Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | throw0101c's comments login

> everything is relative. biking in vienna in winter isn't similar at all to biking in winnipeg in the winter.

Perfect is the enemy of the good: just because you can't cycle everyday, twelve months of the year, doesn't mean you shouldn't perhaps cycle for 6/8/10 months of the years when it is "possible".

But on the topic of locations, how about Finland? "Why Canadians Can't Bike in the Winter (but Finnish people can)":

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uhx-26GfCBU

Or a fellow in Calgary:

* https://www.youtube.com/@Shifter_Cycling

Or a couple that have live(d) in Ottawa and Montreal:

* https://www.youtube.com/@OhTheUrbanity/search?query=winter

Also look at the larger conversation of one of the most car-centric countries, the US: how many folks live in climate zones (say) 1 to 4:

* https://basc.pnnl.gov/images/iecc-climate-zone-map

What does "winter" mean there?


Ya, I could bike in -20c to -40c weather for 1.5 hours a day in each direction (3 hours a day), or I could drive to work and be warm for 25 minutes and have 2.5 hours to do useful things with my life.

Bike nuts are nuts.


> You're not going to take your cargo bike on a weekend 200km trip or to visit family on the other side of the state/country unless you're bent on doing exactly that.

How many times are those types of trips done, as compared to 'just' running errands around town? What are the fixed costs you are incurring for those presumably occasional occurrences, versus optimizing for the more likely common cases?

It's like the folks who buy pickup trucks "for towing", but:

> According to Axios, 63% of Ford F-150 drivers barely use their trucks for towing. 29% admitted to towing occasionally, while just 7% regularly tow. When properly equipped, many F-150 models can pull around 13,000 pounds.

> However, 28% of drivers say they use the truck for hauling. Meanwhile, 41% take advantage of the F-150’s hauling capabilities once in a while, and 32% are indifferent. It’s a shame considering all F-150 models can haul about 2,000 pounds.

* https://www.motorbiscuit.com/63-of-ford-f-150-owners-almost-...

Perhaps buy for what you actually do, and rent for when you need 'extra' capabilities.


> How many times are those types of trips done, as compared to 'just' running errands around town?

If you have children definitely more often the former than the latter. I think it's every 2-3 weeks in my case. That's also how my father would use his car and, coincidentally his father as well.

> Perhaps buy for what you actually do, and rent for when you need 'extra' capabilities.

I did. Perhaps you shouldn't make assumptions about people's habits.


> If you have children definitely more often the former than the latter. I think it's every 2-3 weeks in my case. That's also how my father would use his car and, coincidentally his father as well.

And of the couple dozen people that I know that have kids, precisely zero take regular 200km trips. Or 100km. Or 50km for that matter. And by "regular" I mean at least once a month: certainly on some holidays to visit family, but that is at most once a quarter.

I live in Toronto, Canada, and have neighbours with family all over southern Ontario (Windsor, London) as well as a some in the Maritimes. They regularly rent larger vehicles for trips (or fly there and rent/borrow).

> I did. Perhaps you shouldn't make assumptions about people's habits.

I made no assumptionsa about people's habits. I asked how often 200km occurred in general. In the US at least, 99.2% of trips are less than 150km, with 80% being less than 15km:

* https://evstatistics.com/2021/12/99-2-of-us-daily-trips-are-...

While 'road trips' do occur, they are the minority of events:

* https://www.utires.com/articles/road-trips-survey/

For most people, most of the time, considering 200km is a waste of time (using US data). That you just happen to perhaps be in the minority does not invalidate that: you are extrapolating a need to the general public from your personal experience which isn't statistically common and very anecdotal.


Well, I live in Europe and over here this is how we roll. There's plenty of places to visit within 100km and especially during the summer they're packed. You don't always have to drive, but at the same time some of the more remote places don't have a train station.

It appears that the US/Canada situation doesn't extrapolate to the rest of the world, but that's not surprising.


> Well, I live in Europe and over here this is how we roll.

I have several cousins in Europe with kids, and that is not how they roll. They rarely drive >50km.

So who should I believe: your n=1 sample size or my n>1 sample size?


> What are you primarily using during winter and rainy months?

In the Toronto, Canada, I cycled 5km every workday to/from work, from March to December, rain or shine: as long as the roads were clear I added layers for winter, and during rain I put on rain gear (like even a simple poncho):

* https://www.mec.ca/en/product/6017-198/mec-hydrocycle-jacket...

I bought my rain gear many years ago, and it gave be ~decade of service (don't cycle nowadays because of WFH/hybrid, but the gear is still good).


pretty milk winter in toronto as well


> pretty milk winter in toronto as well

How many people live in IECC Climate Zones ≥5:

* https://basc.pnnl.gov/images/iecc-climate-zone-map

And even for those that do, just because someone may not cycle in the winter, that does not preclude cycling during the other three seasons. Further, not all winter days are bad, even in colder climates.

See also "Why Canadians Can't Bike in the Winter (but Finnish people can)":

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uhx-26GfCBU

Or a fellow in Calgary:

* https://www.youtube.com/@Shifter_Cycling

Or a couple that have live(d) in Ottawa and Montreal:

* https://www.youtube.com/@OhTheUrbanity/search?query=winter


Winter weather in calgary, ottawa, and montreal are all warmer than winnipeg or edmonton.


> Maintenance on bicycles is also insane. An "oil change" (clean and lube the chain) every 300 km or so.

In the Before Times (pre-COVID) I cycled 5km to work and 5km back, rain or shine, every workday from March to December in Toronto, Canada.

Every spring I'd spend $100 on a tune up, which usually included a new chain, and every ~second year I'd need a new rear cassette too and some new brake pads too. I've had the same tyres for 10+ years (though I get flats 1-2 times per year so needed new tubes). I lubed the chain once a week from a bottle that I purchased for $10 which lasts for 1-2 years.

I have no idea where you get your bike maintenance ideas from, but my experience was quite different after a decade of experience.


Does anyone have experience on two- versus three-wheeled cargo bikes?

When he made a video on the topic, Jason Slaughter of Not Just Bikes preferred two wheels with the big box upfront (bakfiets):

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQhzEnWCgHA&t=2m55s

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_bike#Long_john_bicycle


Yes, I own both.

The three-wheeled ones take some getting used to. You can't take turns at a high speed or you'll tip over. They are nice when you are standing still, because they stay up-right. They are easier to turn-around on foot: the front wheels are closer to the centre of mass, so you can easily lift the back wheel and swing it around.

The two-wheeled ones are faster, and handle more like a normal bike. When fully loaded (100+ kg) they take some effort getting them on the stand. They are clunkier to turn around.

I prefer the two-wheeled ones.


The risk with the three-wheeled ones is that they are perfectly stable right until they aren't. You're either upright or on your ass. The steeper you turn the smaller the stable area gets, even when going slow. The two wheeled ones have more of a gradient. You'll feel it when it starts to go so you can course-correct.

The nice thing about the three wheeled ones is you don't need to use a kickstand, though the two-wheelers tend to have really solid kickstands.


I've only done the three wheeled one, and that is a never again. It's like training wheels. You can't lean in a turn. Besides that, the steering was weird because there wasn't an axle, instead the entire middle of the frame was articulated.

That thing was a slightly faster and more ergonomic wheelbarrow, not a bike.


> That's a very wrong idea of beauty you have, there is no such thing as "objective quality".

Not believing that there is such a thing as objective beauty is a recent phenomenon. Going back to ancient philosophers and in to the Italian Renaissance, the consensus was such a thing existed:

* https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/beauty/

And we don't have to go that far back to find it, as as 'recently' as the Victorian era architectural designs were based on such principals (such as the golden ratio):

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-0XJpPnlrA

Having different be elements proportional to each other was basic stuff pre-WW2:

* https://www.youtube.com/@BrentHull/search?query=proportion

> Point is, contemporary architecture is always ugly. Give it 50 years and it becomes historical and beloved.

I'm not sure (m)any people find beauty in most of the brutalist buildings that are now ~50 years old.

Some of Le Corbusier's works are noted:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Architectural_Work_of_Le_C...

but I'm not sure how many would be called "beloved".


> PR-chitecture is, essentially, the architectural equivalent of vaporware: Proposed projects, ideas, and innovations that generate a lot of hype and publicity and yet never materialize (and even when they do materialize, they do so in a muddled-down form). It’s architecture for the click economy, a product of the internet age of short attention spans and a constant, uncritical drive towards the new and shiny. PR-chitecture is the inevitable result of an image-driven, buzzword-laden media atmosphere where big ideas and sumptuous imagery are rewarded time and time again with attention, clicks, and opportunities over the work of up-and-coming or more critical and subversive practitioners.

* https://www.archpaper.com/2020/06/opinion-no-pr-chitecture-w...

* https://mcmansionhell.com/post/618938984050147328/coronagrif...


> Yes for sure, I never had much hope for any kind of change because of the reasons you gave. I think it's quite telling of our time how we cling to some idealized idea of the past.

Or perhaps leave old things as they were and build new things according to current ideals?


Related to the hybrid post-QC crypto stuff, similar moves have been done for Chrome:

* https://security.googleblog.com/2024/09/a-new-path-for-kyber...

Draft for adding it to TLS (1.3):

* https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-kwiatkowski-tls-ecdhe...



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: