Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org>
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech
Subject: Re: The AI specified bicycle features of the future
Date: Sun, 26 May 2024 16:25:43 -0500
Organization: Yellow Jersey, Ltd.
Lines: 91
Message-ID: <v309co$3jr27$1@dont-email.me>
References: <8c915jh72csumpn470ur8ffo2v7odn6j8c@4ax.com>
 <v2qn5k$2ebfn$1@dont-email.me> <1ja45jhruruii7ap5scg4i5hrv2amsiqvs@4ax.com>
 <v2td1i$30g4n$1@dont-email.me> <cvp65jl6sm023sv5sf8eco01d0gl8mu50c@4ax.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 26 May 2024 23:25:44 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="ae6a1ec2539c482e79aa81c1623f8a9e";
	logging-data="3796039"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX198Iu+AFBA7h2UstV+2p1/9"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Db4Q1mzVLQe4iwIt/lJ+6pzYC2Q=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <cvp65jl6sm023sv5sf8eco01d0gl8mu50c@4ax.com>
Bytes: 5258

On 5/26/2024 12:29 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Sat, 25 May 2024 14:09:39 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> 
>> On 5/25/2024 1:51 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>> On Fri, 24 May 2024 14:44:04 -0400, Zen Cycle <funkmaster@hotmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 5/24/2024 10:47 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>> (mega chomp)
>>>
>>>>> Remember, this is a conceptual design, but who knows? The future might
>>>>> surprise us with even more incredible innovations!
>>>>
>>>> Meh...I'll just stick with the basics....
>>>
>>> Did you notice that the CoPirate AI generated list of features didn't
>>> include anything that would be considered innovative or revolutionary?
>>> All of the items suggested were existing for failed products.  Nothing
>>> futuristic or attention grabbing.  That's to be expected because the
>>> data used to train the AI was probably limited to existing products
>>> because Microsoft doesn't make any money advertising science fiction
>>> bicycles.  If you're brain storming for revolutionary ideas, then
>>> CoPirate and probably Google Gemini, both of whom are funded by
>>> advertising, are unlikely to be very useful.
>>>
>>> Hmmm... basic bicycle?  Like this?
>>>
>>> "A Prehistoric STONE bike?"
>>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSIiBetTgjk>  (19:54)
>>> To bypass the construction and go directly to the first ride:
>>> <https://youtu.be/SSIiBetTgjk?t=965>
> 
>> Makes sense. Bicycles reached their apex before 1900* (steel
>> frames, neutral handling geometry, tubular tires and fixed
>> gear).
>>
>> Typical example:
>> https://luxlow.com/bicycles/vintageroadtrackbikes/1898-antique-davis-dayton-model-22-special-road-racer-bike-2950/
>>
>> All features after are refinements and/or geegaws.
>>
>> *one might quibble that coaster brakes date from 1899.
> 
> If someone offered such a bicycle today, I'm not sure how well it
> would be received with one fixed gear, coaster brake, wooden rims,
> solid rubber tires (no visible valve stem), no water bottle mounts and
> a rather stiff looking saddle.  Weight might also be an issue.  I'll
> admit that I'm spoiled by modern conveniences and really wouldn't want
> to degenerate into retro minimalist cycling.  I live in the hills,
> where the lack of gears, a front brake, and pneumatic tires would make
> cycling on such a minimalist machine a painful and hazardous exercise.
> When I was much younger, the lack of such conveniences were not much
> of a problems.  At my advanced age, they are now a necessity.  One
> size does not work for everyone.
> 
> What I suspect you may have done is listed all the marginal features
> and bolt-on gizmos that have been added to the basic bicycle, and
> passed judgment on each individually.  Yes, it is possible to design a
> usable bicycle by removing a few marginal features.  However, you've
> gone a step further and declared everything added since 1900 to be
> superfluous.  It doesn't work that way.  In an ideal world, the rider
> would pass judgment on each feature individually and individually
> determine if they are necessary.  I would suspect that every rider has
> at least one modern bicycle feature that they deem essential.  I can't
> help it if the bicycle industry throws in everything as standard.
> 
> "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler"
> That's the simplified version.  The original quote wasn't sufficiently
> simplified:
> "Did Einstein really say that?"
> <https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-05004-4>
> 
> 
> 
> 

We're in general agreement. Still, well over a hundred years 
on, people do still ride simple (if not simplistic) 
bicycles.  There is a gulf as usual between 'adequate' and 
'desirable'.

One quibble; Late 1890s mid to premium bicycles are on 
tubular tires not 'solid rubber' or even semipneumatics.

'no visible valve stem' may be either a photo edit or a 
'just for looks' tire rather than a $$$ period correct tire.
-- 
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971