Sick of duck-walking around in cycling shoes? The barefoot-style sock/shoes said to be ideal for bikepacking adventures, plus cool stuff from Uvex, Lezyne, Topeak + Coospo

a1white wrote:

A £99 bike computer with GPS turn by turn nav is classed as "midrange"? I can't think of one cheaper than that. I'd be interested to see the review

EDIT. Just googled and noticed you can get for £44 on AliExpress

"Midrange" compared to the non-GPS computers that can be had for as little as a tenner.

They will also lighten your wallet, at least compared to the many equivalents available for around a tenner.

slc wrote:

They will also lighten your wallet, at least compared to the many equivalents available for around a tenner.

Agreed, plus there is nothing in the construction and materials that makes them worth anywhere near $72, maybe $20 tops.

It's still using an artificial mechanism to make intelligent decisions. Just of a very basic kind that's not really worth mentioning. Except that it means you can hike up the price when you do.

Even an old-school bimetallic thermostat is a kind of artificial intelligence, after a fashion.

In the same way that a brake lever connected to a brake calliper is a very simple neural network.

mdavidford wrote:

It's still using an artificial mechanism to make intelligent decisions. Just of a very basic kind that's not really worth mentioning. Except that it means you can hike up the price when you do.

Even an old-school bimetallic thermostat is a kind of artificial intelligence, after a fashion.

Doesn't the "intellegence" part of AI imply, as per the definition of intelligence, the ability to learn, to develop and apply learning? A bimetallic strip - or this light - exhibits no learning or development, it's simply doing what it was set up to do in a binary reaction to a stimulus.

Rendel Harris wrote:

per the definition of intelligence

There isn't really a good definition of intelligence (natural or artificial). It's an inherently wooly concept. That's a large part of the problem with people waving around the term 'AI' without being more specific about what they mean.

There are two parts to it. Machine learning is the process whereby a model is trained using data. An AI is the implementation of that model, it doesn't necessarily learn itself.

bensynnock wrote:

There are two parts to it. Machine learning is the process whereby a model is trained using data. An AI is the implementation of that model, it doesn't necessarily learn itself.

There's a specific problem with getting an AI model to continue training called "overfitting" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overfitting). This is where sample data is used to determine how "good" the AI is getting at classifying images etc. Initially, as training progresses, the AI becomes better at classifying the sample data and also better at classifying real-world data, but as the training continues, the AI gets even better at the sample data, but gets significantly worse at classifying real world data.

A non-AI analogy would be like measuring exam results to see how well children are being educated, but by focussing too much on the results, the educators become adept at teaching children to pass the exams rather than actually educating them on the subject matter.

Indeed. But is 250 lumens too dazzling for a rear light? 🤷‍♂️

Another_MAMIL wrote:

Indeed. But is 250 lumens too dazzling for a rear light? 🤷‍♂️

I wouldn't think so, LED car brake lights are 300-600 lumens aren't they? They're not dazzling, why would this be?

Maybe depends on the area of the light?  People aren't running lasers but I find the smaller area / point emitter of many bike lights a bit dazzling.  But perhaps some were flashing ones which don't help?  Your lux may vary...

Seeing, being seen (or noticed) and conveying roughly where you are exactly and your velocity... maybe I need 3 lights now (or 3x2)?

Car led brake lights are dazzling especially when stopped and the driver sits with their foot on the brake. 

Beardy wrote:

Car led brake lights are dazzling especially when stopped and the driver sits with their foot on the brake. 

According to the AA this is not so much because LED brake lights are so much brighter but because the massive increase in SUV-style vehicles means the brake lights are now right in the eyeline of the following drivers. I must say that makes sense to me because as a cyclist I don't find them dazzling, perhaps because they are below my eyeline. As if we needed another reason to show why they are unsuitable for city streets…

Whether it's the brightness, the height, or just me getting older, I certainly notice headlights are more dazzling in my mirrors these days (when driving). 

How good is it, do you think the extra expense and faff is worth it, and what happens when it goes funny?

ktache wrote:

How good is it, do you think the extra expense and faff is worth it, and what happens when it goes funny?

I really like it, it's a good light in its own right without the braking capacity, nice and bright (150 lumens max) and with all the usual mode selections, about five hours on max power (claims six) and 35 (claims 40) on lowest. Very quick to charge, fully flat to full in about 90 minutes. As I said it was a gift so not sure what it cost at the time but can be had for under £40 now, fairly good value in the current market. No faff involved really, just a long press of the on button to activate the braking feature and it remembers your choice for subsequent use until you turn the feature off with another long press. Don't know what you'd do if it goes wrong but shows no sign of doing so, been through a winter and a half of commuting plus use in summer as a daytime light (it has a light sensor that adjusts brightness in accordance with ambient light), maybe 750 hours of use all told and thus far as good as new. I've had quite a number of favourable comments, particularly from cyclists on London's busy cycleways who've remarked how useful it is to know when the rider in front is braking but also from drivers who've said the same. Had one complaint from a cabbie that it was "distracting" but as I (semi)politely pointed out, if it distracts you that means you've seen it so it's doing its job. Really happy with it overall. I have a slight reservation about the rubber fitting band, which, as with so many lights these days, is a proprietary number, so if it should break it would mean buying a replacement from the manufacturer, but it's got a reassuringly solid click-in garmin-style fitting and the rubber is showing no sign of fatigue thus far, despite being frequently swapped between bikes. I'd recommend!

Exactly right. If were intelligent then it's behaviour would not be predictable. It may choose to never turn on the light to save power for thinking about stuff. It may choose to burn out in a blaze of glory and end it's miserable existence. It may try and blink messages asking for help.

Yeah I've had this on a cateye rear light for like 6 years. It's fine, if a bit overzealous with the "brake light". It can come on when you hit a steep hill