Designer touts 'super sight' sunglasses Hindsight, as they say, is a wonderful thing. So a designer’s crafted a pair of sunglasses that he's claimed will extend your field of vision. Nike_01 May's Fresnel lens glasses: widen your horizons Although the specs would have base-curve nine lenses at the front, designer Billy May said the specs would also incorporated …
Now, if we can just educate cyclists to obey the rules of the road as well...
And yes, I do see that the *motorist* appears to be running a red light in the picture.
Look at it another way though, maybe the light's not red on the car's direction of approach (as we can't see it), and it's actually the idiot on the bike that's in the wrong.
Still like the idea though.
Unfortunately, in this example, the approaching car might appear smaller and would appear to be about to pass in front of the cyclist (depending on the lens). He would then brake and stop in front of the oncoming vehicle. I'm sure it could have many other uses, but when I cycle I'll stick to looking over my shoulder.
It's a good idea, but I seem to remember from a time when I was small and had a diving mask with side panels ( that looked like a great idea in the shop so I nagged my parents for them indefinitely ) that the extra vision, being in slightly different proportions to what one is accustomed to, was deeply disorientating.
I have a similar thing with prescription glasses now- when I got new ones with smaller frames a while back, having a wider field of vision outside the glasses took some getting used to. I wonder whether wearing glasses like that would tend to be a little disorienting or even nauseating if you weren't wearing them the whole time.
Should have gone to Specsavers.
Here is the designer's resume:
http://www.coroflot.com/public/individual_profile.asp?from_url=true&individual_id=142236&sort_by=1&
If he's also made a working prototype then fair play to him but otherwise my Dragon's Den money remains in a big stack on my desk until I see evidence that the optics work as advertised.
Most cyclists are simply distracted when they are running around, thinking about their lives or the pretty girl on the corner.
And I don't think adding objects to their field of vision (and with this adding distractions) would be a good idea.
What about restricting the use of music players?
R
...when most cyclists just use the pavement anyway? I've recently decided that in today's "i'll sue you if you even look at me funny" culture i will stop diving out of the way and let them hit me, although they'll probably managed to counter-sue me for damaging their precious bike with my fragile meat-based body.
This is so stupid I'm surprised it made it through the Reg's usually fine bullshit filter. Be handy while riding a nuclear hoverboard. I have written a poem for it in the style of the great Wesley Willis.
fresnel glasses
These glasses would be like looking through the end of a bottle
Get that crazy-ass mother off your skull
Wearing these glasses can get you into a collision
It can also get you killed for the gravedigger
fresnel my ass
fresnel my ass
fresnel my ass
fresnel my ass
Aldi, it's the stock-up store
Hey, when there's so many bits of the Highway code that has the hidden coda "unless it's a cyclist"* why obey the rules of the road myself?
PS What about those with an asymetric squint? Extra FOV doesn't work because the brain ignores the unused eye?
* E.g. "Don't pass on a corner (unless it's a cyclist)". "When passing, ensure plenty of room before turning in (unless it's a cyclist)". Or the most common one: "When overtaking you shouldn't break the speed limit (unless you're passing a cyclist).".
Maybe the cyclists will see the cycle lane to their left when riding through my local town and stop holding up traffic on the fudging road.
We do all we can for them, and they still insist on running red lights, ignoring pedestrian crossings, and pulling out to the right at the same time as cars.
Well spotted! Yes, again some drive-on-the-right git took a picture of a drive-on-the-left intersection and photoshopped something onto it without thinking.
Sad part is, that same unobservant fuckwit is going to be driving home this evening. Pity any cyclists (or motorcyclists) that get in his way.
How many times has a car/ van driver heard someone say to them, "Sorry mate, I didn't see you"?
How many times have cyclists/ bikers heard the same phrase?
Yes, there are *some* two wheel users who give the rest of us a bad name, but how many of them are responsible for the majority of the three and a half thousand or so deaths on the UK's roads every year...?
1) The idiot who photo-shopped it didn't realise he used a jpeg of a street in England and placed the car and cyclist on the "American" side of the road (stupid!).
2) The idiot who photo-shopped it knew he used a jpeg of a street in England but was too drunk to realize he placed the car and cyclist on the "American" side of the road (stupid!)
3) the idiot who used the jpeg of a street in England which caught both a car and cyclist too drunk to realize they both were on the "American" side of the road (that rates a 3X STUPID!)
For those pedestrians who have cyclists coming at them on the pavement without a care. Step smartly aside and raise your arm at about their neck height. Using the correct arm should give a tell-tale 'thunk' (quite satisfying).
For the pedestrians who spot a cyclist going along on the pavement gently and considerately - try and show the same consideration, I know it's your 'right of way', but it doesn't hurt or take much effort. Stopping is a pain on a bike.
For the motorists pissing on about cyclists not using the cycle lanes. Which ones, the ones that are an artwork of potholes and drains, or the ones covered with pedestrians. Also, you want a cyclist nipping by between 20 and 30 mph when you're walking on the pavement. It would scare the willies out of me!
As for the pedestrians who walk on the cycle lane, and the pavement, and the cycle lane (you get the idea). What's up? You pissed, or does the white line confuse you?
- That said, whenever I'm walking along the routes I normally cycle, I nearly always end up walking on the cycle lane. Oops! Old habits, and autopilot.
And for the TWATS at the local council office:
| pavement / cycle lane | road |
So, which clever dick thought putting the cyclist road-side was bright? Painting extra give-way signs for the cyclist whenever there is an area a pedestrian 'may' think of crossing is on par with eating cheese wire. Put the cyclist furthest from the road. 1) You don't need those annoying give-way signs every 100yds (yes it is that bad where I live) 2) when (or if) the cyclist screws the pooch, they are much less likely to end up under the wheels of the truck going by at the worst moment.
| pavement | cycle lane / road |
For five minutes!
- What's the width of the cycle lane in this scenario?
- What's the width of the average drain and obligatory pothole around it?
Only look up the answer to one or the other. They are the same.
| pavement | random red paint / road |
Why are there cycle lanes which are only about 3m long? And what's with the ones that just point you in a direction which just leads you around in circles? Do you have a budget for cycle lane paint that you just must use? How about making the useful ones wider?
End Of Rant
To probably 50+% of car drivers, 80+% of bus, van and lorry drivers:
Thank you. I'm shocked that the majority of motorists are actually pretty good where I live. And, much more shocked that the number of lorries or similar that drive like 'yaks* around me in one year can probably be counted on my fingers. I work on an industrial estate and ride ~3 miles to work _every_ working day (ie I see more HGVs a day or two, then try to kill me in a year).
*mani'yaks, for the ill educated. I can't compare people's driving to that of yaks' due to never having seen any sort of yak or elk like animal behind the wheel of a car. I want a yak icon. It could be used for all sorts guys.
... most the comments are simply trying to showcase their cleverness via sarcasm.
I've done my time as a cycle commuter in London (largely law abiding, I might add). Increased peripheral vision would be a good thing to have whilst riding in any major city. If the product is as useless as claimed, it'll fail. But give the designer credit for implementing an idea that on the surface of it is quite practical.
"3) the idiot who used the jpeg of a street in England which caught both a car and cyclist too drunk to realize they both were on the "American" side of the road (that rates a 3X STUPID!)"
Neither the road markings, nor the traffic light installations comply to UK standards, nor does anything else suggest a UK origin for the road junction depicted. (Does appear to be 'drive on left' - Australian maybe?)
4X STUPID in your case...
I have some prescription wrap around safety glasses which distort out towards the edges, and they took a while to get used to. When I turn my head things tend to move closer together or farther apart, accordian style, and that's just no good for balance. I imagine that these things would be even worse, since they're designed for massive distortion.
I know in the US cyclists have to follow every law that a car does, when they ride on a road, which includes signaling, stopping at stop signs, and not wearing headphones. Of course everyone ignores that. I once saw someone that I know just about get themselves run over by a cop when she sped through a stop with headphones on, while not even bothering to look around the intersection. I think that cost her about $400 in tickets. But most of the time cops aren't there to catch the morons.
@Edward - "For the pedestrians who spot a cyclist going along on the pavement gently and considerately - try and show the same consideration, I know it's your 'right of way', but it doesn't hurt or take much effort. Stopping is a pain on a bike."
No, it's only a pain to stop on a bike when you are cycling without consideration for other people
An afocal convertor is a multiple element design which could not be implemented like this, fresnel or whatever. In short, it is complete bollocks.
The "designer" hasn't implemented anything except some attractive but flawed drawings. While stylishly executed, they are not real, nor will they ever be. The designer does not understand what a fresnel lens is or does, or the optical requirements of acheiving his goal - the pictures might as well be of glasses that can see through walls or into the future, and, as I say, I am surprised this chaff made it through the BS dectectors.
No, it's a pain when you're cycling to stop.
You can still have consideration for other users (e.g. pedestrians) even when cycling on the path. Your sense of entitlement is getting in the way. In short, you're bigoted.
If my back light is out (rechargables can go out VERY quickly with no indication they are near EOL) I will cycle on the path as opposed to the road where I can easily be killed.
It takes a lot of doing to kill a pedestrian on a pushbike. You have to really work at it.
Now, if you can remember your indignation when driving and treat a cyclist as a very vulnerable road user (the only crumple zones are where the limbs break and absorb some of the impact) AND GIVE THEM ROOM. Heck, I've had drivers yell "you shouldn't be ON the road". Well, according to you, I shouldn't be on the pavement either. But when on the pavement I accede right of way to the pedestrian. This DOES NOT mean I get off the pavement, just that I treat their right with respect. For which dickheads like you ignore the efforts taken.
Oh, and lastly, on a cyclepath, who do you think has right of way? Cyclist? No. Pedestrian.
Cockeyed or what.
Aye. Cyclists need to drive to see how hard it is to see a cyclist in the dim light when they are dressed in donkey jacket, black trousers and bovver boots. It will show them WHY this is stupid.
Drivers definitely need to cycle to see how scary it is when a car "misses" you but passes so close the wind of their passing waves the hairs on your legs. It will also show them that while this is going on, you aren't looking ahead, you're concentrating on your ears to hear what's going on behind. A state that after the fact you realise was dangerous in itself.
Im not sure I like the idea of cycling along with fucking great big blue lazer beams comming out the side of my head like that.
In other news
The average person is too slow and stupid to react to anything they would see through those lenses.
Our gene pool no longers allows this sort of inovation to work with the plebs, maybe some of the more affluent people out there may be able to make use of them but the top and bottom ends of our society are so inbreed that I don't think there would be a market for these
That would be attempted murder.
Just because a driver nearly runs me off a roundabout doesn't mean I can pull a gun and try to shoot the shithead in the brainpan.
And if I were not to die, I would get up and throw the pratt who bumped me in front of the next bus coming by.
After all, if a misdemeanour is worth committing a criminal act of assault, then what is acceptable response to someone committing a criminal act of assault on you? Nuke the family???
...and the economy crumbles, you'll all have to think twice about your motoring addiction. Your world is falling apart and no one will tell you it's all going to be ok.
That aside, can people not just turn their heads to look around?
I never cycle on the pavements, I just wish 'pod'estrians would stay out of the road.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
