E-bikes could be the electric revolution cities need - <AUTHOR> https://www.routefifty.com/infrastructure/2019/12/e-bikes-cities-infrastructure-changes/162151/ <comment><USER2> I've been commuting using a class-1 (limited to 20 mph) e-bike around Santa Barbara, CA for the last year and it is a dream. Far better experience than I expected. It won't work in all cities but if you have reasonable bike lanes switching over from a car can have many benefits.

      1. Cost. Sure it's a high initial outlay (3k) but I'm not paying for insurance, gas, parking, and auto loan payments.
      2. Faster. I can hop on my bike, ride to my building at 20mph, and park in my office. No dealing with paid parking in the city and walking from the lot.
      3. Better for my physical and mental health. The daily exercise, fresh air, and feeling of connection to the bustle of the streets makes me happier.

If you have a short commute and have a safe route to work or errands I highly recommend giving it a try. Being able to pick up speed and keep up with traffic helps make it much safer and easier than a non-assist bike.

<comment><USER3> If you're commuting with cars, there is no sense in which the air you are breathing is "fresh"

<comment><USER2> You are right about that. I'm hoping eventually this will become popular enough that cities will open more dedicated bike paths separate from traffic. I've even heard rumors of our city closing and dedicating the main street downtown for bikes and pedestrians.

<comment><USER4> I would also add that Santa Barbara generally has some of the most delicious air i've experienced in a place that still has restaurants, stores, jobs, etc. It surely gets worse with proximity-to and volume-of car traffic but overall the air quality here vs. other places i've lived is noteworthy[0]. (0: except when there's fires.)

<comment><USER5> > except when there's fires

Which is a given in the winter :(

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I ebike 20 miles for work every day and live it.

I don't use my ebike for small errands because it's too easy to just rip expensive stuff off of it while locked up.

Also, the picture shows a rider with no helmet which is insane. I wear a motorcycle helmet and leathers. The speed limit for ebikes on roads in CA is 28, which is deadly with even a normal bike helmet.

Finally the article says that the new models are lighter because they've integrated battery in frames.

Totally false, the weight is not significantly lower and the in-frame battery means when your battery wears out in 3-10 years, you'll have to pay the maker to replace it if it's possible at all.

I highly recommend converting yourself using a bafang bbshd

<comment><USER7> Helmets are for sports. Ebikes have a ~50% market share in Belgium where approximately nobody wears a helmet ever. It's really not an issue.

<comment><USER8> Helmets are for any activity that has an impact risk to your head which includes cycling not just sports.

I live in Austria where few cyclists wear helmets yet my girlfriend who works in the local hospital sees patients coming in with serious head injuries on a daily basis from biking accidents that could have easily been prevented by wearing a helmet. Since then we both wear our helmets religiously.

You don't even have to get hit by a car. An unfortunate collision with a texting pedestrian, some dog on a leash jumping in front of you or another cyclist could be enough to smack your melon on the asphalt.

Just because you hear Europeans aren't wearing helmets doesn't mean it's the model to follow. I see wearing a helmet the same as wearing a seatbelt. Sure I never needed it since I never had an accident and it feels slightly uncomfortable but I know it could save my life.

It's up to you how much you value your head.

I highly doubt ebikes have a 50% share in Belgium. Do you have any references on that claim? Last year I visited Belgium's 4 major cities and almost every cyclist I saw was on some old half broken bicycle.

<comment><USER9> I think the biggest reason people don't see a bicycle helmet as necessary is from personal experience. I grew up on the 70's, long before kids helmets were in vogue. And I had several bicycle accidents.

Once I hit a curb, went over the handlebars, and skinned up my hands/knees and my wrists hurt pretty bad for a week or so after. Another time I wiped out at the bottom of a hill, tore a huge gash in the side of my knee. Then there was the time I chipped a tooth on a curb when trying to ride no-handed.

In all the falls I experienced, none of them involved a head injury that a helmet would have prevented (the chipped tooth incident could have been prevented by wearing a mouth guard, or by not being stupid). So based on that, it feels like helmets are useless.

Of course, in reality there is a huge difference between a kid riding a bicycle at single-digit MPH on neighborhood streets and back-woods trails, vs. going 15 - 20 MPH on roads or paved trails. At those speeds, it would probably be impossible for me to break my fall using just hands and feet, not to mention the possibility of getting distracted hand running into a street sign or tree branch. Logically I'm aware of all this, but still I have trouble with maintaining proper helmet discipline.

<comment><USER10> Your anecdotes of falling without hitting your head aren't very relevant. And if you had such an accident, you might not be capable of posting here.

<comment><USER11> [https://www.vox.com/2014/5/16/5720762/stop-forcing-people- to...](https://www.vox.com/2014/5/16/5720762/stop-forcing-people-to-wear-bike- helmets)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I've started using Uber's Jump bikes in London to avoid changing tubes (sometimes this is possible) and the experience is revelatory. Cycling on the road by e-bike is quieter, easier and more effortless compared to changing tubes at a busy junction. For my journey the time is also identical. The benefits of course include getting fresher air and exercise (e-bikes still require your own energy)

</comment><comment><USER13> I ride a motorcycle to work almost everyday (today's 47 degree ride was a bit brisk) and i have to say, drivers don't look out for bikes, and this is a major city (San Antonio).

My big issues with motorized bicycles are lanes to ride and rules of the road. I see people riding them on sidewalks, in streets, and in bike lanes. It is almost like people on motorcycles who ride in the break down lane or lane split (both of which are illegal in Texas).

We already had/have a HUGE problem with the escooters, people getting run down by kids on the sidewalks and riding them in traffic downtown.

I am for this 100%, but please put down infrastructure and some sort of rules of the road and enforce it.

<comment><USER14> > I see people riding them on sidewalks, in streets, and in bike lanes

Where are you suggesting that they ride?

<comment><USER15> Not on sidewalks. Pedestrians can and do change direction on a dime, and on a sidewalk, they always have the right of way.

Adding high-speed (i.e., greater than five mph) vehicles to that mix is a recipe for disaster.

<comment><USER16> There are some simple rules pedestrians can follow that make commuting easier for everyone. Move at a steady pace. Don't stop or change lanes without doing a shoulder check. Look both ways before crossing the flow of traffic.

This not only makes it easier to share the sidewalk with vehicles, it also improves the flow when there are a lot of foot commuters with different walking speeds.

I live in a city where pedestrians frequently share the sidewalk with both bicycles and electric mopeds. It works because people pay attention to what's going on around them and generally work together to try keep the traffic flowing smoothly.

<comment><USER17> That sort of rule of thumb works fine with an abled bodied sober and alert adult, but throw in someone with a disability, an elderly person, a toddler, and suddenly it makes far more sense to have the bike/moped on the road and just offer the gutter at the very least for a bike lane. A road bike can kill a toddler.

<comment><USER16> Usually the way it works here is if a rider sees a kid or older person then they will slow down to walking pace and only pass when it's safe. Pedestrians still have right of way, after all.

I am not against dedicated roads for bikes (although depending on the city's density, they can just end up as a second sidewalk), but I also think it shouldn't be treated as a prerequisite for developing a bike culture.

<comment><USER15> For many years I rode and was in favor of "bike culture". Now that I finally live in such a place, though, it's quite clear that this experiment is a failure. Bicyclists ride as they like, without respect to laws or even likely tragedies, and there is no countervailing force to reign them in. I cannot walk a block without observing a bicyclist breaking a law or risking someone's life (often their own).

If bicyclists want this mode of transportation to be taken seriously, they need to start self-policing in a major way. So far I'm seeing not even a hint of that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> As a life long cyclist (half of that time in big european cities, half on the countryside) I doubt that the muscle power to propell your bicycle forward is the issue that blocks a wide adoption of the vehicle.

As far as I can tell the (by far) biggest issue is the perceived risk involved which boils down to mostly two things: infrastructure and adoption.

Better infrastructure demands you not to be as hardcore to start riding the bike — more adoption makes cycling more normal and therefore safer (motorists and pedestrians start to think more about cyclists, which means less dangerous situations occur).

How to get people to cycle is also something that you can figure out by places where this worked (e.g. the Netherlands, Denmark etc.) instead of trying to create new products to sell.

<comment><USER19> I think you underestimate how lazy people are. Hell, I cycle every day to work and there are still plenty of times where I wish I could drive instead because I don't feel like bothering.

Ebikes will absolutely change that. Risk is a factor but not a hugely significant one (at least in Europe - possibly in America where you'd have to be a bit crazy to cycle on most roads).

The main barrier to ebikes being popular is their cost, and the perception of them being for lazy people.

<comment><USER18> Lazy people won't take an ebike unless _all_ the infrastructure favours cyclists and everything else is worse.

Ebikes are cool for older people tho: I know a guy who has one and he told me, since he has it he hardly uses anything else. His incentive was to be able to cycle normally, but take the electric aid when there is a steep hill or when he gets tired.

I think this is a much more realistic use case: people who really _want_ to cycle, but live in hilly areas, feel insecure about their energy managment or have long distances to cover.

The real lazy ones you descripe will take the subway, the train or the car if they can afford it. Because sitting in the wind and weather on a bicycle takes a little bit of motivation, regardless of electrification. Having the courage to drive through a big city plays a even bigger role, as I mentioned. This obviously depends on where you are — certain cities are a charm to cycle in, where others make you feel downright suicidal even as a live long cyclist.

<comment><USER19> > The real lazy ones you descripe will take the subway, the train or the car > if they can afford it.

In most cities there _is_ no subway or train. And cars have significant downsides in cities even if you can afford them - you have to deal with traffic and parking, and you have to take the car with you - no one-way journeys.

Why do you think electric scooters are popular?

<comment><USER18> > Why do you think electric scooters are popular?

Are they really? Where I live the numbers dropped as soon as the summer ended and where I saw at least ten people a day I didn't saw a single one in two weeks even when the weather was nice.

However the plural of annecdote is not data — do you happen to know any data on that?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> as-j I think this would be amazing for some cities. I've used a electric motorcycle/scooter to commute around San Francisco for 3 years now, and it made me fall in love with the city again. I've used Jump e-bikes to get around as well instead of Uber/Lyfts when I can. (I'd use them more, but their service area stop a mile from my house)

Sadly I think SF is a good special case where it works well most of the year:

1\. City is pretty compact. It's not exactly 7mix7mi, but not far off either.

2\. Weather is pretty good most of the year. (no ice/snow/freezing rain, etc) Yes you can cycle in fog. ;)

3\. Speed limit is 20mph in residential, and 30mph on busier roads, but congestion generally makes the impossible. Bike lanes are normally free.

4\. Bike lanes/paths/routes are expanding throughout the city. Including nicely protected routes.

5\. Parking and Gas are expensive here. I was just in Texas and filled up a car for < $20. I can't remember when I did that last.

Sure it's a dream, and I wish the article would come true here. Imagine how cool it would be to have tons of bikes on the road and so many less cars/ICE zooming around? Ok, maybe I'm just not a car person. ;)

There are hiccups though:

1\. Carrying groceries/etc. You can't get a shopping cart full and take it home.

2\. Kids...getting them to school. Cargo bikes here are an option, but they need to be a certain age and I do worry about safety. :/

3\. It does rain...and ridding in the rain sucks. Most parts of the US get it so much worse though, it feels hard to complain.

4\. Commuting via bike to work does take time/effort. Carrying a change of clothes, showering, etc, etc.

<comment><USER20> Cities need to remove car lanes and add protected bike lanes to really increase adoption. Most parents would not let their kids ride on the road with cars. The car always wins and cars are very dangerous. As far as the schools-- they used to be smaller and more local. Now schools always seem to be built on the periphery of a town, take up a massive amount of space and are pretty much designed only for cars/busses. Cars cause cities to be built in ways that are only car-friendly. Hopefully e-bikes provide a revolution in that regard to make other forms of transit equally viable.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> The main reason I prefer renting e-bikes instead of using my own bike isn't the electric power. It's the convenience and not having to worry about my bike getting stolen. If I only want to bike one way and not round trip, no worries.

If I was to own an e-bike, I would want to not have to worry about it getting stolen. Everything would have to be like e-bikes you rent. All the parts would need to be integrated and not easily removable (lights, seat, etc). I don't want to waste 5 minutes locking/unlocking my bike every time I want to stop somewhere and have to carry around my lights. I would also want GPS so I can track my bike if it gets stolen. Until I have I bike like that, I will continue to buy the cheapest crappiest bikes I can find or rent bikes because people suck.

<comment><USER22> My non-e-bike has bolts in place of quick releases for wheels and saddle and a bolted-on dynamo-powered headlight. That essentially eliminates component theft. It takes about 20 seconds to use my u-lock to attach to a convenient pole or bike rack.

It's really quite simple to make your bike a less attractive target for theft.

<comment><USER23> One of my bikes is a Brompton mainly for theft reasons.

As a alternative to using a bike lock I just fold it up and bring it with me.

It's still a heavy lump to carry any distance but it fits under a desk just great.

(Amusingly they now make an ebike Brompton too).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Whenever I go looking online at e-bikes, I'm always dismayed by what seems like artificially inflated pricing. It's difficult to believe that the engineering and manufacturing of most of these bikes justifies their 100+% premium over standard bikes.

There are some very clever e-bikes, and perhaps their prices are reasonable. But there are a lot of bikes which are standard models with an added Bosch motor on the crank and a battery clipped to the frame.

<comment><USER25> Both the US and EU has put heavy tariffs on Chinese made ebikes. That has caused domestic manufacturers to increase their prices too.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> For the past six months I've been driving my car 13 miles on the motorway to the city park-and-ride, then taking my folding e-bike out of the boot and cycling the last couple of miles to work.

I use the building's freight lift and keep the cycle behind my desk. Work visitors INSIST on touching the handlebars whilst talking to me.

I wear hi-viz (ISO 20471 Class III) hardshell jacket/softshell jacket and cycle helmet. I have daylight blinkers at front and back of cycle. Also, Bring-Bring bell.

I get "Nice Bike" on the way in, and on the way out. Car appears to be moping.

</comment><comment><USER27> I think e-bikes will be very successful, but you have to get the product into the people's hands. It's hard to know what an e-bike is like until you try it. They are so fun, and getting fresh air will almost certainly make you more happy.

But trying to convince people of that without putting them on an e-bike is kind of hard.

<comment><USER28> Agreed, especially given the 2-4K you have to plonk down on some of these things. They sound great, but I haven't yet used them. The money thing is a barrier, and I'm a one-car family looking for options.

For that kind of money, you're buying a pretty solid scooter or a cheap car. Nevermind if you want a cargo bike or Bakfiets. Having the infrastructure / city planning to make this worthwhile is definitely an important second part. I'm not going to park a $4K bike just anywhere.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> I've ridden 5,000 miles on my ebike in two years. The e assist flattens hills and shrinks the city. I can use my bike to get anywhere in Seattle in reasonable time. I regularly beat the bus and I've tied with ride shares more than once.

</comment><comment><USER30> If you are a road cyclist, the plus of getting an ebike is that you can now do rides where your SO/friend rides your ebike and you ride your regular bike. This has enabled me to do rides with my wife (who is a bit shorter but fits on the ebike) where normally the difference in pace would be... painful.

</comment><comment><USER31> Seems pie in the sky to get adoption of e-bikes in places like my home state of Texas. Our city has e-bikes for rent all along the city biking system, very cheap too!

These bikes are available for rent nearly all of the time, except for when we close down a few streets for the spring fair. So, adoption isn't going to happen very fast in places where there is no appetite. We have cheap gas here and A/C in our cars.

<comment><USER32> You're right that A/C and heat is a big factor; forget being able to shower there, no one likes exercising in one hundred ten-degree heat. Distance is a problem too, though: in cities lots of people commute 40+ miles to work each way, which isn't really feasible by bike. Thinking about when I got started working as hourly, I would never have spent two or three times the time because that would have a serious opportunity cost, so probably never an option for hourly workers.

<comment><USER22> e-bikes help substantially with heat. Less effort for the same speed means more wind and less sweating.

No one is proposing e-bikes for 40+ mile commutes. That can only be replaced by commuter rail and in-fill housing.

Half of all car trips are less than 15 miles and a lot of those could be replaced with e-bikes.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> No thank you. In my 40 years of driving I've been in two accidents. Both times I was rear-ended while waiting to make a lefthand turn. Both times were major inconveniences that made me late for work and cost me time and money to resolve but no one was injured in the slightest.

Had I been on a e-bike/scooter/moped I would have certainly been badly injured and possibly killed.

Give me 3000 lbs of steel, multiple crumple zones, smart 3 point seatbelts, anti-lock brakes, traction control, active head restraints, forward-collision warning, automatic emergency braking, blind-spot warning and 23 airbags if I am traveling over 20mph. Especially if I've got family in the car.

<comment><USER10> I do not sit in the middle of the road waiting to make a left turn on a bike. That just seems way too dangerous. Instead I ride through the intersection to the right side of the cross street, and wait to go straight through after the light changes.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> You could also use a regular bike by moving closer to work. I've been biking for nearly 9 years to work, church, dentist, and the dr's office. They are all within a 3 mile radius. It's highly addictive, and a great form of exercise.

It's my understanding that the toxins produced from mining the minerals for batteries, and recycling them isn't great for the environment.

I'm still interested in an e-bike though, or adding a motor to a bike for the days where everyone else's pollution causes an inversion, and I can't breathe too well.

</comment><comment><USER35> I use a Solowheel unicycle. It is perfect for me to run my errands around my neighboorhood but wouldn't use it to commute to work. The only problem so far is that they are rather on the heavy side otherwise i'd commute between public transportation and the final destination. They seem hard to ride but once you spend 10 hours on one it becomes second nature, almost easier than walking..

<comment><USER36> Have you ever tried a mini segway? That's what I use, and I'm wondering how the Solowheel compares.

<comment><USER35> The solowheel is very portable and flexible in terms of maneuvrability, though a bit heavy to carry for long distances. Because it only has one wheel you can get better angles and turn faster. It is very fun to ride and a light workout. The segway I haven't tried one but I'll most likely enjoy it. I'll try one when I get the chance.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> I use an e-scooter rather than e-bike because 1) it's more compact 2) it's relatively cheaper 3) I only go short distances 4) I'm a lazy s.o.b.

Some people will need to sit while riding. Some people need to haul stuff. Some people may need to travel farther. Some people may prefer having weather- shielding. Future cities should allow for a range of micromobility options, not just one thing.

<comment> ben-schaaf I wanted to make that same choice for the same reasons, but they turned out to be illegal to ride in public where I live (Sydney). Instead I bought an e-bike and it was probably the best purchase I've ever made.

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> Hmm. For my part, as a frequent bicycle rider, I really hate e-bikes. The reason is that it feels like I have much, much less control over speed.

Especially in situations where there's a lot of traffic or when for safety purposes one needs to ride slowly (e.g., in a shared-use space where there are also pedestrians around, like a college campus or something), being able to bike _slowly_ is really nice.

On a real bike, I can bike slowly just by gearing down and pedaling very slowly. But on an e-bike, any pedaling at all makes it zip forward. I find that, frankly, terrifying, like I'm about to plow into cars or objects all the time, or I'm just riding the brakes.

<comment><USER39> I think you haven't used a good ebike. I have a ebike with the shimano steps motor. I've been riding it almost a year commuting, and it's very sublte and natural the way it adds power to my pedaling. There is a torque sensor and pedal speed sensor that makes all this happen.

I switch to my steel frame street/mountain bike without power assist and it just feels like I'm riding a heavier bike (which it isn't)

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> For those who have e-bikes, what are your thoughts on riding them without the motor assistance? Is it heavy and difficult? Do they have battery regeneration from breaking?

I've been on the fence about getting one, and normally ride a crappy hybrid bike to and from work every day, which an e-bike would be useful for. But I also do 40+ mile trips on weekends and am afraid that if the battery dies, I'll be lugging a heavy bike around and exerting extra effort compared to a bike without a battery.

<comment><USER41> It's basically impossible. Unpowered hub motors drag a lot. Unpowered mid- drives are better because they have clutches or freewheels, but you're still pedaling a fifty-pound bike. Some ebikes do have regeneration triggered by brake lever switches but it's pretty rare. Others have a regeneration mode switch. Most just don't bother.

What you should understand about these bikes is the power delivered by the motor, and the power needed to recharge batteries in a useful time frame, greatly exceeds the continuous power a human would normally exert on the pedals.

<comment><USER42> Not sure I agree with that. It really depends on both the rider and bike. You can get a lighter weight (obviously with less range/power) mid-drive e-bike that is still manageable unpowered if you're not a small rider. It certainly isn't fun, but I've done it just fine on mostly-level ground with a sub-40lb bike.

Note that I have fond memories of pedalling girls around on the back of my unassisted bike back in the day, so I might not be an average rider.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> Just wanted to point out the "GeoOrbital" wheel. It's an all-in-one battery- motor-wheel that can replace the front wheel of most conventional bikes in a minute or two. Presto! New eBike.

[https://www.geoo.com/](https://www.geoo.com/)

(Hmm, I can't reach their site at the moment.)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeoOrbital](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeoOrbital)

<comment><USER44> The Copenhagen Wheel [https://www.superpedestrian.com/en/copenhagenwheel](https://www.superpedestrian.com/en/copenhagenwheel) does the same with the backwheel and the website currently works. I saw a guy with it in SF at a signal and asked him how he liked it and he said "I love it!" so there's a random anecdote.

<comment><USER43> Ah, that's a beautiful, elegant design.

The geoorbital comes off in a jiffy and you can take it with you (e.g. when you have to lock you bike outside) but the Copenhagen is so stylish.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> Also interesting alternatives that start to pop up are electric personal transportation vehicles like EUC (electric unicycle), e-scooters and similar.

I'm personally using EUC to work in food delivery and I commute to and from area of work. I can make 130km a day with peak speed of 25mph. This is my between-programming-jobs endeavour. I also commuted 10miles one way to my office and it allowed me to skip traffic jams.

</comment><comment><USER17> As a former bike commuter, the elephant in the room is safety and security. I put up with the abysmal bike lane network in LA, but my bike, along with everyone else's parked in the rack, was stolen from the gated and surveilled garage in my building. LAPD filed a report and that was that.

Even when I had my bike, I would never lock it out of sight. Cable lock or $200 U lock, they all fail.

</comment><comment><USER46> Not really. You still have the same issues normal bikes have; all ebikes do is give power assist and more or less fill the same niche a gas or electric moped does, for the same price as a gas or electric moped.

You still have no real cargo capacity, you can't transport passengers, you are exposed to the elements, and more. While the power assist is of considerable benefit, it puts the price of the bike up immensely; many are the prices of a used motorcycle or scooter.

I feel its much better to get a 4 cycle scooter or motorcycle for that; if i'm spending 3k plus on a bike, getting one that can actually do traffic or be on roads is a plus. Yes there is licensing, but ebikes will fall under your states moped laws anyways and may require having an actual drivers license instead of a motorcycle endorsement.

</comment><comment><USER47> A while ago, I was seriously considering buying a bike (A regular one, 110 CC). I didn't because there's no way in hell my partner will let me ride it for the main purpose that I wanted to buy it for, take our 6 yo to school (as I wanted to buy it mainly for that, as riding a bike is much faster in the city where I live, Buenos Aires).

I just went to the site where I do all my purchases, and that same bike is at the same price tag as an ebike of medium quality.

I reckon this country is a little particular when it comes to economics, but buying an ebike is far from cheap around here. Until that changes, the bulk of people will use just regular means of transport in this country.

Besides that, I do think that electric vehicles are the best way to move around for distances in the low miles.

<comment><USER48> How about cargo bikes, also sometimes called Christiania bikes: [https://www.christianiabikes.com/uk/category/models/](https://www.christianiabikes.com/uk/category/models/) ? I've seen people transport kids in them, their lower center of gravity make it safer for the kids.

They even have e-models..

</comment></comment><comment><USER49> Truly written by a non-disabled twentysomething in Southern California who gets his groceries by delivery service.

Don't get me wrong, I bike every day there's no ice on the streets and really enjoy driving those Uber e-bikes too, but seriously: any mobilty solution that's aimed as a "revolution" can't go around people with disabilities, heavy rain, northern winters, multiple kids, 10km+ commuters, elderly people and transportation of more than 10kg of cargo.

If you're coming with cargo bicycles, you haven't tried parking one in an "already-convinced" city, also go read the above sentence again.

<comment><USER50> I don't like this line of thinking. The majority of the population (including children) is not disabled and is capable of riding an electric assisted bike - no one is proposing disabled people _must_ also do the same.

It feels like a "gotcha". "Aha! because _I_ cannot do this, no one can!"

</comment></comment><comment><USER51> I am all for E-Bikes, they put the relatively unused bike lanes to good use from what I see: Awesome stuff.

I do suggest some bike handling skills and helmet for anyone who tries though: You're still on a bike fully exposed to the world. Only now you're doing 25mph down a trail beset by jaywalking peds and lane jumping cars.

Do some high speed stops / slick road training - learn how to handle bad situations. Ride safe and wave at us on manpowered models :)

</comment><comment><USER52> Still concerned about getting clipped by a careless driver of a 5000lb. machine. It's unfortunate.

</comment><comment><USER53> Thinking of converting an old trek. Anyone have thoughts on front / rear wheel drive?

<comment><USER54> the rear frame is much stronger than the front fork so a rear wheel drive is what i'd recommend unless you have a sturdy steel fork.

come join our discussion at the ebike discord [https://discord.gg/6fRvwSx](https://discord.gg/6fRvwSx)

<comment><USER55> Motor forces are entirely insignificant over what wheels, fork and frame experience when you are hard braking (primarily, of course, through the front brake).

No, the bigger issue with front drive is that the front wheel has less weight over it (so significantly less traction) and that should it ever lose traction, you are more or less guaranteed to crash while the rear wheel slipping is perfectly recoverable. This is exacerbated since a human motor knows not to turn the power on going through a turn in the wet, but e-bike motors don't bring any such intelligence.

<comment><USER54> a direct drive motor weighs 8-10kg so hanging that off the front of the fork will increase all forces, not just the ones by the motor.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER56> The jump bikes in Providence Rhode Island have gotten completely trashed. Gangs of criminals were dismantling them, selling parts, using them in crimes, chucking them in the river, etc.

</comment><comment><USER57> In The Netherlands which is the biking Mecca of the world, last year more than 400,000 e-bikes were sold. It helps that the cities hundreds of years ago were designed for horses and not for cars. Notably a lot of elderly use e-bikes which not only keeps them fit but notably increases the range that they travel.

</comment><comment><USER58> The actual title is a little bit different on the site:

"Here Come the Electrics. Could E-Bikes Be the Electric Revolution Cities Need?"

You can also apply Betteridge's Law of Headlines to the real one easier :-)

</comment><comment><USER59> Hmm. What about a regular bike which one moves with muscle power? Had a nice ~85 km afternoon loop today. =)

<comment><USER60> You're talking to people who sit in front of computers most of the day, lol

<comment><USER7> I have a suspicion that our industry harbors an above-average number of bicyclists.

<comment><USER60> I agree. I was just joking. I've been enjoying biking more the past year especially. There's some really great bikes these days.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER61> Why are ebikes a revolution while mopeds have been around for decades? It seems like they fill the same niche.

<comment><USER7> You need a special license for mopeds in many jurisdictions, they weigh 100+ pounds, double what an e-bike weighs, and because of the fuel system you can't really just carry it up the stairs and leave it in your kitchen at night.

<comment><USER62> Dang, they are known are liquor cycles where I am from... on account of people with DUI charges being able to use them still.

Agreed on the second point.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER63> This is a fantasy in the US, change my view.

We have waaaay too many overweight/obese people. And, as other comments point out, there would have to be a sacrifice in terms of automobiles for this to truly work. I find it highly doubtful that Americans would be willing to make that trade. Also, I think that if it came up there would be significant push back from groups you wouldn't expect, like the disabled or union trade workers. This "bicycles will fill the gap" is a fantasy of Boujie urbanites and the aristocracy. We talk about how the middle/lower class feels a sense of generational wealth loss, a major push to move people to bicycles from cars would really drive(no pun intended) that message home.

And this is coming from someone who enjoys taking a bike instead of driving.

<comment><USER64> You've got this entirely backwards. E-Bikes are an enabling factor for overweight people to start using bikes more. I know because I am one, my BMI is 33 and it's one of the main driving factors behind my decision to acquire an e-bike in 2018. (Another driving factor is the fact that my commute home involves an elevation gain of ~550ft, which would be tough even if I was not obese. I had been a bike commuter when I lived in the Bay Area but after moving to Portland I had a longer commute with more hills and I couldn't make it work with my old bike.)

The biggest barriers to people in the US riding bikes more are having enough safe bicycling infrastructure to make trips feasible without having to go too far out of their way for a safe trip and having secure parking at their destination. These are solvable problems if we have the will to do so.

I admit I'm lucky, I live in Portland where we have a pretty good greenway network -- I encounter very few cars on my commute -- and I work at Oregon Health & Science University, so I get to park my bike at the largest bicycle parking lot in North America before I hop on the Portland Aerial Tram for the last leg of my commute. Plus I get a commute incentive of $1.50 every day I ride. OHSU does have unique incentives to limit employee driving -- the city limits how much employee parking we have, so spots are limited. Daily parking passes are expensive and sell out quickly; you can expect to wait at least seven years for a permanent parking pass. The bus takes 20-40 minutes longer than my bike ride depending on transfer connection timing. The e-bike is my best commute option, hands down. Even in the rain, it's far more enjoyable.

I'm actually on my second e-bike; my first one was my old bike converted with a GeoOrbital Wheel. That was great until it started malfunctioning, and it was the second time I sent it back to the company for service that I decided to invest in a new e-bike with a larger battery and more range. Now I not only commute by bike, I've acquired a cheap cargo trailer so I can do my grocery shopping, I ride it to therapy appointments, and I even rode it to a Trail Blazers game once (we have a set of secure BikeLink lockers at the Rose Quarter Transit Center, which I first used in the Bay Area and something Portland needs more of). Portland's climate means I can ride nearly year- round; I won't ride when the streets are icy but that's pretty rare around here.

I am really, really close to being car-free and my e-bike is the reason why. I recommend everyone try riding one at least once.

<comment><USER63> Nice! I just don't think you fully appreciate how privileged your position is. Giving up car ownership is extremely privileged. You have a good, salaried job, with I'm assuming flexible and encouraging employers. You have enough money for therapy and urban rent (and Blazers tickets!) and enough free time to bike everywhere, and I'm guessing decent health insurance to boot. You also are completely devoid of responsibilities for others. No kids to take to soccer games, no family members of friends in the hospital or who need taking care of. You can afford to fly/hire a driver to travel. I'd venture a guess that most Americans aren't in a position like this. It's a lot easier to physically exert yourself to get to work when most of your needs are met. You most likely have an okay boss and at least somewhat enjoyable work. For a lot of people their commute is one of their only times of respite, and it seems they like to drive a car in comfort during that time, it's why Americans spend so much money on luxury cars (and as a form conspicuous consumption). People of means are quick to forget how important 10 minutes can be when you're poor and that a car serves as a backup place to sleep and store your effects. It's not just a dangerous status symbol for everyone.

But back to my main point. I just don't see Americans as a whole adopting bicycles. Able bodied people will routinely wait in line in for minutes in parking lots to park 100' closer and wait in line(also for minutes) for the elevator to go up three floors. Not everyone is overweight/obese because they are unmotivated, you obviously aren't, but I would wager based on my experiences that most Americans aren't motivated(by much beside sloth), and I don't see how an elected body is going to change our infrastructure enough to motivate people. AARP is a big lobby, and have 0 interest in cedeing roads or sidewalks to bicyclist.

<comment><USER64> While I agree that I am privileged, I disagree that biking, particularly to work, is. The data bears this out: [https://www.vox.com/2014/7/9/5883823/its- not-just-hipsters-o...](https://www.vox.com/2014/7/9/5883823/its-not-just- hipsters-on-bikes-cycling-is-most-popular-for-poor-people)

Some of your arguments ring true for traditional bikes but I think they are less true for e-bikes. They're faster, so you don't need enough free time to bike everywhere, you need 20 minutes instead of 15, and it's often much easier to find parking. It's a lot easier to physically exert yourself to get to work when the bike reduces the amount of exertion. And a bike ride provides just as much, if not more, respite than driving a car -- you're not frustrated stuck in traffic and you get a nice endorphin rush.

<comment><USER63> I guess what i mean to say is that bicycling to work _and enjoying it_ is privileged. Alternatively, bicycling to work by choice rather than necessity is privileged. I think the data supports that.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> I truly believe e-bikes will be the future of transportation. What's holding them back is dumb legislation. In EU, they are limited to 25 km/h top speed and 250 W motors, which is not enough for everybody. Legislators think that if they are allowed to become more powerful then more people will die in accidents. True, but cars kill even more people so why don't we ban them?

For fit people in good weather, 250 W is plenty enough. But not for overweight people or people with movement disabilities. The energy required for movement is proportional to the weight, so it makes a ton of difference if the rider weights 100 kg or only 70 kg. To ride in rain or snow you need sturdier tires which means that the frame and motor needs to be heavier further contributing to the weight.

This issue is solvable but legislation is way behind. If, or when, e-bikes running at 30 - 35 km/h with 750 W motors becomes street-legal, they would become usable by almost anyone. You'd easily do a 15 km commute without breaking a sweat. I know because I've owned a bike like that which I used to ride in the winter. I sold it and bought a regular bike because I realized that I got zero exercise from it. The e-bike was more like a moped than a bike.

<comment><USER65> So, the future of transportation is an e-bike with more power so it can have higher top speeds, carry larger loads, and operate more safely in adverse weather conditions.

Of course, with higher top speeds you will probably want a windshield to protect the driver from bugs, debris, or precipitation. Hard to concentrate when you are getting hit in the face with stuff at 45 kph.

And really once the windshield is there, you should put a roof on too to provide better protection from the elements.

And a passenger seat or two. Maybe some storage. Maybe another wheel (or two) for better stability.

And then you have an e-car.

<comment><USER25> I know you are trolling, but what you are describing is an electric velomobile. Right now, they are too niche for mass production, but they are coming too. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CURGm- BcaaM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CURGm-BcaaM)</comment></comment></comment>


23andMe Wins FDA Approval for First Genetic Test Kit - <AUTHOR> http://www.biospace.com/News/23andme-wins-fda-approval-for-first-genetic-test/365424/source=TopBreaking?intcid=homepage-seekernewssection-tabtopbreakingnews <comment><USER2> Can a mod replace this with a less spammy URL like [http://arstechnica.com/science/2015/02/fda-allows-23andme- to...](http://arstechnica.com/science/2015/02/fda-allows-23andme-to-use-its- genetic-kits-to-test-for-bloom-syndrome/) or [http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewherper/2015/02/20/what-23...](http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewherper/2015/02/20/what-23andmes- fda-approval-means-for-the-future-of-genomics/) or whatever?</comment>


Profileroid - App to make Androids Smarter - <AUTHOR> https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.project.FYP.Profileroid <comment><AUTHOR> I'd love some feedback on my app from this knowledgeable community!</comment>


Face Masks May Be the Key Determinant of the Covid-19 Curve, Study Suggests - <AUTHOR> https://www.forbes.com/sites/alicegwalton/2020/06/13/face-masks-may-be-the-key-determinant-of-the-covid-19-curve-study-suggests/#7871dfae6497 <comment><USER2> Nobody wears a mask in Norway.

<comment><USER3> Everyone is pollen allergic in Tokyo btw.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Remember when the CDC recommended against mask-wearing? I think they have blood on their hands.

</comment><comment><USER4> This is not true. A two second search on duckduckgo had a dozen doctors explaining to me why this was wrong. Even Fauci himself says it. CDC also said it. Even places with no lockdown did better than Michigan and New York. No masks did not make the difference.</comment>


A look back at Willow Garage - <AUTHOR> http://www.businessinsider.com/a-look-back-at-willow-garage-2016-2 <comment><USER2> I am using one of Willow Garage's open source projects for my startup called Point Cloud Library. It seemed like after the acquisition the project lost some steam but I think the community stepped up and is still maintaining although the Robot Operating System has been separated from the rest of the library. There is a python interface for PCL that I might try to start again or contribute.

</comment><comment><USER3> Interesting; I got the impression at the time that all the engineers became employees at Suitable selling the same thing under a different name. Given that some of the founders aren't part of that new company, I assume there's something at play beyond "you're free now!"

</comment><comment><USER4> I use OpenCV for a lot of my projects and Willow did a lot of work on that. Always wondered what the backstory was when they shutdown.</comment>


Hacking a ThinkGeek My First Bacon with a PIR - <AUTHOR> http://blog.incidentgtar.com/hack-plush-talking-bacon-toy/

<comment><USER2> pretty cool!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks!

That bad boy has been sitting in our office for a few months now and it never gets old hearing it every time someone goes to the bathroom or something =)</comment></comment>


Rainwater Harvesting to Replenish Underground Water in Rajasthan, India - <AUTHOR> http://www.ecotippingpoints.org/our-stories/indepth/india-rajasthan-rainwater-harvest-restoration-groundwater-johad.html

<comment><USER2> Chennai in India is considered another success story for rainwater harvesting. It should be noted that there was much whining and hand-wringing about the costs of setting this up. But the situation got kinda bad about a decade ago, and there was an ordinance from the state government that every building must have the requisite facilities. The situation turned around within a few years, and the water situation is much much better now.

Here are a few (semi-random) articles about that:

1\. [http://www.thealternative.in/society/i-started-to-do-rwh- in-...](http://www.thealternative.in/society/i-started-to-do-rwh-in-chennai- for-selfish-reasons-sekhar-raghavan/)

2\. [http://www.auick.org/database/apc/apc044/apc04403.html](http://www.auick.org/database/apc/apc044/apc04403.html)

3\. [http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/tamil-nadus-water- revolution-...](http://www.ndtv.com/india-news/tamil-nadus-water- revolution-402085)

</comment><comment><USER3> Interesting topic. The Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Australia has been looking into the usage of aquifers for water storage in urban areas for some time now (the most recent project was Managed aquifer recharge and storm water [http://www.csiro.au/en/Research/LWF/Areas/Resilient- cities/U...](http://www.csiro.au/en/Research/LWF/Areas/Resilient-cities/Urban- water/MARSUO) from 2010 to 2014, though I remember reading reports about some research around 15 years ago).

I think it is particularly interesting that their research is focused on urban areas, where all the concrete and bitumen results in huge runoff. This creates risk of flash flooding, wastes a useful resource and even causes problems for marine life. So if it can be stored underground in natural aquifers and utilised locally that'd be quite an improvement. Apparently the cost of treating storm water for drinking is similar to treatment of water from reservoirs. No doubt there'd be a pretty big saving infrastructure needed for distributing water over long distances as well.

</comment><comment><USER4> A stunning environmental victory, if true. And in case the bureaucratic hand in India sounds heavy, it is probably worse here in the Land of the Free: [http://www.ncsl.org/research/environment-and-natural- resourc...](http://www.ncsl.org/research/environment-and-natural- resources/rainwater-harvesting.aspx)

</comment><comment><USER5> Apparently, that practice is still banned in some US states and counted as 'water theft'.

<comment><USER6> Do u mean that one cannot store rainwater at all in US (some states)? Did not know that.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> It's great to see this kind of grass roots triumph. Hopefully, this will prevent a water monopoly ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydraulic_empire](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydraulic_empire)).</comment>


Newsweek Defends Birtherism V2 - <AUTHOR> https://www.newsweek.com/editors-note-eastmans-newsweek-column-has-nothing-do-racist-birtherism-1524800 <comment><AUTHOR> Newsweek apologizes for op-ed that questioned Kamala Harris' citizenship [https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/aug/15/newsweek- kam...](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/aug/15/newsweek-kamala- harris-citizenship-apology)

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Newsweek doubles down on its op-ed questioning Kamala Harris's entitlement to hold office by arguing the meaning of Article II, Section 1 of the constitution.

<comment><USER2> Don't editorialize titles.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you for sharing your opinion about my opinion about Newsweek's opinion about its own opinion, wgib.

I hear you saying that titles should be opinion free.

How about:

Newsweek features 'somewhat arcane legal debate about the precise meaning of the phrase "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" in the Citizenship Clause of the 14th Amendment' which 'Has Nothing to Do With Racist Birtherism'?

<comment><USER2> Like this is not my rule--it is in the guidelines:

 _Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don 't editorialize._

<comment><AUTHOR> OK, thanks.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


New version of StrongLoop's Process Manager for Node with docker and nginx support - <AUTHOR> https://strongloop.com/strongblog/node-js-process-manager-production-docker/

<comment><USER2> I use forever but it doesn't have clustering... Will check this out.

</comment><comment><USER3> This seems to be the most advanced runtime for Node.js in Production

</comment><comment><USER4> Ready for prime time and continuous improvements coming soon.

</comment><comment><USER5> How does this compare to Forever?

<comment><USER6> check it out - [http://strong-pm.io/compare/](http://strong-pm.io/compare/)</comment></comment>


Voice recognition: Which smartphone is the best listener? - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-15348792

<comment><USER2> Interesting. I would have expected the android phone to perform better.

I would question whether or not he had already talked to Siri before the test, as such prior experience is likely to make the whole test meaningless.

<comment><USER3> I find the test a bit unreliable as well. Only someone well trained in giving speeches would read something twice with the exact same tone, diction and pace.

If he were to record the paragraph and play it over speakers or use that same recording twice, then we could see which system is more accurate.

<comment><USER4> They should also include a human transcription as comparison. Even when people talk to each other, often some sentences need to be repeated before they are understood.</comment></comment></comment>


The Plight of the Introvert [A Rant] - <AUTHOR> http://blog.edwardamsden.com/2012/03/plight-of-introvert-rant.html <comment><USER2> Introversion and extroversion always seem to have hazy definitions, but one I like better than the popular social model of how people are "energized" is this:

Rather than extroversion being about whether a person is socially "energized" by groups or not, it's really about how much stimulus a person can accept before their brain starts feeling saturated. IE, it's less about the social aspect and more about being able to process stimuli in general. It's just that social gatherings tend to provide a lot more stimuli (people are complicated!)

In this model, an introverted person is simply a person that becomes saturated much more easily; and the reason they dislike crowds and other large gatherings is just because the amount of possible inputs are tremendous and need to be kept track of. An extroverted person might feel more comfortable in these situations, either because they can process more stimuli, or more likely in my opinion, because they're less sensitive to those stimuli. (I don't think it's a coincidence that a lot of the introverted people I know tend to pick up on subtle social cues a lot more readily than extroverts, and also tend to emit more subtle cues).

As a person that's probably moderately introverted, thinking of it in terms of "saturation" feels more natural to me. If I'm in a large group I don't so much feel a loss of energy (unless I'm trying hard to be extra friendly); if anything, when I reach a saturation point I'm at a higher energy level, I'm just sort of "full".

I wish I could remember where I first read about this way of thinking about it though and give some sources.

<comment><USER3> I suspect you read about it while reading some MBTI-related stuff. INTP?

<comment><USER2> Haha yep, INTP exactly. Certainly sounds likely, I do have some books on that stuff.

<comment><USER4> I'd be interested to see how many INTPs are HN readers. I, for one, am one.

<comment><USER5> Someone does a poll every once and a while. Here are two:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=946249> (858 days ago)

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1675197> (562 days ago)

<comment><USER6> Thanks for those links. The analysis on the older one is really interesting Most significantly, 76% of HNers were 'NT' types, compared to 11% in the general population.

Since HN has grown quite a bit in the last few years, I'd be interested to see if we've drifted closer to the 'norm' or if we're still dominantly NT Rationals.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I think this classification of introvert/extrovert personality is a little self-fulfilling.

See, I have always believed myself to be introvert, despite what people tell me. I find all these different ways to classify someone as introvert, find one or more that fits me, and I say "see, I'm introvert!"

Until one day, I just randomly started to think the behavior of my ex (cough..), who is considered to be extrovert by everyone, including herself. And guess what, she also gets tired of groups at times, and she also wants quiet time at home, or any other classification of introvert I've read.

What I now believe is that, introversion/extroversion is a state of mind, rather than personality. Most people are both introvert and extrovert, only at different times. Some may be extrovert more often, others introvert more often.

I have no scientific proof of this, but it seems to fit with what I observed of myself and people around me.

<comment><USER8> I think you have taken a couple of assumptions and drawn the wrong conclusions.

First, introversion/extroversion describes a characteristic of how you generally prefer to be 'energised' (introvert: on your own; extrovert: around other people). Whilst the description is a binary one, the characterisation of someone is not. If you ever do a Myers-Briggs test, the result you get back will often place you on a sliding scale of introversion-extroversion - when I did the test I was on the border of the two (slight leaning towards introversion).

So simply because your ex decided to have a quiet night in, doesn't suddenly means she's an introvert. Unless one is an extreme introvert or extrovert, you won't be solely displaying the one type of behaviour at all times.

Second, the 'state of mind' conclusion seems to be a bit of a leap of logic :) Just because someone exhibits the occasional different behaviour doesn't mean it's 'all in the head'. Would you argue that cancer suffer who have good and bad days with their pain mean that their pain is caused by a 'state of mind' rather than an actual illness?

Introversion/extroversion is not something you can 'think positive' your way out. This is exactly the complaint of introverts who are tired of people who think that 'if they just made more effort they wouldn't be so anti-social'!

<comment><USER9> I have trouble with this "energized" word. I don't know what it means.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I think this is complete nonsense. I mean all those projections of what "normal people" supposedly think about you if you don't enjoy partying in large groups all the time.

First of all, nobody really cares about you (or anybody else), so nobody will worry about you being antisocial or not. Secondly it simply isn't true that most people want to party in large groups all the time.

You are setting yourself up for failure with your beliefs.

<comment><USER11> Yeah I agree, I think what he's done is redefined introvert around his own very specific and likely over-thought preferences.

What does ideal group size have to do with introversion anyway?

<comment><USER12> Actually I resonated with what he said a lot. I'm a loner but I crave interaction.. but not interaction in large groups, and I don't like talking about trivial topics most of the time. My ideal interaction is with 1-2 others.

<comment><USER10> I'm not even sure what the "interaction in large groups" is supposed to be? Even on a party, usually you only talk to 1 to 3 people at a time. If you don't like floating around the party like a butterfly, just find a comfy couch somewhere.

I don't understand why the author and it's supporter are so bent on drawing a black and white picture of other people, like either they enjoy large groups or single interactions? What if most people "enjoy" both - larger groups are usually just a tool for finding small groups to interact with.

<comment><USER12> Talking to people in a party, vs really being one-on-one with them is different for me. When you're in a party, I feel you have the pressure to talk about "fun", casual topics vs deep discussion. Simply because of the context of the situation.

<comment><USER11> There are better parties out there my friend.

<comment><USER12> I am not blaming the party, my friend.

<comment><USER11> I am.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I appreciate how this post doesn't posit that introverts "don't want to be around people", like many articles and essays do. I'm an introvert and love being around people; just not _all_ people _all_ the time. It's an important distinction.

However, something in this article that I pick up, and I see it in other writings, is that introverts like to think while extroverts don't.

Just as extroversion is dressed up in socially-positive words like "outgoing", "friendly", "life of the party", etc., it seems like more and more introversion-related articles are using equally seductive and over-the-top words like "deep", "intellectual", "pensive", and more. Just pointing out that a lot of extroverts aren't the former words, and a lot of introverts aren't the latter words.

I just seem to notice this in articles about intro/extroversion. People keep using words and terms to make it seem like there's a huge difference in intellect, etc. between the two groups. I don't think that's true.

<comment><USER14> IIRC there was some evidence of this found in research -- cited in "59 Seconds: Think a Little, Change a Lot". IIRC the study was focused on characteristics of 'successful' people where 'success' was defined in terms of societal achievements (e.g. monetary success, status). Ultimately, the gist was that, among other personality characteristics, people who identified as 'introvert' were more 'successful'. This may have absolutely nothing to do with intelligence, per se, but in my humble opinion; it probably does (not saying this because I identify as 'introvert').

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Another way I like to describe the difference between introverts and extroverts is that introverts are energised by solitude, while extroverts are energised by company. Introverts certainly want to socialise as much as extroverts, but they then need to retreat to recharge, while an extrovert will find alone time draining, and need to retreat to a social setting to recharge.

<comment><AUTHOR> Great way to sum it up, by that measure I'm a clear introvert. That doesn't mean shy, quiet in gatherings or even unhappy in company of others, but group time is exhausting and alone time is, as you say, recharge time.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> I imagine introvert/extrovert is simply an inadequate description -- for the ways people want to use it -- of the ways people prefer to interact; after reading a number of blog posts like this I'm increasingly convinced that the reality is far more nuanced. There are more categories of social interaction than "large group" / "small group" / "not at all"; you can talk about very complex things, very simple things, personal things, impersonal things, societal politics, clique politics, and so forth; people generally have differing preferences with regard to different things.

The introvert/extrovert distinction was never meant to be a complete description of someone's social preferences, but just a general way to classify all of the crazy people that psychiatrists encountered back in the early 20th century. MBTI tests can be suprisingly apt, but they aren't going to tell you everything there is to know about yourself.

</comment><comment><USER17> This resonates with me very well as an introvert who enjoys company but finds large group very energy draining. I never thought that extroverts actually find such activities energy gaining. Instead I have felt it was just me who doesn't find large group dynamics enjoyable.

Here is a TED talk "Power of introverts" I recently enjoyed on this subject.

[http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/susan_cain_the_power_of_int...](http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/susan_cain_the_power_of_introverts.html)

</comment><comment><USER18> The problem I've always had with being an introvert is that many extroverts think it's a curable disease. Furthermore, because I do behave as the blog post describes, people often don't believe I'm actually an introvert. The solution I've found is it's much more acceptable if I explain to people that I'm an "ambivert", an introvert who has developed skills normally associated with extroverts. At minimum, it gets people off my back...

</comment><comment><USER19> I am a self-proclaimed introvert. I tend to think about small "mistakes" I made socially and how I could have done better. However, I enjoy being around people, just a small group of people all of whom I know. I like to be engaged in a conversation, and if put in a situation with a large number of people (such as a party or "social gathering") i will spend most if not all of the time with the same people. It's not that I don't like people, it's just that to connect with them I have to have a conversation with them of greater length than happens at such social gatherings - and it just so happens that the people who enjoy these conversations are other introverts, creating the appearance of the introverts hanging out at the edge of the crowd and talking with other introverts.

</comment><comment><USER20> I do believe in the idea that social interaction is energy draining for introverts and the opposite, energy gaining, for extroverts. With all demands a startup puts on a person, I can understand why an introverted founder would decline social invitation for no other reason than being worn out.

</comment><comment><USER21> It always amazes me every time I find someone or something on the internet that resonates perfectly with me. I can't stand being alone, it makes me really depressed. But social events don't feel right either, they take a lot of energy as the author says. What I feel best with varies and it's more complicated than just a variation in time.

So what I mean is, he's probably right. Introversion and extroversion are no dichotomy and probably even more complicated than a spectrum. I've heard too many people say I'm an introvert while I feel am not just as this person has heard too many say he's not an introvert.

</comment><comment><USER22> I consider myself introverted because being in a large crowd is very exhausting for me.

But recently I found that the main problem I have with lots of people is that the sound level gets so high that I have problems following individual conversations. It takes me a lot of concentration to understand the person next to me.

That's why I mostly avoid crowded or loud places, since I wouldn't understand a thing anyway. I generally hear well, but seem find loud sound painful earlier than other people.

Because of this, I wonder if hearing problems could be a cause of introversion.

</comment><comment><USER23> Hi guys!

I'm the OP. I don't have time to respond to everyone here, but let me just say it's been quite gratifying to see the productive discussion this has generated. I wrote this post late at night, after a particularly exhausting group activity, hoping to thoughtfully react to my frustration. Whether or not I managed that, these sorts of discussions are just what I was hoping for!

</comment><comment><USER24> The article hit the nail on the head for me. Maybe someone can offer some advice on my related plight?

I'm like many of you in the sense that I spend all day every day on my computer -- I work in security, and I'm introverted. At the same time, I do crave interaction, and I find that going to bars in my college town provides me with social stimulation (I don't talk to Jersey Shore airheads). However, as I am also a night owl, this is basically my only social interaction for the day: the day doesn't seem complete unless I've talked to people. Therefore, I have become an alcoholic, which has profoundly affected me psychologically, and it's beginning to affect me physically as well.

The obvious solution to this problem is to find forms of socialization that don't involve alcohol. But that's easier said than done: what should I do? I have no hobbies and few other interests that don't involve books.

Real advice would be appreciated. Thanks.

</comment><comment><USER25> A must read: Caring for Your Introvert, The habits and needs of a little- understood group - [http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2003/03/caring-f...](http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2003/03/caring- for-your-introvert/2696/)

</comment><comment><USER26> Right on. This is why I try to be a speaker or help with organizing/running events I go to, because a) I get a perfect excuse to be busy, b) I get a perfect excuse to run off for a nap after speaking/chairing, c) people will generally want to talk to me about my talk in depth, d) if it gets too heavy, I can hang out in the speakers' room/similar instead.

d is quite a handy one. If possible, I try to find a way to tag on to people in the speakers' room, because the atmosphere there is way better for introverts, IMHO. Smaller groups, not noisy, people actually doing work, etc. Luckily I'm _usually_ speaking or organizing so can do this, but it could get a bit crazy if everyone tried this ;-)

</comment><comment><USER27> I wonder if introversion/extroversion are umbrella terms for a wide range of meshing cognitive and personality traits.

For instance, we all default to a particular attentional style. To use the actor Woody Allen as an example, he has a classic narrow-internal attentional style (introspective, perhaps slightly neurotic) which suggests he's an introvert, yet these traits works for him socially on many levels.

But is he introverted? I think he and many people transcend that label.

More on Attention Theory: [http://rejectiontherapy.com/control-your-reality- like-a-tv-s...](http://rejectiontherapy.com/control-your-reality-like-a-tv- set-howto/)

</comment><comment><USER28> A good mixture of extroverted and introverted personalities will be good for a start-up team. The key is for the extroverts to know when to just shut up and listen....lol

</comment><comment><USER29> Yeah.. you guys aren't "real" introverts. Real introverts are like me and have practically no friends online or off, almost never go out unless they have to, and do all of their social interaction by writing comments on random Hacker News or reddit posts, rarely even seeing a username they recognize.

<comment><USER30> My life in a nut shell right there. We should be friends...hmm, wait...maybe not

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> Another one about introverts: <http://www.carlkingdom.com/10-myths-about- introverts>

I like that one better :)

</comment><comment><USER32> What is this 'energy' is that people are extracting from their social environment? And why are we holding off judging extroversion against introversion?

I'm going to state for the record that introversion is best. Anybody who isn't introverted has no kind of mental life.

<comment><USER28> Every extrovert is an introvert in some way. I have seen introverts become extroverts in their comfort zones and have seen extroverts become introverts in a new and unfamiliar environment or situation.

<comment><USER33> I always thought I was an introvert, but I never had this energy problem people are talking about after being social for a long period of time.

My problem was that I just couldn't get outside my comfort zone. After years of forcing myself outside my comfort zone (which many people don't or can't do), I don't really have a problem anymore.

One of the problems with being introverted is that you will probably get passed up for promotions at most companies. you need to be social to move up the ladder, even if you are a developer.

<comment><USER28> I remember reading a study done a few years back to figure out why many Asian Americans were being passed up for promotions in their work place, despite that they went to better schools and had many honors when they graduated compared to their white co-workers. Initially people thought discrimination was the biggest and only factor but the study showed that they tend to be more introverted and would not ask for a salary raise or a promotion as much as their white counterparts would. Success will not be handed to you in a silver platter in the corporate world, sometimes you just have to go out there and stake your claim.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> The author has a strange view (and cares way too much) about what other people think. Reminds me of myself in high school.</comment>


Y Combinator Day, Pt. 2 - <AUTHOR> http://mattmaroon.com/?p=186 <comment><USER2> Thanks! I'll do my best to let you all live vicariously.

<comment><USER3> Do you happen to be related to Larry Ellison?

<comment><USER2> If I was the only time I'd be in Boston is when my yacht parked there.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I have to admit I'm a touch jealous but also excited. I can't wait to see what you and your group get going.

</comment><comment><USER5> Congrats and good luck!

</comment><comment><USER6> Congrats, that's awesome.

</comment><comment><USER7> Congrats!!!!</comment>


Ask HN: Browser testing, where are we at? - <AUTHOR> Doing a dive into browser UI testing. Also wondering where are we at with the cutting edge?
How are retail websites doing GUI testing (buttons, forms) vs more complex visual cases like Google Maps or websites with non-traditional layouts?
Are there any papers or interesting libs that come to mind? <comment><USER2> We run farms of puppeteer and headless Firefox.

Not retail, but it's a complex app (that is also available in Electron); things like video plays have trappable events to hook into.

For example, hit play -> time how long until video starts playing -> hit pause at 00:19 (random example time), take a screenshot of the #video-container element DOM, and do a comparison to a known-good screenshot.

It's not overly non-traditional, but still much more than forms and buttons.

Other things include typing into an autocompleting search box, and having middleware capture /autocomplete.json?q=* type of requests and comparing them to see whether they are coming up OK, what queries are coming up, and then dumping the DOM of .autocomplete-search-results-container or similar and iterating them through to turn it into an array again, and ensure sorting order matches.

</comment><comment><USER3> I feel that nothing significant has changed over the past decade. There newer frameworks that are faster not in order of magnitudes, more stable, have a bit more features or run in the browser itself but at the end you are interacting with elements in your DOM and you are dependent on 20 other cogs and gears that are not part of the browser.

Your best bet would be doing automated smoke GUI testing, lots of API testing and below and above all a layer of manual testing done by the whole team during and after development.

In one team we used high speed cameras, or screen captures on mobiles, to capture images containing debug timestamps and do image comparison of selected regions to reference ones, I think it was using imagemagick. This worked but required constant maintenance and manual interventions.

</comment><comment><USER4> They just employ people to do the testing</comment>


Do you understand our value proposition? - <AUTHOR> Hi there, I have a website: ottocopenahgen.com, but I am concerned that consumers doesn't understand our value proposition.
If you should guess, what do you think we offer?
Best,
Rasmus <comment><USER2> > We can't connect to the server at ottocopenahgen.com.

[https://www.ottocopenhagen.com/](https://www.ottocopenhagen.com/) loads better.

Try 4 frames for free. Buy any you like. And maybe some sort of subscription thing I have to figure out how to cancel?

I can't tell if you ship internationally or what DKK converts to in a currency I know.

</comment><comment><USER3> One can try glasses at home, then buy them. It's well presented.

<comment><AUTHOR> Hi Mtmail,

Thank you so much for your feedback. Do you think the glasses are expensive to buy?

Do you think the glasses comes with prescription lenses and if so, do it cost extra?

Best, Raska</comment></comment>


MIT's Bitcoin-Inspired 'Enigma' Lets Computers Mine Encrypted Data - <AUTHOR> http://www.wired.com/2015/06/mits-bitcoin-inspired-enigma-lets-computers-mine-encrypted-data/ <comment><USER2> Amazing how shallowly an article can cover the specifics of something like this. The best explanation they gave was "mathematical tricks."

<comment><USER3> The discussion on reddit [1] is actually fairly decent, thanks to the active participation of the creators.

[1] [https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3bmbi5/mits_bitcoi...](https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3bmbi5/mits_bitcoininspired_enigma_lets_computers_mine/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Wait wait what? So I can send my (locally encrypted) CC info into an Enigma- enabled CC processor, and they can deduct an amount from my account without ever actually knowing my account info?

Or more like I can send an encrypted list of passwords and they can tell me what the most common letter is in all the passwords without ever knowing any of the passwords?

If these things aren't possible, can someone provide a useful example of this being used to solve a problem? I'm having a bit of trouble actually understanding what this is/does.

<comment><USER5> I don't know about CC processing, because... banks and regulations.

But what fully homomorphic encryption allows you to is to perform arbitrary computations on encrypted data.

So you send your encrypted data to a machine, it performs the computation, and sends it back to you still encrypted. Like the password list example you mentioned.

What is cool about this is that is solves the problem with privacy in cloud computing platforms. You don't expose your data.

NOTE: I'm not a cryptographer nor haven't read the article yet. Just writing what I can remember.

<comment><USER6> I recall something similar to this recently on HN, [http://www.zerodb.io/](http://www.zerodb.io/). Are they using homomorphic encryption here?

Would homomorphic encryption make it possible for cloud hosting to run a website without knowing the code that is being ran?

<comment><USER7> ZeroDB here. We're not homomorphic, and it is possible to make a cloud hosting you're talking about w/o homomorphic encryption.

But if you are to perform heavy computing on server side, you have to be homomorphic. Or other amazing opportunities like decentralized key management, content tokenization (DRM) etc appear from this homomorphic work (even if the speed is 100 times slower than unencrypted)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> This would be awesome as an alternative to Facebook having all your likes / personal information and other companies tapping into that. Imagine if you stored all of that in Enigma instead and only gave it to the companies you trusted.

So you could store your own list of favorite music bands in the cloud and share that with say spotify or pandora to get personalized recommendations, but nobody else knows about it. Then you store your favorite authors in another location which only amazon has access to. Or your medical records could be kept in the cloud and only shared with your personal doctor, then easily transfered to another doctor if you switch.

This seems like a great solution for storing these small pieces of personal information in the cloud without having to give them all to a central authority like so many people do with Facebook currently.

</comment><comment><USER9> I had a similar idea! I'm glad something like this is being implemented.

The most important idea imo is that companies can never claim ownership of personal data because they never have access to it. Another cool idea is that if you have a currency that can be cashed in for fractional computing power on the network you could pay tech companies in computing power, either providing it from a device you own or paying for it with the currency.

I look forward to the papers/code that they release.

Edit: I'm not really clear on this, is there any currency component to Enigma? I was thinking there could be a currency that's a transferrable debt of fractional computing power of the network.

Edit 2: Apparently it isn't a currency and uses bitcoin for fees...

<comment><USER10> MaidSafe[1] is a similar scheme for data (not CPU cycles) and it does have a currency based on amount shared and a couple of other things. It is also serverless but it doesn't use a blockchain. They are doing a lot of active development in the space right now.

1 - [http://maidsafe.net/](http://maidsafe.net/)

Edit: actually it does appear a goal is to share computing power though I know less about those details compared to the data distribution. Ref: [https://forum.safenetwork.io/t/homomorphic-encryption-by- mit...](https://forum.safenetwork.io/t/homomorphic-encryption-by-mit/4255)

<comment><USER11> >They are doing a lot of active development in the space right now.

Citation needed, the only thing I've seen maidsafe do is take peoples' money

<comment><USER10> See the forum [1], watch the sprints [2], look at GitHub [3] and watch their dev in Rust.

1 - [https://forum.safenetwork.io/](https://forum.safenetwork.io/) 2 - [https://maidsafe.atlassian.net/](https://maidsafe.atlassian.net/) 3 - [https://github.com/maidsafe/](https://github.com/maidsafe/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> So if I am understanding correctly, this could compete with services like s3 and ec2.

People can earn money by attaching their machines to the network (but they have to include a security deposit). Then they will collect fees from users for each request processed as well as a set fee for storage.

The application developer will then use a provided scripting language (I am not sure if they actually write the application using this language or if it is just for ensuring a contract). They will need to continually pay storage fees or their data will be disabled and eventually deleted.

I would like to see examples of the scripting language they reference.

<comment><USER13> (I'm one of the creators of this project)

I don't believe centralized/public clouds will disappear anytime soon. However, there simply aren't any privacy-preserving alternatives out there. We're hoping to change that.

Also, your description is accurate. We'll be releasing our code and some dev- friendly documentation for the beta soon. You're welcome to sign up at [http://enigma.media.mit.edu](http://enigma.media.mit.edu).

<comment><USER14> Sometimes I wonder what kind of operations would actually be useful to do on such data in the real world.

I mean, the way the web currently works is that I trust some server to host my data. I can have this service auth an external consumer site and display data in an iframe, say, which the consumer site can't get at. This is good enough for displaying people their personalized info (name, friends) on various services (eg directions to their house in an iframe, for a user authenticated with my chosen provider).

But to go further, what if I don't want to trust any provider?

Then I could simply encrypt the data and store encrypted data with the provider (or providers for redundancy). The authentication could be replaced with visitors holding a key to decrypt the data (because I gave it to them) and I can switch to using some other key and effectively "unfriend" those who don't get my updated key.

But all this is good enough for displaying data and files I upload. Now, why would I want to do operations on those files "in the cloud" without trusting a provider? I am already trusting my friends with the data, since they can reshare it once it's displayed to them. So why not trust a provider? One of my friends can run the provider.

I guess the only scenario I see it being useful is if all my friends can only have limited access to the data and all manipulations on the data are collaborative, and that's where the homeomorphism comes in. Perhaps no one will be able to see the whole data and it's not really about data at all, but views of some Enigmatic process running on some network (like an autonomous corporation.) is that the use case?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Oh! Is this basically a secret sharing DAO?

Huh, last I read something about this, it seemed like every multiplication needed multiple network messages, but I guess they solved that problem.

Sounds exciting! I am excited!

</comment><comment><USER16> From what I gather this is good for privately sharing other people's private data? Correct me if I misunderstand the idea here.

</comment><comment><USER17> "Code evaluated in our system is guaranteed not to leak any information unless a dishonest majority collude"

<comment><USER18> What is your point? That this is not an advancement over the current state of affairs, or that you have a better idea?

<comment><USER17> I found the original article light on explanation and so posted what I thought to be a good summary sentence that I found in another place.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Two things I haven't yet seen here in the comments:

1) Electricity used. This scheme

       only multiplies the computing requirements
       for a calculation by less than 100 fold

It's bad enough that bitcoin mining itself is so energy intensive, but now we're coming up with additional power-hungry schemes.

2) (Ab)use of the blockchain:

       Enigma stores that metadata in the bitcoin
       blockchain, the unforgeable record of messages
       copied to thousands of computers to prevent
       counterfeit and fraud in the bitcoin economy

So eventually the whole world will use the one true blockchain for "unforgeable records" of everything? Eventually the chain will grow by what, 1 GB per hour, 1 GB per minute, 1 GB per second?

<comment><USER20> 1) It's not related to bitcoin energy usage, which is designed to be high. This is based on the current best science has to offer in making things cheap.

The 100x multiple is to the cost of normal computation. Normal, unsecured, visible to your hosting provider, etc, computation. Companies already pay huge amounts for securing computation so a pure mathematical way to do it that's only 100 times the base cost of the CPU time is actually a huge savings to many.

You don't have to run your whole webserver this way, just the payment processing pieces...

2) What will happen is pure guessing because it depends on the hidden motives of others via market (and other) dynamics.

But the options are _roughly_ ,

A) The bitcoin blockchain remains at today's general capacity. In this case the price per blockchain/byte will increase and people will use side-chains and "link" them back in as they feel appropriate. You will have the option of downloading sidechains you care about.

B) The bitcoin users decide on one of the proposals to increase the blockchain capacity dramatically - and all of these offer some form of prunability so you don't need to hold the GBs of stuff you don't care about in order to strongly verify the things you do care about (like the balance of someone who's paying you)...

C) Some other currency which solves these things really is the "one".

But these questions didn't need asking. They're needlessly critical - as if technologies should (or even could) all be invented at greater than 100% ROI just out of thin air, and as if market dynamics wouldn't handle things anyway. If this solution is too expensive, nobody will use it. There are no externalities involved here, nobody is getting a free lunch; they'll only pay for it if it helps them overall.</comment></comment>