alexlrobertson

Other than converting the trunk and passenger area into a cargo area, this hardly classifies as a truck. It appears that little was done to improve the vehicles handling off-road. The wheels and tires look to be stock meaning no gains in traction. No mention of suspension or ground clearance which means it will still be limited to fairly well groomed and paved roads. But as I'm familiar with Simone's content so I'm aware this is pretty tongue in cheek.

That initial animation induced motion sickness for me and very rarely get motion sickness from video games, VR, movies, driving, flying, etc.

In Chicago they've reduced the speed limit on one of the most frequented bike routes to 20 mph in some areas but its had perceivably no effect. My perception is that cars still average 25 to 35 mph through these areas and I've yet to ever see someone pulled over for speeding.

This is similar to what I remember from playing Operation Flashpoint: Cold War Crisis. I wasn't very good at the actual game, but there was a post-credit sequence I would skip to where you could just walk, drive, and fly around quiet, rural, and sparsely islands. The simulation is pretty unremarkable by todays standards but being able to explore a huge open world at my own pace was incredible at the time.

One encounter that stands out in my memory was of driving along a remote road in the middle of the night and coming across a bad traffic collision where a truck had completely crushed a small car along with its driver. Something about the brutal and almost mundane nature of the encounter has stuck with me.

"Deliverance From 27,000 Feet" [1] in the New York Times really changed my view in a similar way. While the most successful and visible adventurers are consummate professionals there is an unseen tier of adventurers that take on more than they are trained for seeking glory without the required experience.

1. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/12/18/sports/everes...

Buttons for pedestrian signals are great for safety. The point I was trying to get across is that in the proposed system, a pedestrian would never get a dedicated window to cross unless they push the button.

> Our solution for the short term, while physical traffic signals still coexist with the VTL system, is to provide pedestrians a way to give themselves the right-of-way. Ever since January of this year, our pilot program in Pittsburgh has provided a button to push that actuates a red light—real for the pedestrians, and virtual for the cars—at all four approaches to the intersection. It has worked every time.

This is what is described as a "beg button" by urbanists. Requiring pedestrians to press a button to give them a safe window in which to cross doesn't account for situations where pedestrians may not be able to request to cross due to construction, disability, or other factors.

https://usa.streetsblog.org/2017/03/24/seattle-campaign-to-g...

Aside from the points other commenters have raised, one key feature of GPS head units like the Bolt is connectivity to sensors and accessories.

Sensors historically used the ANT+[1] wireless protocol which was the standard for monitoring sensors. Phones don't have ANT+ support and required an additional dongle.

Most sensors now support ANT+ and Bluetooth Smart which allows them to work with phones, but for the broadest accessory compatibility you need an ANT+ head unit.

Another point I'd raise is that the head unit allows me to ride with my phone off, silenced, on airplane mode, or even without my phone at all. The price point is significantly less than a phone so I'm also a lot less worried about damage or theft.

  [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ANT%2B

Got a source?

Strava segments in my area often have very wrong altitude data. Chicago is extremely flat yet there are segments that report gradients of over 10%, sometimes as much as 27%. I believe they are thrown off by buildings and the frequent elevated train tracks.

https://www.strava.com/segments/1504604

Altitude is a tricky thing with these kinds of devices. They’re usually based on pressure readings from a sensor inside the device but that reading can be affected greatly by a number of factors.

See https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!topic/wahoo-elemnt-users...

But not all recreational airports.

I'm not sure where they got the price of $5 for the current CTA train to the airport.

http://www.rtachicago.org/index.php/plan-your-trip/travel-ti...

> CTA "L" train fare $2.50

More realistically there's a single-ride ticket for $3.

> Single-Ride Ventra Tickets cost $3, which provides up to 2 transfers within 2 hours

I found React one of the easiest frameworks to learn and pick up but I had the benefit of learning React after working for a few years with Backbone and Angular. I found the opinions of the framework to be sensical and guided by the realities of web application development and developer experience.

> 1. i haven’t invested enough time on learning it.

I usually find the types of tutorials Brad references in this section to be very bad at actually connecting with the real process of using a framework. What you're building is just as important as what you're building it with. When you find the right project to use the right tool, it helps the principals click so much more quickly.

> 2. react and es6 travel together

This is definitely a pain point but I think the crux of this is JSX. Most every other convention in React is a very straightforward use of ES6 syntax. Most of the awesome, difficult, but not broadly available parts (generators) of ES6 aren't used in React's public API.

> 3. syntax & conventions

I think React could benefit from a clearer breakdown of how JSX translates to actual JavaScript. Babel's REPL is a good first step. [0]

> 4. getting lost in this-land.

For the most part I've found React's use of JavaScript OOP and `this` to be the most sane. You can use what amounts to a bit of boilerplate in any component that needs state and use `this` within lifecycle methods without batting an eye. Backbone and Angular had all kinds of headaches when trying to explain `this` to junior developers. And don't get me started on libraries that used `this` to pass context around.

> 5. i haven’t found sample projects or tutorials that match how i tend to work.

I think React excels at matching his ideal workflow, but doesn't do a good job explaining how to achieve it. Higher Order components and smart/presentation components are very under-documented.

[0]: https://babeljs.io/repl/#?babili=false&browsers=&build=&buil...

Wouldn’t a pro player be playing less games? They’re playing longer, higher scoring games not lots of average scoring games.

Just a standard dependency on version 15. It figured out react-dom just fine though.

  {
    "dependencies": {
      "react": "^15.6.1",
      "react-dom": "^15.6.1"
    }
  }

Just looked at the "dependencies" for one of my projects and it interprets "react" as this 5 year old, defunct repo: https://github.com/wballard/react.

I'm surprised we haven't seen config packages for webpack take off along the lines of the configs in the ESLint community. There's nothing stopping anyone from publishing an extensible base config.

I'm just getting into touring, myself and it's quite awesome. You get the joys of cycling, treking through nature, and can pack a little more liberally than backpacking. The big limiting factor is finding suitable trails and roads.