TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Traffic collisions including cyclists in London 2022

45 点作者 willm超过 1 年前

8 条评论

hyper_reality超过 1 年前
This map looks cool but it doesn&#x27;t tell us a lot about the safe and unsafe places to cycle in London. Because it&#x27;s based on collision data by location, but we don&#x27;t know how many people cycle on each road per year, so can&#x27;t normalise for that.<p>To compare two examples, you can pick out Richmond Park in south-west London due to the low number of collisions in it. But this is actually a highly popular location to cycle. The relatively low amount of vehicles, 20mph speed limit, ban on large vehicles, high visibility, and few junctions, makes it a great place to cycle.<p>There are also a low number of collisions in the boroughs of Bromley and Bexley in south-east London. But this is not because they&#x27;re safe, but because very few people cycle there. There are loads of fast roads in these boroughs and little cycle infrastructure, and more of an hostile attitude from drivers compared to many other places in London.
评论 #38203841 未加载
评论 #38206982 未加载
评论 #38203812 未加载
riv991超过 1 年前
Incredible how you can see CS7 extending from Elephant and Castle to Clapham and Tooting on the map.<p>I was knocked off there earlier in the year, and the LCC said it has the most dangerous junction for cyclists in London on it.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;lcc.org.uk&#x2F;campaigns&#x2F;dangerous-junctions&#x2F;" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;lcc.org.uk&#x2F;campaigns&#x2F;dangerous-junctions&#x2F;</a>
评论 #38203450 未加载
nickweb超过 1 年前
*reported collisions. There will no doubt be a lot more minor bumps that haven’t been reported to one of the relevant agencies.
sertbdfgbnfgsd超过 1 年前
It&#x27;s a heatmap of population density.
评论 #38207013 未加载
评论 #38203709 未加载
snthd超过 1 年前
<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.roadpeace.org&#x2F;get-involved&#x2F;crash-not-accident&#x2F;" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.roadpeace.org&#x2F;get-involved&#x2F;crash-not-accident&#x2F;</a><p>&gt;I can’t help but get upset when people call a crash an accident. I lost my leg in a crash with a lorry. It was preventable – and even though the driver didn’t intend for the crash to happen, it was still his fault – Victoria, crash victim
sofixa超过 1 年前
&quot;Including&quot; &#x2F; &quot;Involving&quot; cyclists. Why the focus on the victim (more often than not) and the passive voice?
评论 #38203615 未加载
评论 #38204206 未加载
评论 #38203692 未加载
评论 #38203772 未加载
larodi超过 1 年前
Somehow I can’t help but think that spatial SQL is much more convenient for such analysis. Of course Jupiter and python libs are very convenient, but also not very performant in a way that matters with larger datasets…
gniv超过 1 年前
Do you really mean &quot;including&quot; or &quot;involving&quot;?