jimmybot
@jimmybot.com
writing about housing, safe streets, transportation, local & state happenings from Jersey City, NJ
Ah I found the before and after. Simple and effective. Awesome.
The awful Williamsburg Bridge off-ramp was leveled by
Mayor Mamdani and NYC DOT on Tuesday ahead of a $70 million capital improvement project that will make Delancey Street safer and more navigable for cyclists and pedestrians.
New from @sophlebo.bsky.social: www.youtube.com/shorts/XIZD7...
Mayor Mamdani and NYC DOT on Tuesday ahead of a $70 million capital improvement project that will make Delancey Street safer and more navigable for cyclists and pedestrians.
New from @sophlebo.bsky.social: www.youtube.com/shorts/XIZD7...
Williamsburg Bridge bike ramp fixed by Mayor Mamdani and NYC DOT #nyc #urbancycling #bike
YouTube video by Streetsblog NYC
www.youtube.com
January 6, 2026 at 10:18 PM
Ah I found the before and after. Simple and effective. Awesome.
Reposted by jimmybot
Zohran just went out and fixed the Williamsburg Bridge bike entrance. Just did it. No faffing, no nonsense. Bam. Fixed.
January 6, 2026 at 7:37 PM
Zohran just went out and fixed the Williamsburg Bridge bike entrance. Just did it. No faffing, no nonsense. Bam. Fixed.
Reposted by jimmybot
Looks like they will be running service every 15 minutes on the 119 on Saturdays, instead of every 20.
π π Thank you NJ Transit! Much needed frequency improvements. More weekend service coming to the 119 and more weekday service coming to the 125 π π
We'll continue advocating for faster, more frequent, and more reliable buses.
We'll continue advocating for faster, more frequent, and more reliable buses.
January 6, 2026 at 5:47 PM
Looks like they will be running service every 15 minutes on the 119 on Saturdays, instead of every 20.
Reposted by jimmybot
π π Thank you NJ Transit! Much needed frequency improvements. More weekend service coming to the 119 and more weekday service coming to the 125 π π
We'll continue advocating for faster, more frequent, and more reliable buses.
We'll continue advocating for faster, more frequent, and more reliable buses.
January 6, 2026 at 5:29 PM
π π Thank you NJ Transit! Much needed frequency improvements. More weekend service coming to the 119 and more weekday service coming to the 125 π π
We'll continue advocating for faster, more frequent, and more reliable buses.
We'll continue advocating for faster, more frequent, and more reliable buses.
I agree driver assist has deep structural issues β liability dodging, lulling drivers into inability to take over β even aside from the stats. Driver assist also still requires buying cars and parking. I don't find them equivalent, but consumers will be confused, sure.
January 6, 2026 at 9:59 PM
I agree driver assist has deep structural issues β liability dodging, lulling drivers into inability to take over β even aside from the stats. Driver assist also still requires buying cars and parking. I don't find them equivalent, but consumers will be confused, sure.
David does exactly p-hacking in his article. Actually it's more like completely ignoring p-values to make his point. "What if I grabbed a p-value from one scenario and applied it to something completely different?"
January 6, 2026 at 8:05 PM
David does exactly p-hacking in his article. Actually it's more like completely ignoring p-values to make his point. "What if I grabbed a p-value from one scenario and applied it to something completely different?"
Yes, apparently a tribal/cultural battle π€£. There are a lot of people that believe in Tesla's FSD with zero statistical grounding, and even if you showed them otherwise, it wouldn't change their minds. There's the possibility the same is happening on this site with Waymo just in the other direction.
January 6, 2026 at 8:04 PM
Yes, apparently a tribal/cultural battle π€£. There are a lot of people that believe in Tesla's FSD with zero statistical grounding, and even if you showed them otherwise, it wouldn't change their minds. There's the possibility the same is happening on this site with Waymo just in the other direction.
Yeah and dismissing crash rate and injury data is just not productive. It's not impossible for the fatality rate to actually be same as human drivers *while* serious injury crashes are down 90%. But it would be very surprising. In human drivers there are tons of predictive factors.
January 6, 2026 at 7:55 PM
Yeah and dismissing crash rate and injury data is just not productive. It's not impossible for the fatality rate to actually be same as human drivers *while* serious injury crashes are down 90%. But it would be very surprising. In human drivers there are tons of predictive factors.
I am for all those measures and outcomes. We should continue those. If Waymo's data continues to be good, I simply do not feel that is a threat or reason to stop working on mode shift or street redesigns. As you've made the point many times, people will own existing cars far, far into the future.
January 6, 2026 at 7:40 PM
I am for all those measures and outcomes. We should continue those. If Waymo's data continues to be good, I simply do not feel that is a threat or reason to stop working on mode shift or street redesigns. As you've made the point many times, people will own existing cars far, far into the future.
"1. There's is laughably zero risk the US adopts AVs for *safety* reasons."
The reason I made this point is AVs will probably be adopted because of convenience. You're not cynical enough about car culture if you don't think it's just going to keep happening and the game is regulating, not stopping.
The reason I made this point is AVs will probably be adopted because of convenience. You're not cynical enough about car culture if you don't think it's just going to keep happening and the game is regulating, not stopping.
January 6, 2026 at 7:20 PM
"1. There's is laughably zero risk the US adopts AVs for *safety* reasons."
The reason I made this point is AVs will probably be adopted because of convenience. You're not cynical enough about car culture if you don't think it's just going to keep happening and the game is regulating, not stopping.
The reason I made this point is AVs will probably be adopted because of convenience. You're not cynical enough about car culture if you don't think it's just going to keep happening and the game is regulating, not stopping.
It gets rid of sunk cost fallacy and converts it to a marginal cost. You can't model VMT unless you know the price. VMT reduction isn't really that common of a goal, but it should be, and we can simply tax VMT in that case. It is politically difficult now because people already own their cars.
January 6, 2026 at 7:17 PM
It gets rid of sunk cost fallacy and converts it to a marginal cost. You can't model VMT unless you know the price. VMT reduction isn't really that common of a goal, but it should be, and we can simply tax VMT in that case. It is politically difficult now because people already own their cars.
Just because the US has resisted obvious safe streets measures doesn't mean the political environment will become easier because advocates stomp on AVs. The 3D chess is also hypocrisy and doesn't work when advocates are trying to call out Google for (potentially) lying by pushing lies themselves.
January 6, 2026 at 7:09 PM
Just because the US has resisted obvious safe streets measures doesn't mean the political environment will become easier because advocates stomp on AVs. The 3D chess is also hypocrisy and doesn't work when advocates are trying to call out Google for (potentially) lying by pushing lies themselves.
It's a really poorly researched article and not grounded in actual statistics. I think advocates just need to put their (correctly) cynical hats back on instead of playing 3D chess:
1. There's is laughably zero risk the US adopts AVs for *safety* reasons.
2. Have you seen human drivers lately?
1. There's is laughably zero risk the US adopts AVs for *safety* reasons.
2. Have you seen human drivers lately?
This piece is disappointing and deeply misunderstands statistics, statistical power, and uses data to mislead. It does not take billions of miles to prove an AV system *if* it is much safer than human drivers. It's also not clear that Waymo doesn't reduce overall VMT if people give up car ownership.
Sorry, but triumphant claims about autonomous vehicle safety are wildly exaggerated.
It's an open question whether todayβs self-driving cars are any safer than those driven by humans.
And if reducing crashes is the goal, that isnβt even the right question.
My deep dive, in Bloomberg π§΅
It's an open question whether todayβs self-driving cars are any safer than those driven by humans.
And if reducing crashes is the goal, that isnβt even the right question.
My deep dive, in Bloomberg π§΅
January 6, 2026 at 7:04 PM
It's a really poorly researched article and not grounded in actual statistics. I think advocates just need to put their (correctly) cynical hats back on instead of playing 3D chess:
1. There's is laughably zero risk the US adopts AVs for *safety* reasons.
2. Have you seen human drivers lately?
1. There's is laughably zero risk the US adopts AVs for *safety* reasons.
2. Have you seen human drivers lately?
Live in one of the lowest fatality areas in the country, and it is enormously frustrating how anti-social post-COVID human drivers have become. Deliberate bullies now.
If Waymo continued on their current trajectory and yielded to pedestrians reliably, I'd take them over human drivers in a heartbeat
If Waymo continued on their current trajectory and yielded to pedestrians reliably, I'd take them over human drivers in a heartbeat
January 6, 2026 at 6:52 PM
Live in one of the lowest fatality areas in the country, and it is enormously frustrating how anti-social post-COVID human drivers have become. Deliberate bullies now.
If Waymo continued on their current trajectory and yielded to pedestrians reliably, I'd take them over human drivers in a heartbeat
If Waymo continued on their current trajectory and yielded to pedestrians reliably, I'd take them over human drivers in a heartbeat
All for regulation, rigor, and transparency. I am also skeptical of Tesla and don't see any AVs as even close to working except for Waymo. Waymo is self-interested sure, but 90% fewer serious injury crashes is not something you can just dismiss off-hand with handwaving skepticism.
January 6, 2026 at 6:43 PM
All for regulation, rigor, and transparency. I am also skeptical of Tesla and don't see any AVs as even close to working except for Waymo. Waymo is self-interested sure, but 90% fewer serious injury crashes is not something you can just dismiss off-hand with handwaving skepticism.
The implication of the RAND study (2016) is that it would not be worth building an AV system that was only slightly safer than humans because that would take billions of miles to prove. But the same study calculated you would only need a few million miles to show drastic decreases in injuries.
January 6, 2026 at 6:41 PM
The implication of the RAND study (2016) is that it would not be worth building an AV system that was only slightly safer than humans because that would take billions of miles to prove. But the same study calculated you would only need a few million miles to show drastic decreases in injuries.
This piece is disappointing and deeply misunderstands statistics, statistical power, and uses data to mislead. It does not take billions of miles to prove an AV system *if* it is much safer than human drivers. It's also not clear that Waymo doesn't reduce overall VMT if people give up car ownership.
Sorry, but triumphant claims about autonomous vehicle safety are wildly exaggerated.
It's an open question whether todayβs self-driving cars are any safer than those driven by humans.
And if reducing crashes is the goal, that isnβt even the right question.
My deep dive, in Bloomberg π§΅
It's an open question whether todayβs self-driving cars are any safer than those driven by humans.
And if reducing crashes is the goal, that isnβt even the right question.
My deep dive, in Bloomberg π§΅
We Still Donβt Know if Robotaxis Are Safer Than Human Drivers
And even if self-driving technology proves to be less dangerous, there are many better ways to improve traffic safety and prevent fatal crashes.
www.bloomberg.com
January 6, 2026 at 6:27 PM
This piece is disappointing and deeply misunderstands statistics, statistical power, and uses data to mislead. It does not take billions of miles to prove an AV system *if* it is much safer than human drivers. It's also not clear that Waymo doesn't reduce overall VMT if people give up car ownership.
"per mile death rate than average American drivers, who drive around 123 million miles for every fatality"
This is simply incorrect based on your citation. IIHS estimates one fatality for every 79 million miles. Did you forget to divide?
100M miles / 1.26 fatalities = 79M miles
This is simply incorrect based on your citation. IIHS estimates one fatality for every 79 million miles. Did you forget to divide?
100M miles / 1.26 fatalities = 79M miles
January 6, 2026 at 4:31 PM
"per mile death rate than average American drivers, who drive around 123 million miles for every fatality"
This is simply incorrect based on your citation. IIHS estimates one fatality for every 79 million miles. Did you forget to divide?
100M miles / 1.26 fatalities = 79M miles
This is simply incorrect based on your citation. IIHS estimates one fatality for every 79 million miles. Did you forget to divide?
100M miles / 1.26 fatalities = 79M miles
You're being misleading or don't have a grasp of the fundamental statistical constraints. The implication of the paper is that it wouldn't be worth building a self-driving system that was only slightly better because the amount of miles to prove it would be very large. But not if it's a big jump.
January 6, 2026 at 4:22 PM
You're being misleading or don't have a grasp of the fundamental statistical constraints. The implication of the paper is that it wouldn't be worth building a self-driving system that was only slightly better because the amount of miles to prove it would be very large. But not if it's a big jump.
I agree those are crisises. No one disagrees. Which is why dollars should be urgently spent effectively. Your original assertion that only rail could shift people out of cars is simply incorrect. In cities, bus lanes, signal priority, bus frequency, etc are all very efficient ways to decrease VMT.
January 5, 2026 at 4:08 PM
I agree those are crisises. No one disagrees. Which is why dollars should be urgently spent effectively. Your original assertion that only rail could shift people out of cars is simply incorrect. In cities, bus lanes, signal priority, bus frequency, etc are all very efficient ways to decrease VMT.
No, TOD, which is typically bedroom communities, doesn't fix the basic issue of lack of reverse direction demand. The opposite is something like NEC which has Philadelphia and NYC as anchors for example.
January 5, 2026 at 3:23 PM
No, TOD, which is typically bedroom communities, doesn't fix the basic issue of lack of reverse direction demand. The opposite is something like NEC which has Philadelphia and NYC as anchors for example.
NJ needs to redesign roadways to be safe 24/7. In the meanwhile, there is pretty good evidence that traffic enforcement + aggressive license suspensions would reduce crash deaths. NJ's crash death rate per mile is 40% higher than Massachusetts β where there aren't even speed cameras.
#VisionZeroNJ
#VisionZeroNJ
January 5, 2026 at 2:54 PM
NJ needs to redesign roadways to be safe 24/7. In the meanwhile, there is pretty good evidence that traffic enforcement + aggressive license suspensions would reduce crash deaths. NJ's crash death rate per mile is 40% higher than Massachusetts β where there aren't even speed cameras.
#VisionZeroNJ
#VisionZeroNJ
Agreeing, but to drive the point home β because commuter rail in the US typically only has demand in a single direction at any given time and is running empty in the other direction, it also fundamentally has double whatever the theoretical operating costs are. Bedroom TOD also doesn't fix this.
January 5, 2026 at 2:12 PM
Agreeing, but to drive the point home β because commuter rail in the US typically only has demand in a single direction at any given time and is running empty in the other direction, it also fundamentally has double whatever the theoretical operating costs are. Bedroom TOD also doesn't fix this.
Maduro stole the election in 2024, 8M refugees, thousands of political prisoners. I wonder if this is the outcome β no war, no regime change, yet continued stolen elections & human rights violations β is actually quite palatable to the America-first left.
(I don't condone what happened yesterday)
(I don't condone what happened yesterday)
January 4, 2026 at 2:40 PM
Maduro stole the election in 2024, 8M refugees, thousands of political prisoners. I wonder if this is the outcome β no war, no regime change, yet continued stolen elections & human rights violations β is actually quite palatable to the America-first left.
(I don't condone what happened yesterday)
(I don't condone what happened yesterday)
Reposted by jimmybot
The @nytimes.com now confirming that, yep, this is exactly what happened www.nytimes.com/2026/01/04/w...
January 4, 2026 at 6:27 AM
The @nytimes.com now confirming that, yep, this is exactly what happened www.nytimes.com/2026/01/04/w...