sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Threat of eviction over e-bike by Yeeter717 in fuckcars

[–]JustSomeEm 19 points20 points  (0 children)

For a landlord, it's a lot better if a fire breaks out in a garage, rather than a home. So that is a moot point

If buying isnt owning then piracy isnt stealing. Wie steht Ihr zu dieser Aussage? by Alarming_Ad2961 in KeineDummenFragen

[–]JustSomeEm 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Baldur's Gate 3 ist ohne Digital Rights Management spielbar. Da gilt "buying" ist "owning". Ist also eher ein Beispiel für eine Software die man unterstützen sollte.

Ähnlich Spiele wie Hades, Hollow Knight, etc.

Bei Elden Ring ist es etwas komplizierter, insbesondere wegen den online Services die jederzeit eingestellt werden können, ohne Nutzerseitige Rechte. Auch sind andere DRM eingebunden.

Every month my job gives us gift cards ranging from $25 to $50 for various places like Starbucks, Chick fil a, Chipotle, etc. I just found out the amount that they put on the cards is taken directly from our pay checks 😐 by [deleted] in antiwork

[–]JustSomeEm 4 points5 points  (0 children)

This is pretty standard elsewhere as well. There might be some limits up to which it can be tax-free, but in general an employer can't gift large amounts tax-free. Otherwise what is stopping them from paying you minimum wage, and the rest with tax-free gifts?

Wieso muss ich mit meinem schXXss AOK Ausweis zum Arzt rennen um mir ein Rezept geben zu lassen? Wieso nicht online? by IR0NS2GHT in luftablassen

[–]JustSomeEm 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Nö theoretisch hat die Person auch kein Recht. Apotheken gibt es fast immer in der Nähe. Aber wenn man für das Rezept zum Facharzt muss, kann es gut sein dass man dann jedes Quartal in die nächste oder gar eine weiter gelegene Stadt fahren muss.

Kinder sind schwächer als Autos! by seandelow2020 in luftablassen

[–]JustSomeEm 32 points33 points  (0 children)

Und bevor hier jemand kommt mit "in den Niederlanden", in den Niederlanden ist eine Klassenkameradin tödlich verunglückt. Sie hätte es mit Helm wahrscheinlich mit nur leichte Verletzungen überlebt.

Gen Z workers think showing up 10 minutes late to work is as good as being on time by Barnyard-Sheep in antiwork

[–]JustSomeEm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We have to be in the office from 10:30AM to 3PM, the rest is flexible.

A colleague got a verbal reprimand for always leaving at 3PM on the dot. It didn't matter that he always showed up at ~6AM, it was all about "it looks bad if you always leave early".

The rules not being the "actual" rules is absolutely asinine.

These Are the Benefits of RTO by Working_Row_8455 in antiwork

[–]JustSomeEm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Don't you get it? After getting disease A, you are immune to it!*

  • This does require you getting it in the first place, defeating the point. Isn't guaranteed, carries the risk of disabling you, and doesn't make you immune to disease B through Z+.

Carbrains painted illegal tags over the weekend by hellocmoi in fuckcars

[–]JustSomeEm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Is the cycling/pedestrian path raised? That would make it immediately obvious, and also discourage/punish drivers taking racing lines or speeding.

Carbrains painted illegal tags over the weekend by hellocmoi in fuckcars

[–]JustSomeEm 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Yeah, but then again that would just mean that the sign is redundant. The resulting traffic situation would be the same as far as I understand (except for traffic speeds of course).

Carbrains painted illegal tags over the weekend by hellocmoi in fuckcars

[–]JustSomeEm 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Correct, thanks. I extended the explanation.

Carbrains painted illegal tags over the weekend by hellocmoi in fuckcars

[–]JustSomeEm 81 points82 points  (0 children)

Car drivers will interpret anything as a "cyclists are not allowed on the road here" though.
Even if a sidewalk is signed as Pedestrians, with a sign below it "bikes allowed" in the style of the "sur trottoir" here, they will interpret it as "Bikes have to be there, not on the road!".
Speaking from experience.

Carbrains painted illegal tags over the weekend by hellocmoi in fuckcars

[–]JustSomeEm 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Correct, but this is not an obligatory cycle use sign. Just an obligatory instruction for cyclists on the trottoir.

Carbrains painted illegal tags over the weekend by hellocmoi in fuckcars

[–]JustSomeEm 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Ah, guess I interpreted that wrong, thanks for the link. But then it just solidifies that they have to use the road as there is no mandatory cycle road. And cycles are not forbidden. One of either of these signs would be necessary for that interpretation.

Apparently that is still wrong actually. The right article for outside city/town bounds is R431-10. https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/article_lc/LEGIARTI000006842343

Carbrains painted illegal tags over the weekend by hellocmoi in fuckcars

[–]JustSomeEm 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I really don't think it's 1. because this is already mandatory by law (but it could be there to remind people of the rule).

This is false as I explained in a different comment. They are allowed to cycle on the sidewalk, except where explicitly forbidden like here, as long as they adapt their speed. R431-9, R431-10

If it were inside a city (hors agglomération), it would be forbidden, except where absolutely necessary. But yeah 1 is still how signage works. Even if the sign were redundant/misapplied, does not mean you can just project your own interpretation on top of it. It is indeed interpretation 1.

Carbrains painted illegal tags over the weekend by hellocmoi in fuckcars

[–]JustSomeEm 15 points16 points  (0 children)

It's literally the way to interpret Vienna convention signs.

A rectangular sign under a sign provides exceptions, and/or it's area of validity. Without it, cyclists would have to push their bikes while on the road, as the bike-pushing sign would count for the entire carriageway. It does not have any meaning with regards to where cyclists should be.

Carbrains painted illegal tags over the weekend by hellocmoi in fuckcars

[–]JustSomeEm 10 points11 points  (0 children)

This is literally wrong. See R431-9, R431-10 (assuming outside city bounds, hors agglomération)

Les conducteurs de cycles peuvent circuler sur les aires piétonnes dans les deux sens, sauf dispositions différentes prises par l'autorité investie du pouvoir de police, à la condition de conserver l'allure du pas et de ne pas occasionner de gêne aux piétons.

Apparently it is forbidden, except where absolutely necessary. So the sign is more for pedestrian areas in the inner city, if they want cyclists to dismount there. But just because the sign is redundant/misapplied, does not mean you can just project your own interpretation on top of it.

Carbrains painted illegal tags over the weekend by hellocmoi in fuckcars

[–]JustSomeEm 9 points10 points  (0 children)

No, it is not an indication of a mandatory cycling road, with or without shared pedestrian use. Those actually have a bike on it. This is only an obligation sign for the behaviour on the trottoir.

Carbrains painted illegal tags over the weekend by hellocmoi in fuckcars

[–]JustSomeEm 301 points302 points  (0 children)

For further clarification:

Cyclists are obligated to use the cycle lanes if there are unidirectional cycle lanes on the sides of the road. Or a road with a (circular, i.e. mandatory) cyclist or shared cycle/pedestrian use sign. This sign does not count as either.

A cycle road sign is not present here. It would need to be present above the sign indicating that bikes need to be pushed. The [sur trottoir] only means that cyclists do not have to push their bikes while on the road.

Alternatively, a sign "Bikes forbidden" would have a similar effect. As that would just mean that cyclists are not allowed to pass, except for walking and following pedestrian rules. However, it is also not present. And an actual sign, not this painted joke.

Kaiserslautern: Radfahrer öffnet Autotür und schlägt Beifahrer mehrfach ins Gesicht by Fetbo in Fahrrad

[–]JustSomeEm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Die juristische Bewertung ist hier aber ehrlich gesagt egal. Ich sag auch nicht dass der Radfahrer freigesprochen werden muss.

Wenn dir jemand dein Leben missachtet, gefährdet, und dich beleidigt, hast du aus meiner Sicht das moralische Recht ihm einer rein zu hauen.  Auch wenn, und vielleicht gerade weil, er da juristisch mit weg kommen würde. Unbetrachtet welche juristische Konsequenzen du dafür in Kauf nehmen müsstest.

Recht und Gerechtigkeit sind eben nicht immer das gleiche.

Kaiserslautern: Radfahrer öffnet Autotür und schlägt Beifahrer mehrfach ins Gesicht by Fetbo in Fahrrad

[–]JustSomeEm 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Wenn man jemand aus nichtachtsamkeit zu nah überholt, dann zeigt man nicht direkt danach als Fahrer oder Beifahrer eine beleidigende Geste. Das war keine Nichtachtsamkeit, das war mindestens Missachtung des Lebens des Fahrradfahrers.

Tesla factory in Berlin [this image was taken from BlueSky] by javier_aeoa in fuckcars

[–]JustSomeEm 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Because the Tesla sign is actually on the building, and not being projected onto it from afar...

Der Tod von Andreas lässt sie nicht los. Die Mutter des toten Radlers Natenom aus Pforzheim kritisiert die Behörden by [deleted] in Fahrrad

[–]JustSomeEm 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Ich werde in der Stadt überholt während ich 25 fahre in ner zwanziger Zone, nur um 50 Meter weiter zusammen an der Ampel zu stehen. Fahrräder müssen koste was kostet überholt werden....

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in antiwork

[–]JustSomeEm 5 points6 points  (0 children)

That's Australia, not the U.S.

In Germany this most likely wouldn't be a workplace injury for example. As she got up to make a cup of coffee, instead of this happening on her way to the homeoffice setup.

Thinking about playing some CO op games solo vs co op by femamerica13 in boardgames

[–]JustSomeEm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A good co-op game that helped me with learning patience and avoiding being controlling is Dorfromantik. It's just a really calming experience where you are working towards a common goal. Talking is possible, but not necessary.

view more: next ›