The biggest issue with cycling (I used to cycle everyday, no longer):

* Theft. I have to carry a lock and cable (for the front wheel). These are heavy and get dirty.

* Storage. I have to haul my mountain bike up and down the stairs in my apartment. Additionally I can't put the bike on my right shoulder and I cannot carry things on my left as it "feels wrong". So the whole process is a PITA.

* Being run over and accidents. I've been hit by cars hard enough twice to send me in and out of hospital for months. I had other less minor collisions with cars. I do not like cycle lanes either because there is even more chances of collision (read below).

* I am also normally dodging people's dogs and/or children while on a cycle even on the "cycle" lanes. This makes any cycle frustrating.

* Cycling has intertwined itself with the insufferable green crowd. I used to enjoy cycling for the act itself, I am not naive enough to think I am saving the planet.

> Cycling has intertwined itself with the insufferable green crowd

Is that so? The insufferable green crowd is also pro public transportation, is that a reason to have an issue with trains?

I don't want to associate (or seen to associate even though I don't) with the green crowd. Guilt by association is a thing. However due to them now infecting what is essentially a hobby, I no longer enjoy it, so I moved on. I still cycle from time to time, but I am no longer and avid cyclist.

I actually prefer working on and driving my 97 LandRover Defender these days and Making Youtube Videos.

I disagree, a lot. First of all, while biking may be a hobby to you, it’s the primary mode of transportation for at least a billion people. To claim that all these people are “infected” by the green crowd, whatever that means, is just silly.

Would you be happy to be associated with aristocracy, now that you drive a land rover, because many "old money" people drive those?

While in your first comment you gave lots of reason why you dont ride a bike, now youre saying you stopped mostly due to perception of others..thats to me just as silly as all the tesla drivers who are now oh so afraid to be associated to musk and going so far to putting stickers on their car claiming they didnt know musk is unhinged.

> I disagree, a lot. First of all, while biking may be a hobby to you, it’s the primary mode of transportation for at least a billion people. To claim that all these people are “infected” by the green crowd, whatever that means, is just silly

BTW it was a form of transport to me. I used to cycle everyday to work and I used to cycle after work and at the weekends.

When I say it was infected by the green crowd, I am not including people that simply use it as a means of transport. I would have thought that would be obvious.

I am talking generally about cycling as a whole. I got into it because I thought mountain biking was cool when I was 12. Now almost every discussion about it is about building whole cities around it, carbon emissions etc. That is pushed by people primarily by people in the green crowd. I used to personally know these people. I probably still have their email and phone numbers hanging about.

There are a lot of extremists in the cycling the movement that want to totally ban cars, think pet ownership is akin to slavery and they are very vocal and some are involved in planning transport infrastructure. I know this for a fact, because I used to know these people personally.

You only think this is all silly because you haven't encountered these people.

> Would you be happy to be associated with aristocracy, now that you drive a land rover, because many "old money" people drive those?

Most Defenders are driven by Farmers I would wager. You are confusing a Defender with a Range Rover. Defenders are very bare bones, mine doesn't even have a Radio. I also have no issue with the aristocracy. They don't interfere with my hobbies or my life in any meaningful way. In fact many of them that I have met are very nice.

> While in your first comment you gave lots of reason why you dont ride a bike, now youre saying you stopped mostly due to perception of others..thats to me just as silly as all the tesla drivers who are now oh so afraid to be associated to musk and going so far to putting stickers on their car claiming they didnt know musk is unhinged.

To clarify, it was a combination of all the reason I listed. You are focusing in on this particular issue because you took exception to it.

The primary reason is one I didn't list (as it was only relevant to myself). I am in my early 40s now. My left ankle has issues, my right knee has issues. My right shoulder is slightly deformed from breaking my collar bone 3 times. When I was run over (the second time), I broke all my fingers on my right hand, some of the fingers didn't set correctly. I don't want to go through that in my 40s again and the roads are less safe than they were 15 years ago.

As for the Musk stuff. I believe it is largely astro-turf'd on the net. If people wish to sell their Tesla or adorn it with Anti-Musk slogans because of his current involvement with the Trump Administration, they are free to do so. I see nothing unhinged about it at all.

If they were to engage in acts of vandalism or violence because of anti-Tesla sentiment that would be unhinged IMO.

> Cycling has intertwined itself with the insufferable green crowd.

> When I say it was infected by the green crowd, I am not including people that simply use it as a means of transport. I would have thought that would be obvious.

Sorry but nothing in your comment made that obvious. It seems you are the one who is conflating cyclists with the "insufferable green crowd" (why caring about the environment is insufferable is a question for another time). People ride the bike for all kinds of reasons, they are quicker, they help them excercise, they help them save money, they simply enjoy it.

> You only think this is all silly because you haven't encountered these people.

I live in berlin, I know this kind of extremism very well, and still would never dream to judge cyclists as a whole - because i know it's just a means of transport that both "good" and "shitty" people use.

> the roads are less safe than they were 15 years ago.

Maybe that's because there are many many more cars on the road than in the past, population is rising everywhere. For everyone to have a car is simply not sustainable, especially in cities.

Zero hours contracts are likely the unintended consequence of other (employment) regulation. People / Organisations (this includes private businesses and organisation, as well as state owned organisation) will try to circumvent any limits placed on it.

You seem to be of the belief that if you "tweak the nobs" just right, things will be magically be fixed, this is naive. The law of unintended consequences has been observed countless times throughout history when people have tried to do exactly that. This is extremely naive.

Even Star Trek itself that you appear to be a fan of. The Earth is post scarcity, they show that the Federation isn't the benevolent force that they pretend to be (This is hinted multiple times in TNG and shown outright in DS9) and that there are others that are negatively affected by the Federation and its policies e.g the Marquis.

I am of the belief that people in zero hour jobs are basically fucked, and that because a large portion of our businesses use zero hour jobs our society in fact has stagnation in poverty systemically built in/designed in.

Star Trek's a cool show. The bible's a cool book. They are guides on how to do better, not reality, not true events. That doesn't change that they can be used to reflect on ourselves/our society to improve them, nor does that condemn us to accept immorality/lower standards as inevitable.

1. Good for you. Did you have kids or was it just you?

2. It is baked in at this point. People with zero hour jobs are at an extreme disadvantage. It's not adversarial government, it's business choice. There are many countries with larger burdens placed on business that have businesses that aren't forced into the zero hour practice. There companies that chose not to adopt zero hour practices. Stating that the government forced business into it doesn't make it true, and the fact the above businesses exist observably shows it's not a direct law of unintended consequences but a choice by business.

3. This position is outside the norm.

Both Star Trek and the bible are moral parables used to shape people's ideas. I'm guessing you are younger and don't understand the 90s tech ethos around Trek. Where I worked Trek was always playing in some room during lunch. Zero people were reading the bible. But I'm from the 80s/90s bay area (ish, Santa Cruz). Trek was definitely a parable that gave people something to aspire to.

Yes, differing views exist. You are the one that seems hostile to them, writing off your entire society because of your personal interests ("I don't view it as "our" society""). Most people agree on what improvement should be (people should be able to afford to raise families and live in some level of dignity and freedom from scarcity, people should not have to fear crime, education should be encouraged) they just don't agree how to fund it nor make it happen.

I mean, I've read enough of the Bible to know it's pretty out there. It's packed with the writings of humans who lived in a time so different to now, with interpreted translations. Shakespeare's writings are a lot more relevant to us, although maybe inspirational rather than aspirational, and far better written. A modern take with updated aspirations that is understandable and approachable isn't a bad thing to equate it to, even if it's the basis for an entertainment.

> Zero hours contracts are likely the unintended consequence

That's hard to believe. It's such an obvious outcome.

They can always claim the consequences were unintentional, but that doesn’t make them less unbelievably convenient for the people who say they had no intention of causing them.

It really depends what you want to believe doesn't it. Purely asserting it is obvious because you believe it to be so, isn't proof that it was deliberate. As I previously said there has been a lot written about the law of unintended consequences and many cases where it wasn't obvious, it seems you haven't cared to read any of it, otherwise you wouldn't have this attitude.

He doesn't know how to cook though, and at this point it's generational... his grandparents quite possibly never really learned how to cook. Worse still, he doesn't want to spend 1-2 hours every day doing meal preperation... cue the "if I do that I won't have any time at all to watch anime without staying up til 4 am!" stuff.

Eating well and making someone else do the work is expensive. For the lazy, this means eating well really is expensive.

I don't know how to cook either. I just put the thighs in the air fryer with some seasoning and steam the veg.

One thing to consider is that Many people simply do not have the time, energy, and/or equipment to cook food from raw ingredients. These factors are common in poorer households where people are working multiple jobs, etc.

I think it's still manageable, but takes some thought.

* Bananas, a fine inexpensive convenient snack.

* Buy bread and sandwich fillers, add sliced tomato, not awful for you and not time consuming.

* Tea is cheap, I like tea.

* Cereal can be good if you can find one that hits the sweet spot between a bowl of chocolate and a bowl of chaff. Some sort of granola maybe.

That's way too long. Ten minutes is more demand on my time than I really want to give to wrangling food items. I'll be in bed eating cake, thanks.

That isn't 30-40 minutes me standing in the kitchen cooking. That is how long it takes to cook in the air fryer (the thighs take about 30-35 minutes). I literally have a timer telling me when to put on the veg and the potatoes. I think prep time is max 10 minutes and then 10 minutes to wash up.

In any-event. It is objectively more expensive to buy junk food, that includes the cheaper junk. Once I cut out the trips to the takeaway and the deli, I was surprised at how much more money I had per month.

The fact is that people tend to want to eat junk.

That's certainly an improvement, but still involves me planning to eat in half an hour instead of just snacking right now. But I shouldn't be presenting myself as representative of any demographic except maybe bedroom coders. I tend to agree that junk and expense correlate. I don't eat junk, I eat random crap, it's very different.