More or less at the time when electric bicycles weighing over 20kg and moving over 30kmh started to drive on sidewalks, I started to avoid living in big cities.

That's the interesting bit. Is this a known / agreed upon feature of ANC headphones or just a property of a specific iteration of let's say airpods?

it is quote common family name in Czechia, my daughter's classmate has this family name as well

same with most of the Japanese car brands or even Citroen, Peugeot...

Or could sell it on eBay for an amount of money that's nontrivial from POV of a gig economy worker.

I bought a nice ding dong bell for my bike, and pedestrians seem to notice it a lot more than the nastier sounding bells.

Every single person that stops and looks due to this is a win in my book.

If this bell gets through ANC then yes it will help people with ANC. It's not an all or nothing situation, you hear it further away for each increase in loudness.

Also, ANC let's you reduce your music volume for the same signal to noise ratio.

I find the "Heard five seconds earlier, the difference between a serious collision and stepping aside" take hilarious. As if there is no other way to prevent a collision in five seconds other than the pedestrian getting out of the way.

As much as I get the urge to plow through pedestrians on bike paths (and stay proudly in the way of bikes on pedestrian paths), in real life, normal people don't do that kind of thing. Bikes have brakes for a reason.

Really? I would have guessed you could argue that it qualifies as „one signal giving device“ since it is one single piece of equipment (ie the horn in a car also has many parts, but it‘s presumably fine) and also that it „only produces one constant sound“, where that sound is composed of different frequencies (again, car horns probably don‘t have a pure tone in Denmark either, right?).

Regular alarm sounds already do that, because above 1kHz or so it's the cushioning in the device that does the majority of the cancelling. There's a dip in effectiveness before that because to cancel noise effectively it's best to have a latency lower than a quarter of the wave's period.

Also ANC works best on wide-spectrum sounds, so any kind of siren or the cries of a child will go through, as the spectrum is a series of narrow peaks.

as soon they do that all kind of companies will start abusing it, for example the sound of all smart phone notification will use exactly that frequency

this sounds like an amazing idea, the govt should introduce laws so that the companies do this

However, deaf people are allowed to drive, cycle, walk etc. so sound won't always work anyway.

Ha, I had the same idea before I realized it’ll just be used for ads. It would be cool for pilots’ announcements on a flight, or approaching stations on the train etc. But CVS will use it to tell you to download their app and enroll in ExtraCare Rewards. Or “Did you know you may be due for more than fourteen vaccines all at no cost to you?”

I think this is a really bad idea unless paired with some regime that penalizes inappropiate use of alarms - and most societies don't treat noise pollution as a real problem. For example, people honk all the time even when there are no safety issues. Or have misconfigured home/car alarms. Outlawing using ANC for blocking "fake alarms" only makes the problem worse.

This is more aimed to warn pedestrians who wear ANC headphones. Should people be prohibited from wearing headphones while walking?

In effect they are, even if not directly. There are requirements to stay aware of your surroundings. If you cause an accident by blocking all sounds, I totally can see insurance companies claiming this is your own responsibility and refusing to cover.

It is of course prohibited in many jurisdictions. it's just not enforceable.

It's not about the cyclists wearing ANC headsets (which is already prohibited at least in Euro countries), but about pedestrians wearing them. Another problem altogether.

It is pedestrian who are wearing the ANC to remove the noise outside.

There’s more than one issue. It’s not wrong to try to solve one of them.

Some people wear them there.

I need a noise canceller canceller canceller.

> Draw a line, say this is for bicycles, pedestrians and cars have no business here, and bikes have no business being on any other lane as long as these exist.

This is the reality in many cities, if it weren't for the hopefully not surprising fact that people don't always obey traffic laws perfectly.

If "shouldn't" worked we'd have no industrial accidents without any safety measures, no unwanted pregnancies and in general would more or less achieve heaven on Earth.

Unfortunately, the UK seems almost incapable of building usable cycle infrastructure (possibly excepting London). Your idea is just a recipe for magic protective paint and even more abuse of cyclists who don't want to be forced to use ridiculously badly designed infrastructure. e.g. Here in Bristol, we have an infamous shared cycle/pedestrian pavement along Coronation Rd that has a few trees completely blocking the cycle side which just means conflict between pedestrians and cyclists who have to fight over the scraps left over from motorists taking most of the space (https://www.google.com/maps/@51.4462522,-2.6064792,3a,75y,80...).

This only leaves open how to enforce all of it without everybody shouting domestic terror.

I would love that but not so much for pedestrians as for cars that don't see me on my bike. Ideally, the "bell" would automatically honk at them very loudly when they get too close.

what

I've been a cyclist in SF and in Amsterdam, both for many years.

In SF I used my bell much more aggressively. It was mainly for cars, if I'm in or entering their blind spot and my spidey sense tells me they are considering an action that places me in danger. For example, we all know when driving when the car in front of us is thinking about merging, even before they indicate (often I feel like I know before they do). I also used it for pedestrians stepping out into the street who are maybe looking past me for oncoming cars but somehow don't see me, or when approaching 'blind' situations like a sharp corner, a driver pulling out of a driveway but there is a tree between us, delivery drivers stepping out from their truck, etc. I can't say how many accidents have been prevented (the person may have eventually looked and seen me), but I can say that my bell has triggered people to look and see me earlier than they were going to had I not rang it.

In Amsterdam my bell is used much more sparingly. It's mostly for tourists stepping into (or considering stepping into) the bike lane. If they are already in the bike lane, I almost always prefer just to slow down a bit and dodge them, as ringing the bell often triggers a deer-caught-in-headlight moment or erratic behavior, which increases the chance of an accident or that I have to come to a full stop. The other situation is to express dissatisfaction at cars blocking bike lanes, cars/bikes not yielding, drivers blocking intersections, or other dangerous behavior. This isn't preventing an accident but I'd argue it is still important, as social control affects how often we make bad decisions. Outside the city I also use my bell to let other cyclists know I'm passing.

So yeah, I'd say bells prevent accidents, but obviously not as well as good biking infrastructure, where pedestrians, bikes, and cars have clear separate spaces, and visibility of cyclists to drivers is high.

Bicycle bells are mostly for warning pedestrians when approaching from behind and passing on shared-use trails. I ride on shared infrastructure and cannot afford to build new infrastructure when my town will not. Not warning a pedestrian when approaching from behind introduces the possibility of collision if the pedestrian makes a sudden change in his walking course. I typically use this etiquette:

Passing a single pedestrian or runner on a quiet day: no bell, coasting for a short bit with a loud free hub (the rotating ratchet element on the rear wheel) alerts the pedestrian to my presence.

Passing a runner: normal ring from a distance so they have knowledge that the bicycle is passing

Passing a cyclist: one loud ring from a distance

Passing a pedestrian walking a dog: two loud rings, one far, one close, so that the pedestrian is aware of the approaching bicycle and he can prevent his dog from running at me/colliding. Many dogs do seem to enjoy a bicycle chase.

Antisocial pedestrians (i.e., walking side-by-side such as to be blocking the path in both directions, preventing the bicyclist from passing): several loud rings of the bell until the antisocial activity has abated. Announcements in my local tongue (not English) that they impede the flow of traffic.

I concur. Even the best bell in the world may be utterly useless if the pedestrian happens to be deaf. Also, bicycle bells tend to polarise pedestrians - some people think that bells are rude and insisting that peds get out of the way and other people think it's dangerous and rude to not use a bell every time you overtake.

My solution is to still have a tiny bell on my road bike, but instead of using it, call out something like "can I get past, please?" or if an immediate response is required (e.g. ped blindly stepping into the road ahead of me) then yelling "Oi!" can really surprise them and make them notice you. I'm also a fan of using "Beep, beep" if a ped is on cycle infrastructure (active travel infrastructure is probably a better term) and I want to pretend that I'm an impatient driver.

I think the human voice is far superior to a bell as you can tailor the message for the situation and you don't have to move a hand away from the brakes to do so. (Using your voice is also a very good idea when approaching a horse and rider - horses know about humans and don't get freaked out if you call ahead "Morning!" or something cheery and appropriate).

A car company wanting to divert attention away from the carnage cars cause. Seems a bit suspicious no?

A horn or bell is mostly for telling other people "hey I'm here, stay out of my way and dont suddenly cross into my path"

My opinion as a cyclist is that I should basically only be using my bell on pedestrians when the pedestrians are wandering onto the bike lane. If im cycling through a shared space, I find it extremely rude to ring the bell, because it feels like I'm telling people to get out of my way, but they have just as much right to a shared path as I do. Some cyclists ring their bells because they're worried a pedestrian might suddenly turn into their path, but I think if one is concerned about that, it's a sign youre cycling too fast, and should just slow down.

With cars, I will sometimes proactively ring my bell at them if I think they're not sufficiently aware enough of me though.

> Do horns and bells really prevent accidents?

They absolutely do, for indirect reasons:

> Generally it's a lot easier just to press the brake

Maybe easier, but it hardly seems fair, nor realistic.

With a bit of experience, you can tell when pedestrians are likely to stumble onto the bike lane without looking. Then you have two choices: Significantly reduce your speed, or ring your bell first and only reduce speed if they still haven't noticed the oncoming bike.

If you only reduce speed, you'll be traveling at a very low average speed, and time is money (especially for bike delivery workers, but I also hate having to sharply decelerate for people glued to their screen or otherwise completely unaware of their surroundings even if I'm not in a rush), so you can take a guess as to whether "just reducing your speed" is practicable.

not all of them do

What if they are shared?

Edit 2: I originally didn’t think of the case when you want to warn pedestrians that you are passing (without asking them to give way) in case they decide to switch direction without looking if there is any incoming entities. That seems legitimate to me. Although giving a wide enough berth might be better than doing it routinely (that could amount to a lot of noise eventually).

Edit: Since people seem to go either way: It is my understanding that in my part of the world (in Scandinavia) cyclists do not have the right of way on sidewalks (which means they can’t bell people away). They also (and I know this one) do not have the right of way while cycling across road crossings. Something that most cyclists, in my experience, violate all the time.

Quite. It drives me up the wall when cyclists not only use the sidewalk close enough to me to practically graze me (pedestrian), but expect me to actively pay attention and yield to them. Use the road, dummy (there are scarce few bicycle lanes).

I use regular headphones (not over-ear and not really noise canc.) on the sidewalk but take them off when I am crossing the street. And I of course am mindful of other pedestrians. But I’m not gonna take them off because some two-wheeler thinks they can ram into me unless I jump out of the way on the sidewalk.

Well, sure, as soon as infrastructure exists so the alternative isn't "get run over by a homicidal driver". And actual infrastructure, not painted lines that typically get filled up with double-parking cars.

At least here in Austria, I honestly rarely, if ever, see them do that. Either roads or dedicated/mixed designated cycle paths. We do have enforcement even against cyclists, though more than anything, that catches all the "unlocked" e-bikes, because cycling on the sidewalks is not a thing anyone does.

Even with bikes being off the sidewalk, there is need for a quick way of getting others pedestrians attention.

Agreed. Make bike paths and people cycle on bike paths. Crazy stuff I know!

This is always an odd one, as it’s the people who look like they just found a bike in a skip and decided to ride around here that cycle on the pavements.

e.g.: In Amsterdam you cross biking lanes to cross the roads sometimes, or bike lanes and sidewalks are so integrated, you can wander into them without noticing.

Being tired in a crowded street in rainy weather doesn't help either.

As a cyclist in London, I’ve hit one pedestrian: they stepped backward(!) into a cycle lane. I had nowhere to go, as there was a curb on the other side. Pedestrian behaviour is just totally wild with respect to cycle lanes, a lot of them are just totally oblivious. If you cycle, you will come across people walking along or stepping into dedicated cycle lanes several times during the average commute.

A lot of footpaths in Europe are designated paths that are shared with cyclists

I'm often a pedestrian and I've been known to walk into the road where there are bikes and cars also.

this was not really an issue before food delivery apps came into fashion

btw. kids up until certain age can pretty much in all countries ride bike legally on sidewalk, are there any countries where 8yo can't ride bike on sidewalk?

I think I’d prefer AI slop comments to comments like this.

I don't know where you're from, but in Germany for example, there are countless situations where cyclists and pedestrians share the same space, or pedestrians can (or just do…) cross bicycle lanes. I'm a very law-abiding cyclist since witnessing a few horrible accidents, and yet I encounter situations with headphone-wearing pedestrians regularly. Often I'll ring my bell to no avail, until driving right up to them, and they still won't hear me. This is really frustrating; I'm definitely in the market for this.

Over-engineering? It's a fully mechanical bike bell that's made slightly differently. It's a very established and straightforward technology.

I completely disagree, this is just another level of safety.

If everything went perfectly everytime we wouldn't need any safety equipment, but things aren't always perfect.

The problem is the cyclist trying to overtake pedestrian on sidewalk faster. The cyclist paying for it is correct person paying for it.

I say it as cyclist. Pedestrians have right to be absent minded in parks and on public sidewalks.

when the alternative is "everyone doing the right thing" this solution starts to look like the pragmatic approach

which part would you consider overengineered?

What's your easy technical solution to improve common sense, then? Or is it the all time classic of "just improving society"? I'm all ears for your ideas.

The presentation looks like marketing overkill, their solution looks pretty simple. It‘s just two trills „Trillerwerk“ bells combined. It was the standard in Germany until the late 1990s https://youtu.be/-mW7dWHDivo

What is the right problem that should be solved here?

Eh, it's pragmatic.

It's replacing a problem you can't solve (human stupidity), with one you can (a better bell).

The real problem is that cyclists and pedestrians apparently in some countries share space commonly enough that this is necessary?

In the Netherlands, bicycle utopia, I cannot remember the last time I used my bell to alert a pedestrian of my existence. Granted, I never cycle in Amsterdam, but that is a special location where high-powered ship horns are probably required.

Regarding ANC, I naturally turn it off while cycling on my Bose Quiet Comfort II, as the ANC will try (and fail) to cancel the noise from the wind. I don't think this is a solved problem? So for bicycle-to-bicycle alerting, this also seems overkill.