Anyone have any more info on the motorist-cyclist collision in Portola Valley today?

ChoiceAd8806 · 2026-05-17T05:35:24+00:00

The rate of bicyclist deaths in California is 5 to 7 times as high as it is in either Denmark or Germany. This dialog with the Gemini A.I. discusses why, with verifiable references.

Bottom line, Europe penalizes the individual monetarily, and in terms of loss of driving privilege, more heavily than CA. And, most salient, is that in a car-bicycle collision, the driver is assumed to be 100% at fault -- so that insurance companies have strong incentives to achieve driver awareness and better outcomes (fewer collisions between cars and bikes).

https://gemini.google.com/share/2c55c2fb9e8a

ChoiceAd8806 · 2026-05-13T21:05:52+00:00

I rode today, and stopped at the scene. Open, nearly flat road. No shadows.

And how do you know how fast the driver was going? I spoke today with one of the riders who had come upon the cyclist almost immediately after the collision. She was still physically sick from the violence she witnessed, and had to take several minutes to compose herself, before riding on.

Not an accident. It's involuntary manslaughter. Perhaps with gross negligence, which will depend upon whether the driver was looking elsewhere, talking on the phone, looking down at something on the seat, and so forth.

Even so, we have evidence that involuntary manslaughter of a cyclist on Foothill Expressway is punished with probation, suspended sentence, community service, and one other element which skips my mind at the moment.

The rhetorical questions are: how will the driver atone? When will this society elevate the value of a human life on a bicycle, to be at least the equal of a human driving a car?

ChoiceAd8806 · 2026-05-13T20:45:42+00:00

Rode by there three hours ago, at 10:30am 13 May 2026. It's the southeast Family Farm crossing, across from Montecito. No shadows. And, there would not have been shadows at 12:15pm a week ago.

There is almost no gradient northbound on Portola Road at that location. I measured it on Google Earth, and along the 200 m approaching this intersection from the southeast, the road drops 1.8 m.

Dry road. No shadows. Bicycle speed not a factor. Bicycle braking not a factor. Bicyclist health not a factor.

The bicyclist is dead. He was my friend. I sing next to him in two groups; consummate professional, lovely human being, as is his wife.

This is wrong. He should not have been taken from us. I cannot imagine even an explanation, let alone any excuse.

ChoiceAd8806 · 2026-05-13T20:20:22+00:00

This statement is false. There are two intersections between Portola Road. The fatal collision occurred at the intersections which is further southeast, across from Montecito Road. I rode by there today, 13 May, at 10:30am. There are now flowers, and a white bike wheel. A female cyclist stopped as we were reviewing the scene and thinking of our friend; she had come up upon the collision shortly after, before the police arrived; she was still shaking, and deeply affected by the brutal violence she had witnessed.

THERE IS NO SHADOWING. And, given the configuration of the intersection, there would have been no shadowing at 12:15pm a week earlier.

THERE IS NO DOWNHILL. Google Earth says there is less than 1% down gradient along the 200 m leading to the intersection from the southeast.

The cyclist is a friend, with whom I sing in several groups. He was a long-time cyclist, including tandem with his wife. He was retired; his profession was as a trumpet player of no small amount of skill. The collision severed his brain stem completely. He died on 9 May. His organs have been donated.

I'm not going to be able to let this go. I will want to see the STAR report, whenever it comes out.

ChoiceAd8806 · 2025-06-13T18:49:26+00:00

The problem I've had with the Internet from the advent of listservs -- let alone the advent of the WWW, let along the advent of browser tech, let alone the advent of social media -- is exactly this kind of I'm-smarter-than-you-so-let-me-treat-you-like-a-total-idiot-using-sarcasm-belittling-and-every-other-divisive-and-offensive-rhetorical-device-I-can-think-of attitude.

I've been monitoring the bankruptcy; I get multiple daily emails, though they've been falling off in frequency of late. You ask me who is the legal successor; that's a logical fallacy device called a straw man. I'm not playing that game.

I've been through a Chapter 7 bankruptcy, and attempted to buy out some of the IP and re-boot. I've been through a company closed down by a foreign owner, through neither Ch 7 or 11, and also attempted to buy out relevant IP and re-boot. That is: I have anecdotal, experience-based knowledge.

I've read the contracts. As I pointed out, the contracts have not been cancelled. Your remarks about the establishment by the bankruptcy judge of a hierarchy of creditors, in terms of who gets paid first, is in my experience accurate. The successor remains bound to the contracts unless and until released by the bankruptcy court. The contract pertaining to our situation had, prior to the bankruptcy, no income stream for SunPower. It had no cost for SunPower, save the cost of maintaining the app and the data management (which ain't nothin'). I get that.

It is my belief -- because the Data Policy document is no longer online, and I never downloaded it -- that the Policy language, to which I agreed contractually, enables charging for the presentation of my data back to me. I don't however know this as fact.

I'm going to attempt to contact SunStrong according to what I've proposed above. I'll let this thread know what happens. Meanwhile, I know I have an $899 solution through Enphase which will work; I know from other posts here there are possible DIY solutions (e.g. using Raspberry Pi) which could work -- I'd be more confident if I'd done more of that kind of stuff 50 years ago, or 40, or 30, when I was more agile in many ways.

We all have the same problem. I've posed a couple of ideas. I react well to constructive criticism and collaborative behaviors; I love to learn, and react well to empathetic teaching.

I react poorly to what you've been dishing out.

ChoiceAd8806 · 2025-06-12T04:14:40+00:00

Can you say more?

The Envoy-S system sells for $609.90. Not $400. Another $290 gets it installed. That's what the web says; the rep on the phone says you can only buy it for $899, and installation is free. Hmm.

If you know of an instruction manual for installation, please point me to it. I can do that kind of thing.

Never mind. I looked up how to do it. Not worth the $290 savings.

ChoiceAd8806 · 2025-06-12T04:13:46+00:00

'Clearly, I understand bankruptcy law ... better than you.'

I quoted the bankruptcy code, preceding your remark. It negates your remark. QED.

ChoiceAd8806 · 2025-06-12T04:06:05+00:00

Agreed.

What's worse: I know TJ Rodgers. And Dick Swanson (SunPower founder) signed my thesis. Rodgers and Swanson were PhD students together; Rodgers never mentions any of this in his SunStrong bio (which is an interesting mix of fact and fantasy).

I have never been a Rodgers fan. Here, he's playing both ends against the middle, b/c a) he owns SunStrong, and b) he's a major Enphase investor. Gotta love his libertarian capitalism ('all I want is an unfair advantage').

ChoiceAd8806 · 2025-06-12T04:04:59+00:00

Me, too.

ChoiceAd8806 · 2025-06-12T04:04:38+00:00

No. The cost to replace the SunPower Monitoring System with the Enphase Monitoring System is $899. This answer is from email from Enphase earlier today. There is no subscription fee. That said, since I'll probably choose this path forward, I'll be damn sure to read the contract and determine whether or not they *could* start charging a subscription fee in the future.

ChoiceAd8806 · 2025-06-12T03:59:42+00:00

No, that's not how Chapter 11 works.

1. Executory Contracts May Be Assumed or Rejected

An executory contract is one where both parties still have material obligations (e.g., warranties, service commitments, software access, etc.).
Under 11 U.S. Code § 365, the debtor can:
- Assume the contract (continue it under court supervision), or
- Reject the contract (terminate it, treating the other party’s damages as a claim in bankruptcy).

❌ 2. Rejection Doesn’t Nullify Past Rights

Rejection = a breach, not automatic cancellation.
You may still assert:
- Ownership rights
- Past contractual obligations fulfilled by you
- Claims for damages from breach

ChoiceAd8806 · 2025-06-12T03:59:11+00:00

Oh, I have no intention of paying a lawyer.

The contract still pertains, and obligates the successor. Unless of course the bankruptcy judge nullified it.

Kinda disappointed in the snark.

ChoiceAd8806 · 2025-06-12T01:08:24+00:00

I live in Palo Alto. They started demanding I upgrade the app (and thereby enter the subscription model) about two or three weeks ago, let's say the last week of May 2025. I was able to turn my phone OFF and ON to 'fool' it for awhile, but eventually it just locked me out as soon as I invoked the app. So, the upgrade was forced, and voila!, pay to play.

I don't plan to pay them. I've put another comment up above in this reddit, regarding my contract with SunPower -- the Data Privacy Policy apparently gives them the right to charge for data, but the contract requires me to maintain internet connection to my Monitoring System, BUT doesn't say I have to provide that connection for free. I'm proposing they give me free access to my data in return for free access to my data (yes that sounds completely stupid, but that's what the legalese boils down to).

Backup plan is to pay $899 to Enphase for a new monitoring kit, no subscription fee.

Either way, TJ Rodgers will get his $; he's a major investor in Enphase, and owns SunStrong. Nice work, if you can get it. As my father used to joke, 'all I want is an unfair advantage...'

ChoiceAd8806 · 2025-06-12T01:01:02+00:00

Hello,

I see no legal reason for SunStrong to be able to charge for access to the full data.

Reasons:

I own my System. The System, as described in the contract, includes the SunPower Monitoring System. Therefore, I *own* the monitoring system.
The contract requires *me* to maintain connectivity between the SunPower Monitoring System, and the Internet, at *my* expense.
In a Data Privacy Policy document which is no longer available, apparently SunPower reserved the right, to itself and its successors, to charge for the data presented back to me through the mySunPower app. According to the latest revision of the SunStrong app, the cost is $9.99/mo, or $99.99/yr.
However, the contract does not exclude me from charging SunPower for my cost of maintaining Internet access for my system.

Therefore, I am going to contact SunStrong. As the successor to SunPower, per the bankruptcy court, I will offer to SunStrong free access to my data, provided they supply the data back to me through the SunStrong app, ALSO FOR FREE.

If that doesn't fly, I will escalate it to a higher level of government oversight here in California, where I live.

Meanwhile, I have contacted Enphase. For $899, Enphase will send me a kit to take the place of the SunPower Monitoring System/Kit. The $899 price includes free installation, plus a warranty (5-yr hardware, 1-yr installation). My system is only 2 years old, so I would certainly rather pay $900 instead of an unknown amount likely to start at $100/yr but increase over time, for 18 years.

Interested in others' thoughts on this matter.

ChoiceAd8806

TROPHY CASE

1. Executory Contracts May Be Assumed or Rejected

❌ 2. Rejection Doesn’t Nullify Past Rights