Top 100 Annoyances For Drivers

[braineclipse]

I'd look forward to that if there's an override to speed up if I'm short on time.

Just speculating here...

I think self driving cars will only be implemented if/when they represent a large decrease in the number of accidents. As a result of this overriding the self driving function, or choosing to continue driving yourself on a permanent basis is going to be controversial. That there will be an increased insurance cost associated with that option (if it will exist at all) seems inevitable. In a way that will probably take care of the problem for a lot of people as many won't be willing to pay more to be able to drive themselves - doesn't make much sense.

At the same time you might get self driving cars decreasing the overall travel times as they could (in time) make more effective use of the infrastructure than us human can. But of course in individual instances a human will probably still be able to be faster, but perhaps at what society will see as an unacceptable risk to others. As a quick example I think it's at least somewhat likely that self driving cars hooked up to a communications network will be able to maintain higher speeds on highways/motorways than a lot of people will be willing to. But in more populated areas self driving cars will probably stick to speed limits much more rigorously than you do when short on time. A higher speed on the motorway will come at little to no cost and possibly be about as controversial at a 300 km/h train. But one kid getting killed in a school area because someone broke the speed limit with the self driving function turned off and there might be an uproar.

Almost certainly there will be transitional phases. Wouldn't be surprised if what you want becomes standard for a while before being phased out...

Either way it will be a game changer. Like I saw somewhere, you could send your dog to pick up your family at the air port And of course car sharing etc...

 

[Lemonade Money]

Of course and I never said they was not, but if you ride a bike on a pavement ' (which are for pedestrians) then not are you a ******** you are a stupid ********.

It's not illegal to ride on the pavement, but you must use due care and attention. I generally ride on the road myself.
Answer me this Parklane. If you are walking along the middle of the pavement and I am riding towards you, and for me to ride past you, you would need to move to one side (but I would still be close), would you give me a nudge?

 

[parklane1]

It's not illegal to ride on the pavement, but you must use due care and attention. I generally ride on the road myself.
Answer me this Parklane. If you are walking along the middle of the pavement and I am riding towards you, and for me to ride past you, you would need to move to one side (but I would still be close), would you give me a nudge?

Are you sure?

Is cycling on the pavement against the law?

A.

Yes. Cycling on the footway (pavement) is an offence under Section 72 of the Highways Act 1835 as amended by Section 85 (1) of the Local Government Act 1888.

Note:

Footways are not footpaths! ‘Footways’ (pavements) are not the same as ‘footpaths’ and their legal status differs. A footway runs alongside the carriageway, whereas a footpath is located away from it. For more, see CTC’s briefing on Public Footpaths



You may be the most considerate cyclist on the road ( but if you do ride on the pavement you can not be) but to answer your question then my answer is yes I would give you a nudge ( and not a gentle one either).

 

[Lemonade Money]

Are you sure?

Is cycling on the pavement against the law?

A.

Yes. Cycling on the footway (pavement) is an offence under Section 72 of the Highways Act 1835 as amended by Section 85 (1) of the Local Government Act 1888.

Note:

Footways are not footpaths! ‘Footways’ (pavements) are not the same as ‘footpaths’ and their legal status differs. A footway runs alongside the carriageway, whereas a footpath is located away from it. For more, see CTC’s briefing on Public Footpaths



You may be the most considerate cyclist on the road ( but if you do ride on the pavement you can not be) but to answer your question then my answer is yes I would give you a nudge ( and not a gentle one either).

I've ridden the pavement in front of police and seen the police on bikes on the pavement. It is accepted. I don't do it unless I'm riding with my sons, or it is a particularly dangerous road (i.e. fast traffic, out in the countryside, no pedestrians).
Back to the nudge, what about if I have my one-year-old in his front mounted bike seat?

 

[parklane1]

I've ridden the pavement in front of police and seen the police on bikes on the pavement. It is accepted. I don't do it unless I'm riding with my sons, or it is a particularly dangerous road (i.e. fast traffic, out in the countryside, no pedestrians).
Back to the nudge, what about if I have my one-year-old in his front mounted bike seat?

Still does not make riding on the pavement ( which according to the piece I quoted IS illegal) , there are plenty of byways in the parks were you can take your kid for a ride where you will be safe. Riding on a pavement is irresponsible. But wee are going around in circles.

 

[Lemonade Money]

Still does not make riding on the pavement ( which according to the piece I quoted IS illegal) , there are plenty of byways in the parks were you can take your kid for a ride where you will be safe. Riding on a pavement is irresponsible. But wee are going around in circles.

But you have to get to the park. And not all travel is recreational. So, would you still give me a nudge?

 

[parklane1]

But you have to get to the park. And not all travel is recreational. So, would you still give me a nudge?

Listen we are not going to agree on this, you carry on doing what you think is harmless and I hope that you will ride through life ( on yer bike) without any consideration for others.

 

[Lemonade Money]

Listen we are not going to agree on this, you carry on doing what you think is harmless and I hope that you will ride through life ( on yer bike) without any consideration for others.

Do you think giving cyclists a nudge is harmless? I always ride with consideration for others. Seems like you have an anti-bike agenda to me.

 

[parklane1]

Do you think giving cyclists a nudge is harmless? I always ride with consideration for others. Seems like you have an anti-bike agenda to me.

You do make me laugh, I ride a bike and have done for years but I am not ignorant and think I have a right to ride on the pavement which is supposed to be for pedestrians unlike some do. But you carry on and do just that as you seem to think you have the right to do so.

 

[Lemonade Money]

You do make me laugh, I ride a bike and have done for years but I am not ignorant and think I have a right to ride on the pavement which is supposed to be for pedestrians unlike some do. But you carry on and do just that as you seem to think you have the right to do so.

Do you have the right to nudge cyclists?

 

[Seedy Ron]

You two'll be so busy trying to nudge each other you won't notice whichever German saloon Scara's currently driving dangerously until it's too late...

 

[scaramanga]

You two'll be so busy trying to nudge each other you won't notice whichever German saloon Scara's currently driving dangerously until it's too late...

Quickly != dangerously

 

[scaramanga]

Just speculating here...

I think self driving cars will only be implemented if/when they represent a large decrease in the number of accidents. As a result of this overriding the self driving function, or choosing to continue driving yourself on a permanent basis is going to be controversial. That there will be an increased insurance cost associated with that option (if it will exist at all) seems inevitable. In a way that will probably take care of the problem for a lot of people as many won't be willing to pay more to be able to drive themselves - doesn't make much sense.

At the same time you might get self driving cars decreasing the overall travel times as they could (in time) make more effective use of the infrastructure than us human can. But of course in individual instances a human will probably still be able to be faster, but perhaps at what society will see as an unacceptable risk to others. As a quick example I think it's at least somewhat likely that self driving cars hooked up to a communications network will be able to maintain higher speeds on highways/motorways than a lot of people will be willing to. But in more populated areas self driving cars will probably stick to speed limits much more rigorously than you do when short on time. A higher speed on the motorway will come at little to no cost and possibly be about as controversial at a 300 km/h train. But one kid getting killed in a school area because someone broke the speed limit with the self driving function turned off and there might be an uproar.

Almost certainly there will be transitional phases. Wouldn't be surprised if what you want becomes standard for a while before being phased out...

Either way it will be a game changer. Like I saw somewhere, you could send your dog to pick up your family at the air port And of course car sharing etc...

I suspect all of that will turn out to be the case.

One advantage driverless cars should yield (eventually, when user input/override is needless) is the ability to take what one is doing and complete the task whilst travelling.

Most of my need for hurrying comes from being held up at the office because people know I'll answer very few emails on a 3 hour drive. If I'm being driven then I could leave when I want and still answer all of them.

 

[Papercut]

I occasionally wear my cap - can't be seen to be having a bad hair day - even in the car!

I thought cycling on the pavement was illegal too. If you are to nudge any cyclist (pavement or road) then it's probably those couriers in the City that don't give a f*ck about anyone in their way.

 

[Daisuk]

People not using indicators! I haven't actually got a driver's license yet, but I'm learning to drive at the moment - and this one annoys me big time. I'd say about 30% of all drivers out there don't use them when they should.
Also, tailgating, yes. I can't believe some people with this. I drive around with a big L on the back of the car (which in Norway means I'm learning, and everyone knows this), yet somehow someone thinks it's funny or a good idea to drive real close to my ass to stress me out or something. fudging idiots.

It amazes me in general how quite a few people seem to not respect the fact that they're sitting in a ton of metal moving at quite high speeds, and do all sorts of silly things to not only risk their own lives, but other people's lives as well.

I'm a pussy driver though, just for the record.

 

[Rock Strongo]

• people who go +/- 10 km/h. if you can't keep a steady pace, use your cruise control
• people who slow down 20 km/h just because they've entered a tunnel
• tailgating is deadly, no matter what you say Scara if you're all up in my ass, I'll drop my speed 30 km/h and watch you in my rear view mirror throwing your cell phone around the car showing me the fist/one finger
• if you think I'm going too slowly, fudging overtake me then, don't ride my tail and kill me and my kids when I have to stop for a polar bear in the road
• sitting behind someone who can't get on at a junction unless the road is 100% car free in both directions
• people who have no idea how big/small their car is and take up 70% of the road, making me drive halfway into the ditch when meeting at a narrow road
• people who drive 110 km/h up the hill where there are two lanes, then dropping to 80 km/h going down the hill on the other side where there is a single file *grrrr*

 

[Baleforce]

another one, happens to me daily this time of year,

drivers who think that they don't have to dip their lights when it's "just a motorbike" coming the other way, clams

 

[Bullet]

another one, happens to me daily this time of year,

drivers who think that they don't have to dip their lights when it's "just a motorbike" coming the other way, clams

My Merc lights dip automatically when they sense something worth dipping for... Don't blame me, buy a car

 

[Rorschach]

• people who go +/- 10 km/h. if you can't keep a steady pace, use your cruise control
• people who slow down 20 km/h just because they've entered a tunnel
• tailgating is deadly, no matter what you say Scara if you're all up in my ass, I'll drop my speed 30 km/h and watch you in my rear view mirror throwing your cell phone around the car showing me the fist/one finger
• if you think I'm going too slowly, fudgeing overtake me then, don't ride my tail and kill me and my kids when I have to stop for a polar bear in the road
• sitting behind someone who can't get on at a junction unless the road is 100% car free in both directions
• people who have no idea how big/small their car is and take up 70% of the road, making me drive halfway into the ditch when meeting at a narrow road
• people who drive 110 km/h up the hill where there are two lanes, then dropping to 80 km/h going down the hill on the other side where there is a single file *grrrr*

These made me laugh. I do that tailgating one too, gradually slow down when someone is riding my bumper until the steam is shooting out of their ears. Pricks.

You need a chauffeur Scara.

 

[scaramanga]

My Merc lights dip automatically when they sense something worth dipping for... Don't blame me, buy a car

Most large saloons do now I think.

You're right about bikes - mine don't dip for them either.