Timeguessr is very similar to whentaken, but I prefer the former.

I don't see it as ridiculing anyone. It's criticising the system that created this mess.

Blaming cyclists for something a motorist failed to do seems to be a uniquely North American thing.

I can tell you that it's also very much a thing in many parts of Europe.

You don't even need that many people before cars become impractical.

In two years presumably. It's been two years away since 2015.

So we can build things to a somewhat lower capacity sure. That helps, but what exactly does it solve?

Even if we assume everyone can work from home, people still need to go places for other reasons.

What's the difference?

Anti car doesn't mean completely banning cars. Nobody is saying to replace ambulances with bus trips. There's obviously a need and cars would be much more effective for those things if the roads weren't clogged with people who don't have a need.

Fast & frequent public transport, safe cycling infrastructure, footpaths, just putting things closer together to reduce the need for transport

The only solution to car traffic is building viable alternatives to driving. Alternatives also bring many environmental and societal benefits.

It's Shanghai, Yan'an Road West. You can see the front of Jing'an Temple and the adjacent mall in the distance. There's definitely some editing weirdness going on on the road in the foreground though.

Speak for yourself. I'm not pulling this out of my arse, I'm telling you things I just happen to know.

A single train with a single crew can transport more people in a day when travelling at higher speed.

This is running costs. The capital costs are irrelevant.

It's cheaper to run a high speed service than a low speed one. You can transport more people with the same number of staff and trains because it runs faster. The solution isn't to run an artificially cheaper low speed service along side, it's to run the high speed service in a sane way.

The problem isn't how they're constructed, it's how they're run, and this article is basically just complaining about SNCF without realising it. They run bad timetables and aim for high occupancy rather than transporting more people. Jon Worth has better writing on the topic IMO.

Should it not be double foldable? It has two folds

Or the fact that it doesn't need to be real because 1. It's still funny and 2. We all know that the incident has happened somewhere, because shit like this happens so often.

Which part of what I said do you disagree with?

exactly, either way you need to make sure there isn't any oncoming traffic.

If there isn't space to overtake two cyclists side by side, there isn't space to overtake one cyclist. If there's another car coming towards you while you overtake, you'd be endangering the one cyclist.