Formerly /u/Zagorath on the alien site.
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
I won't comment on Root because I don't really know it and am not really involved in wargames myself, but in what way is Warhammer possibly not a wargame?
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
If the minis are what you're after, surely there are some cute animal minis for RPGs you could paint?
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
A wargame isn't any game that features war as a theme, it's a very specific genre of game where you move units around on a map simulating actual battles or wars. Think Warhammer as the most well-known example.
At the end of the day, whether or not you're at fault or not, and whether or not you acknowledge as much, doesn't really matter nearly as much as the fact that you're a safer driver today. That's what actually matters.
I only shared my story as a cautionary tale to other readers.
Genuinely, I appreciate that. The importance of looking both ways when approaching an intersection, even if the road is one way, is critical, for the safety of cyclists and pedestrians. Your goal in sharing the story was a good one. It's just the tone of how you told the story that seemed rather off.
If you want to mention him, I won't try to stop you (not that I could if I wanted to). For me though, I'm pretty sure he's already aware of the existence of !notjustbikes@feddit.nl so he has the resources to follow threadiverse discussions of himself if he wants, and I'd rather leave it in his hands to control that rather than have it thrust upon him.
Your defensiveness doesn’t make it feel like you learnt from it. You might have learnt how to avoid that kind of crash (crash, not accident) in the future, which is fantastic, but you haven’t internalised that it was because of your own inattentiveness in operating a dangerous vehicle that the crash occurred, and not because of the perfectly acceptable behaviour from a member of a vulnerable group. A vulnerable group that you victimised.
I hope she was also more careful about going full speed on the sidewalk in the wrong direction of traffic.
Literally victim blaming. It's completely normal to travel in either direction on the footpath.
we even had bicycle lanes on the street
Paint is not infrastructure.
You were 100% liable for hitting a cyclist and you cheerfully admit to paying them off with a pittance of the damage you caused and forcing them to sign away their rights? That's pretty fucking shitty.
At least your last paragraph makes it sound like you learnt from the behaviour that led to your mistake in the first place.
Maybe. Or maybe they just get paid really well and can afford to go out of pocket.
Probably both.
That's not bad dental, it's actually incredibly expensive cosmetic dental surgery.
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
Ok that's some really interesting context I didn't know. I've only ever seen it done the mathematician's way with dx at the end. Learning physicists do it differently explains why the person in the post would want to discuss moving it around.
But I still think they have to mean "if dx can be treated as an operand". Because "if dx can be treated as an operator" doesn't make sense. It is an operator; there's no need to comment on something being what it objectively is, and even less reason to pretend OOP's partner was angry at this idea.
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
You're misunderstanding the post. Yes, the reality of maths is that the integral is an operator. But the post talks about how "dx can be treated as an [operand]". And this is true, in many (but not all) circumstances.
∫(dy/dx)dx = ∫dy = y
Or the chain rule:
(dz/dy)(dy/dx) = dz/dx
In both of these cases, dx or dy behave like operands, since we can "cancel" them through division. This isn't rigorous maths, but it's a frequently-useful shorthand.
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
The operand is the target of an operator
Correct. Thus, dx is an operand. It's a thing by which you multiply the rest of the equation (or, in the case of dy/dx, by which you divide the dy).
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
"operative" instead of, uh, something else
I think they meant "operand". As in, in the way dy/dx can sometimes be treated as a fraction and dx treated as a value.
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
Fake and gay.
No way the engineer corrects the mathematician for using j instead of i.
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
Do they? Most cyclists I know do at least a bit of running.
Swimming though...even triathletes think swimmers are nuts.
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
Splitting lanes is not legal in the vast majority of the United States but idk where you’re from
Where I am it's explicitly allowed for motorbikes (at a maximum speed of 30 km/h), thanks to a relatively recent law change. Pushbikes are a different story. There's no law explicitly allowing it, and this has led to some people (even people in positions of perceived authority, such as the social media team of the Department of Transport and Main Roads) to suggest that it's not legal for bikes. But the reality is that it is legal, as a necessary side-effect of the fact that cars are allowed to overtake bikes without leaving the same lane. Basically, bikes are allowed to share a lane with another vehicle, and this has the effect of also allowing a bike to come up through congested traffic.
It’s very very rare for me to see a car blow through a red light outright
I find this rather hard to believe. First, remember that an amber light does not mean "be careful" or "get ready, you might have to stop soon". It means stop right now, if it's safe. How often have you seen drivers actually do that? I've had so many times where, as a driver, I saw the amber and found myself in that awkward position where I didn't know whether it was appropriate to keep going or to stop, and eventually decided to go through; a situation where it is obviously going to be the case that anyone behind me should stop, because I was on the borderline, so anyone behind me must be well over the other side of the line. And yet, so many times not only has the car behind me gone through, the car behind them did too. And that's before we even get into the daily cases where they don't even start to enter the intersection until after it has turned red. I've got a mate who rides a motorbike and posts helmet-cam footage on Facebook at least weekly, and every one of his compilations includes at least one case of a driver who runs a fully red light.
For cyclists, recall that there are some places in your own country that explicitly allow cyclists to go through a red light if it's safe. Not everywhere does (nowhere in Australia, to my knowledge), but those places that allow it do it for a reason. Evidence shows that it makes cyclists safer. Not all lawbreaking is equal, and the evidence pretty clearly tells us that when cyclists break the law, it tends to be for far better reasons than the reasons drivers break the law, even though the rate of lawbreaking is the same.
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
They’re motorized vehicles when its convenient to them and pedestrians when its not
Almost like...they're neither? What you describe here is perfectly legal.
They split lanes
Legal
blow through red lights
Imagine thinking cars don't 🤣
and they loooooove to go out in big groups
Not remotely against the rules
and take over the road
Please define. Because as someone who has spent many hours in a car, I've been prevented from going at the speed I would like to go by other cars far more than bikes. And my life has been put in danger by cars, not by bikes.
The simple fact is that data tells us cyclists and drivers break the law at roughly the same rate at worst. (Incidentally, one study from a place with better infrastructure shows that when good infrastructure is in place, cyclists break the law considerably less often than drivers.) Studies also show that cyclists break the law to keep themselves safe (this has been backed up by multiple studies). When drivers break the law, it's because they think it's more convenient not to bother.
The simple fact is that though @makingStuffForFun@lemmy.ml claims it's cyclists being "dictators" and you claim they "take over the road", the reality is quite the reverse. When you’re accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression. And no demographic in our society (excluding socioeconomic and racial discussions) is more privileged than drivers.
Oh, that's interesting. So you would also not consider something like Flames of War to be a wargame, because it uses exact position rather than hexes?