax missed the point at all. I believe that he/she is genuinely interested in what exactly 'gratifies one's intellectual curiosity' in this article, to quote the guidelines.
I'm sorry if I come of as rude here, I am appalled by the insensitivity of those anonymous comments just like the rest of you, but, like mixmax, I too don't quite get what is it in this article that 'hackers would find interesting'. There must be something, otherwise it wouldn't receive over 100 votes.
"Hackers" are not a monolithic group that share exactly the same interests. Some people (hackers or not) might have intellectual curiosity about the lives of ordinary people, about how a media organization responded (or, in other stories, failed to respond) to nasty online comments, or about how a simple news item (man on bike killed in hit and run) can be given layers of meaning. Personally I found a great deal of stimulation for my intellect (much more so than reading yet another item about antenna issues on the iPhone), but I don't mean to suggest that everyone would see it the same way.
Sandman is correct in his asessment - I completely understand the point and context of the article as explained in these comments. I simply didn't understand why it seemed to be interesting enough to gather 100+ votes. You can call the original question an attempt to gratify my intellectual curiosity as to why this story is so interesting.
Your comment sheds some light on it, personally I still don't see the value of the article but I do see the sentiment for upvoting it. I merely thought there was some finer point I didn't get and wanted to understand it.
Your comment sheds some light on it, personally I still don't see the value of the article but I do see the sentiment for upvoting it. I merely thought there was some finer point I didn't get and wanted to understand it.
I posted it as "evidence of some interesting new phenomenon": a journalist finds a decent way to push back against online abusiveness. The story isn't really about one guy, it's about human relations and the value of human life. In other words the real story is all meta, but the reporter had the sense do it unobtrusively and keep the focus on Neil.
There's a secondary way in which this is an interesting phenomenon, too: the story is being picked up by other media outlets because it resonates with many people. I caught part of an interview with the reporter on CBC radio last night. While they did talk explicitly about the meta aspect (what prompted you to write it, what were you trying to achieve, how do you think the internet is affecting people), they also had the sense to devote most of the piece to Neil Smith. What the reporter figured out is that by focusing on the details of this individual, he could make a general point more powerfully than by stating it in general. That excites my curiosity.
Edit: There are two common responses to nasty online comments: argue with them or ignore them. Most people figure out after a while that arguing just feeds the trolls, so ignoring is better. But this guy came up with an innovative way to respond: he elevated the thing that they belittled; he picked it up and polished it off and showed that it was beautiful. He found a way to give beauty for ashes. That's just not very common.
There's a secondary way in which this is an interesting phenomenon, too: the story is being picked up by other media outlets because it resonates with many people. I caught part of an interview with the reporter on CBC radio last night. While they did talk explicitly about the meta aspect (what prompted you to write it, what were you trying to achieve, how do you think the internet is affecting people), they also had the sense to devote most of the piece to Neil Smith. What the reporter figured out is that by focusing on the details of this individual, he could make a general point more powerfully than by stating it in general. That excites my curiosity.
Edit: There are two common responses to nasty online comments: argue with them or ignore them. Most people figure out after a while that arguing just feeds the trolls, so ignoring is better. But this guy came up with an innovative way to respond: he elevated the thing that they belittled; he picked it up and polished it off and showed that it was beautiful. He found a way to give beauty for ashes. That's just not very common.
Like everyone on HN I am annoyed disappointed by the natural tendency of online comments to give way to trolls. This article just seemed like a very classy response to troll comments.
It gave me much need pause to reflect and recognize how fortunate I am to have found a career I can be passionate about. That people I generally don't think about could possibly be more interesting and have more to teach me than most of my associates. I also learned that having the latest iPhone (when the previous one didn't break) marks you not as discriminating and fashionable but as easily manipulated.
From hackers I know many are also interested in community building and working towards and more fair and just world where everyone is appreciated for their contributions.
I guess that's what your seeing from the upvotes.
I guess that's what your seeing from the upvotes.
[deleted]
Neil Alan Smith and all the other dependable and beneficial members of society who try do good without making waves or deriving fame, power, or wealth from it owe a great deal to that rare kind of journalism! I hope that my own contributions in life can be seen as such positive as Niel's were.
It's not that simple to do good and be appreciated in life even for seemingly very minute jobs like that of a dishwasher. Reminds me of the ferryman in Herman Hesse's Siddhartha. Wise, humble, happy.
As a cyclist I am familiar with the unbelievable outpouring of bile in newspaper commets whenever a cyclist is killed.
Thank you to the St. Petersburg Times for publishing this article.
Thank you to the St. Petersburg Times for publishing this article.
Um Why is this hacker news?
It's interesting to many of us here who are interested in building online communities. If a person happened to walk by this man's funeral, they probably wouldn't shout that he was "better off dead". But a person who happens to see this man's obituary online apparently has no qualms about the online equivalent.
As hackers, we build things that are used, ultimately, by fellow human beings. Those things we build can have unintended consequences. This story highlights that fact.
As hackers, we build things that are used, ultimately, by fellow human beings. Those things we build can have unintended consequences. This story highlights that fact.
I agree with you. I guess you're being downvoted because, according to the guidelines, a proper thing to do when you feel that an article isn't HN material is flagging it, not commenting that it shouldn't be on HN.
This is a common misconception. Reflectors are worthless. Riding in the bike lane exposes you to great danger -- car doors flying open to the right, aggressive motorists passing too closely on the left. If you take the lane, you're out of the "door zone", and motorists have no choice but to slow down and pass you like they would pass any other vehicle on the road. You may feel like you are being an annoyance, but annoying people is what makes them pay attention and not kill you.
As for reflectors; they only work when there is a clear path from an illumination source to the reflector and back to your eye. Sometimes that happens, but more often than not, it doesn't. You don't need a $300 super-bright rechargeable light system -- get a $5 blinky and throw an extra AA battery in your seat bag. It may save your life.
Also, read Effective Cycling: http://www.amazon.com/Effective-Cycling-6th-John-Forester/dp...
Please don't get yourself killed because you don't want to inconvenience a motorist or buy an LED light. Oh, and get a helmet; the $30 ones are just as safe as the $200, if not as comfortable.
I hate to be preachy, but it makes me sad when people die because they are using a safe and efficient form of transportation. (And believe me, I am not blaming the cyclist for his own death here -- the motorist who murdered him is to blame, with a close second to poor city planning and the total lack of bicycle education in the US.)