Well I drive trucks and make this type of "button-hook" turn a lot. First of all if it were a car he would leave his trailer less than 4 feet from the curb in back so a car can't sneak by. They teach you this in truck school. He had his signal on and I drive through a college housing area all the time and make a turn like this with young people on my right a lot. She probably should have stopped and let him turn, him being in busy traffic he has to turn with the flow of traffic which might be slower than a bicycle. That said, of course he has to monitor the cyclist (I also ride bicycles in the big city) and stop immediately if she didn't yield or time his approach so she goes ahead of him. So ya, from truck driving school to my next work day (tomorrow) the driver is ALWAYS at fault if he hits anything on his right turning no matter who has the right a way. Sad case

No, you miss the point.
Distinctions are important.
It matters hugely, recognizing the difference between violent rape and an uninvited shoulder rub, just as it matters making the distinction between a spanking and attempted murder....not just legally but rationally.

I wholeheartedly disagree that making those distinctions about gradients of wrongness in any way denies the ability to see that both are wrong.....except for the brainless who can't do both.

Public shaming IS a sentence, one that harms your job, finances, family, and future. I have no problem with fair public shaming, but lumping a bad date in with real rapists is as fair as lumping you in with kidnappers and murderers because you slapped a disobedient child's behind.

He denies he did anything to intentionally make her uncomfortable or pressure her, which is what she accuses him of.

NO SIR. THAT IS YOUR POSITION, you said until overboard sentencing becomes a problem, there's no distinction needed between bad sex and forced sex.
Yes, it's not cool, but it's also not abuse unless it is.

If, like this woman, she #metoo'd that you were an octopus that ignored all her nonverbal signals to stop, your denial wouldn't mean much, and most people would just call you a rapist....just like his denial means nothing to you and you're more than willing to let him be lumped in with rapists and abusers.

You lumped them together in your post about how making distinctions is out of fashion. It's like you said stop eating broccoli, sugar, and bacon, then balked when I said broccoli is good for you, you only meant deep fried candied broccoli. Come on.

Don't expect me to read what you mean and ignore what you write...I absolutely hate that.
Don't be sexually aggressive...do be weird.

Yes, distinctions matter immensely.

No, grading offences is proper, otherwise you put rape and going Dutch on a date at the same level because they both upset the date.

If the person goes on a long date with you, accepts an invitation to your bed, undressed and engages in sex, asks you to slow down a bit (which means continue, slower, which you do), and continues, sleeps over, and only later complains, maybe relationships aren't for HER. Her date did absolutely nothing wrong. Verbal cues trump non verbal cues in the dark 99.9999999% of the time....pretty much any time there's no gun to your head.

Still, continuing to pass when he put his signal on wasn't the best move.

Possibly not. The deer wasn't using the correct hand signals.

"BTW, the batteries comment because: short flight life"

Yeah, but how far does the drone actually have to travel?

Even the most basic drone can fly for over a kilometre. The range is generally limited by the control signal, more than the flight time.

I would hazard a guess that a decent spec autonomous drone could easily fly 5km with existing battery technology.

Isn't that enough for this kind of purpose?

Your video, No Signal And Black=Guns Drawn, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

The fundamental point is that when the light turns yellow, the yellow car IS blocking his view, but he speeds up anyway, essentially committing to making the intersection.

At 0:02 the light is yellow and his speed is 54km/h. Less than a second later, his speed is over 60km/h. I'd argue that you can actually see a turn signal from the blue car at 0:05, but the video is blurry.

Either way, it's entirely predictable that the oncoming traffic in the middle lane might be turning left, so the sensible course of action is to proceed with caution.

I'm not saying the biker is an asshole. He just made a mistake and I'm glad he's ok. He certainly doesn't deserve to be injured.

The moment the yellow can is half clear of the intersection the vehicle that cuts left when unsafe is already visible, aka clear line of sight. Predicting that another driver is likely to veer in for a head on collision is impossible. I've watched a couple times and can't see any turn signals either. What's with everyone getting on the biker here?

OK, a few things.

60 km/h is about 37 mph and although I don't know the exact speed limit on that street, it's not unreasonable to assume it's 50 or 60 km/h.

In the video, the light turns yellow approximately 1.5 seconds before he enters the intersection. He is going 54 km/h at that time. This means he is approximately 23 m from the intersection when the light turns yellow.

According to nacta.org, the safe stopping distance for an average driver at 35 mph is 136 ft or around 41 m.

From the Ontario Highway Traffic Act: Every driver approaching a traffic control signal showing a circular amber indication and facing the indication shall stop his or her vehicle if he or she can do so safely, otherwise he or she may proceed with caution. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 144 (15).

Also from the Ontario Highway Act: No driver or operator of a vehicle in an intersection shall turn left across the path of a vehicle approaching from the opposite direction unless he or she has afforded a reasonable opportunity to the driver or operator of the approaching vehicle to avoid a collision. R.S.O. 1990, c. H.8, s. 141 (5).

A great way to scare off bears and loose dogs while biking or hiking is to carry an air horn. Walmart sells them in the boating section. A can of compressed air with a loud, shrill blast. Boaters use them sometimes to signal bridge keepers to raise the drawbridge.

The amount of bikes I see running red, and blowing through stop signs, using no hand signals, I say good... Maybe now at least one person has learned and more will learn from this incident... I hate to see people get hurt, but if you don't follow the rules, you bring it on yourself, who can help the ignorant?

...Cars do the same true, but not as often

I look at it in a simple way: words having meanings; people have motivations. A conversation has a context, and in your example the passerby isn't aware of that context. If she chooses to eavesdrop and feels offended, well, while I do feel sorry for her...it's really not any of her business what you and your brother are conversing about. You might as well turn to her, give her a once-over and criticize her choice of pantsuit. She doesn't know you; she didn't ask for your opinion; and your retort probably made her upset.

Should people try to be aware of their surroundings and try not to say inappropriate things? Of course, but that's just common courtesy...like not commenting on a funky smell at a funeral visitation. Political correctness is fine if we all agree, but we usually don't. And therefore we get people who virtue signal over others because they refuse to kowtow to the newest linguistic fashion.

Now, I'm a fairly polite guy. I hold open doors, give up my seat, offer to carry heavy packages, smile, wave and nod greetings to many strangers, etc. Yet I still occasionally get someone who disagrees with my legitimate use of a term (as I understand its meaning). Generally, I still apologize...but I don't then re-evaluate my language ability. I'm not willing to let the connotations of words take on new, questionable-yet-popular meanings.

I've had a Native American friend laugh at me for asking what he preferred I say: redskin, indian, aboriginal, first people, etc. I've also asked a "retarded" person if they preferred if I said "intellectually challenged." He preferred retarded because...wait for it...he had a lot of trouble saying the other one. Now that's irony.

I think my heart's in the right place. I was taught to be polite, and I try to be at all times. But it gets under my skin to have a total stranger "chastise" me when they know nothing about me. Frankly, I find it more offensive to interrupt and belittle a stranger than it is to overhear some stranger's questionable utterance.

I think most everyone knows how to be polite. A lot of people just don't put much effort into its practice. PC speech doesn't have to be a bad thing, but unfortunately it's most often used by people--to which any "offending" language likely wasn't directed--as a way of virtue signalling over the "offender." This is what pisses most reasonable people off.

I know very little about this but logic has me thinking the frequency range of blue tooth has nothing to do with the frequency range of the final sound produced as it's just transmitting a digital signal.

amiright?