I Want To Ride It Where I Like

July 23, 2005 9:39 PM

Moving By Bicycle. "I've moved several times entirely by bicycle. I've hauled huge things, including couches and washing machines."
posted by fandango_matt (61 comments total)

Huh.
posted by Doug at 9:43 PM on July 23, 2005

I've done that before. It sucks.

Now I have three vehicles, and one is always a pickup truck.
posted by Balisong at 9:45 PM on July 23, 2005

I guess that's feasible if you don't take your furniture with you.
posted by invitapriore at 9:47 PM on July 23, 2005

Umm, the directly linked pictures aren't you want them to be, maybe want to edit that. Good thing I wasn't at work.
posted by Badgermann at 9:47 PM on July 23, 2005

ooh! lemonparty.jpg!
posted by keswick at 9:47 PM on July 23, 2005

heh. lemonparty.jpg paints balisong's comment in a whole new light.
posted by keswick at 9:48 PM on July 23, 2005

Eh, What?

Lemonparty?

I'm using Firefox, and I can't fathom how this is dirty or something.

Google has revealed an early nightmare.

I don't know where you got that, but I guess you got me...
posted by Balisong at 9:58 PM on July 23, 2005

Is lemonparty the goatse of old fat gay guys?
posted by Balisong at 10:00 PM on July 23, 2005

Holy crap, WTF?! I don't know why the images are being redirected. They worked on/in preview. Sorry, everybody.

http://www.michaelbluejay.com/bikemove/

http://www.michaelbluejay.com/bikemove/bikemove14.jpg

http://www.michaelbluejay.com/photos/images/oven.jpg
posted by fandango_matt at 10:00 PM on July 23, 2005

Hahahaha well Balison there's no accounting for taste is there. Yeah, really man, some people consider those type images to be lewd, FYI.
posted by nervousfritz at 10:00 PM on July 23, 2005

I'm guessing the author of the original webpage has an automatic redirect to the nasty gay porn that kicks in whenever someone links directly to photos on his site. Any traces of respect I might have had for someone who moves via bicycle are pretty much overshadowed by that.
posted by craniac at 10:01 PM on July 23, 2005

I still don't know what you're talking about...
posted by Balisong at 10:06 PM on July 23, 2005

I've done that before. It sucks.

Unfortunate choice of words.
posted by Pseudonumb at 10:22 PM on July 23, 2005

If I'd known it was going to be *that* kind of party...
posted by clevershark at 10:22 PM on July 23, 2005

I want to ride it where I like.
posted by euphorb at 10:24 PM on July 23, 2005

The title for this thread takes on new meaning as well...

/me wishes he could squeegee his eyes
posted by birdsquared at 10:27 PM on July 23, 2005

Balisong, the creator of the website in question has his images set up to redirect image links to the .jpg files contained within the page to a photograph of senior gay porn.

Because the .jpg urls are how image files are inserted directly into html, this is a tactic to prevent "hotlinking" to these images (inserting them directly into a web page divorced of their original context) - some view hotlinking as "theft" of bandwidth - although linking to porn images is in my opinion a gratuitous and rude way to do so as this situation demonstrates.

As far as the Lemon Party reference goes, this is a reference to the VERY NSFW lemonparty.org, a "shock site" featuring an image of a gay senior male threesome.

You can divert yourself and torture your eyeballs for a spell by browsing the the Wikipedia article on shock sites.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_shock_sites
posted by nanojath at 10:27 PM on July 23, 2005

No, I saw that, I was shocked of the picture with the kitten and the fruit!
posted by Balisong at 10:34 PM on July 23, 2005

BTW, all the links *to me* still point to some guy moving furnature with his bicycle.
posted by Balisong at 10:38 PM on July 23, 2005

I'm sure this is very cool, but I'm not in much of a mood for old coots tonight.

And a hearty *fuck you* to the site's proprietor.
posted by hototogisu at 10:43 PM on July 23, 2005

Interesting, Bali, it seems Firefox is not executing the redirect code...

As far as your reactions to kittens and fruit, well, I think we're going to have to take that to Metatalk...

No, no, just kidding.
posted by nanojath at 10:43 PM on July 23, 2005

nanojath: my Firefox is redirecting just fine, but then again, I touch my computer and it breaks on a weekly basis. So I have no idea.
posted by hototogisu at 10:47 PM on July 23, 2005

The redirection works fine in Firefox — I would imagine that it's all being done server-side in any case.

If any of you loaded the main before clicking the direct image links, you won't get the shock-picture because your browser has already cached the actual image (which is probably what happened to fandango_matt).
posted by rafter at 10:57 PM on July 23, 2005

You'd have to bring up the full-size image first, not just the main page. At least that's how it worked for me.
posted by strikhedonia at 11:04 PM on July 23, 2005

Yes, ok, there's a couch in that picture.

I wasn't brave enough to check for a washing machine in the other...I guess I'll take your word for it!
posted by lucien at 11:20 PM on July 23, 2005

i see gay porn on safari and no gay porn on firefox.
posted by 31d1 at 11:20 PM on July 23, 2005

Wait, the title of the post is "I Want to Ride it Where I like." Are you sure you didn't know about the redirect, Fandango_Matt?
posted by Derive the Hamiltonian of... at 11:37 PM on July 23, 2005

So, has anyone written to the guy to ask him why his code seems to associate harcore senior porn to his site?
posted by clevershark at 11:46 PM on July 23, 2005

Looks like someone's chain might be short a few links.
posted by PareidoliaticBoy at 11:50 PM on July 23, 2005

Metafilter: I see gay porn on safari and no gay porn on firefox.
posted by Derive the Hamiltonian of... at 11:54 PM on July 23, 2005

I'm down with being eco-friendly and trying to keep one's possessions down to a reasonable level, but this is a bit much. These are the kind of hippie-poseurs that always bugged the crap out of me at Evergreen.
posted by stenseng at 11:57 PM on July 23, 2005

Even though those links are NSFW, it must really suck to be at work on a sunday.
posted by wakko at 12:14 AM on July 24, 2005

I did this because it's fun, interesting, and cheap. I don't necessarily recommend this way of moving, and most people can't do it anyway because they don't have the equipment. To move the traditional way I can recommend the services of Austin's Caballero Moving Company.

This is posing the way the guy who dug that giant bunker into his back yard was posing.
posted by hototogisu at 12:16 AM on July 24, 2005

I've moved some pretty big stuff on my bike. Way too much camping gear. 100+ pounds of groceries for two for two weeks, including milk and water. Computers, including a 17" monitor. Dozens and dozens of books. A few cases of cheap beer.

But never anything as big as a couch with two fat old naked guys on it and a Hummer.

I think I'd need a utility trailer for that. I sure as hell ain't letting them ride on the handle bars or crossbar.
posted by loquacious at 12:53 AM on July 24, 2005

Why are people getting mad at the site-owner? Hotlinking is seriously rude, especially from a high traffic place like MeFi. (embedding would be worse than this mind you)
click click....click.
....Hmmm.. Then again I don't see how you could have linked to specific pages with the washing machine image etc, so that was rather short sighted by said site-owner. It's not like he gives you an alternative to hotlinking. Oddness.
posted by dabitch at 1:10 AM on July 24, 2005

Helps if you have a cargo bike, doesn't it?
posted by fixedgear at 2:26 AM on July 24, 2005

Hotlinking is seriously rude

Well so much for the web, then.
posted by grouse at 2:48 AM on July 24, 2005

I can sure see why people would want to steal his bandwidth. Photos of bikes towing furniture are hot.
posted by srboisvert at 3:22 AM on July 24, 2005

Waugh!

Nude Dudes! Being Rude!

Crikey!
posted by bdave at 3:22 AM on July 24, 2005

> grouse: Well so much for the web, then.

Hyperlinking and hotlinking aren't the same thing even though some marketing-speak people would like you to believe that "hotlink" means a "really kewl (hyper)link".
The only real defense against people hotlinking - embedding images into forums and the likes - is to use that rewrite trick, which as you can see has unfortunate side effects if you link directly to an image (which some also count as a form of hotlinking, if they have given you a web page to link containing that image.) Removing the site owners navigation, information and design is a bit rude, yes.
mind you this guy really could have designed better, I'm speaking in general.</Small)
posted by dabitch at 3:53 AM on July 24, 2005

Drats, closing tags.
posted by dabitch at 3:54 AM on July 24, 2005

which some also count as a form of hotlinking, if they have given you a web page to link containing that image

Webpage: 3,000 bytes
Image: 50,000 bytes
Webpage + Image = 53,000 bytes

Seems to me, clicking on a link directly to the image actually saves bandwidth.

Having the images embedded on a non-local site, I can understand why that's wrong. But who complain about directly linking to an image are just anal.
posted by Jimbob at 5:02 AM on July 24, 2005

Usually when you help move the couches and washing machines your reward is beer and perhaps pizza. I guess this old dude was really happy with how the move went.
posted by caddis at 5:28 AM on July 24, 2005

Yes, because clearly choosing to remove the site (and image) owners navigation and information (perhaps about the image, and reproduction rights of it or other important things) is totally cool and anyone who thinks that you doing so is annoying must be an anal person.
posted by dabitch at 5:33 AM on July 24, 2005

(I agree that embedding is worse, I'm just saying that I can understand site owners getting annoyed when you take their images out of context. In this case, this particular site owner leaves no alternative to hotlinking though. Sorry about the derail.)
posted by dabitch at 5:40 AM on July 24, 2005

Hyperlinking and hotlinking aren't the same thing

Sure they are. The only difference seems to be that you define "hotlinking" as hyperlinking that the webmaster doesn't want you to do.

clearly choosing to remove the site (and image) owners navigation and information (perhaps about the image, and reproduction rights of it or other important things)

First, you haven't "removed" anything. The original author is the one that chose to put the image up on the web without navigation and information built into it. He might like it to only be retrieved in certain circumstances, but that's really his problem. Of course, by using countermeasures, he makes it our problem, which is his right. Turnabout is fair play.

And reproduction rights? In the absence of any other notification, you don't have any. That's a red herring.
posted by grouse at 5:52 AM on July 24, 2005

I got some splainin' to do, being at work (and having a girl temp walk in for a shift behind me just as I clicked on that link).

-sigh-

so much for a quiet Sunday.
posted by Busithoth at 6:38 AM on July 24, 2005

some view hotlinking as "theft" of bandwidth - although linking to porn images is in my opinion a gratuitous and rude way to do so as this situation demonstrates.

I'll say. They could have just given a 403 forbidden.
posted by Tuwa at 7:04 AM on July 24, 2005

Stupid.

You can rent a medium size u-haul for what, $25 a day for local in-town moves?

I would understand if he were in the bush or something but apparently he's in Austin.

Also the argument over hotlinking never ceases to amaze me. In the year 2005, we're still worried about someone linking a 32k .jpg DIRECTLY TO A FORUM.

Absurd.
posted by Ynoxas at 11:01 AM on July 24, 2005

One way to keep those pictures from being linked would be to remove them from the Internets.
posted by mecran01 at 11:31 AM on July 24, 2005

Wow. I'm as much if not more of a bike nut than the next guy, but this guy is completely off his nut. He reminds me of a bike vagrant I sometimes see rolling around the part of Boston where I live, who has a tower of boxes, bottles and cans strapped to his old Huffy.

There is a photobook I saw recently called something like "Bicycles of Burden" that depicts absurd feats of bicycle cargo-hauling in Asia. Anyone know the book? My Google skills are weak today.
posted by killdevil at 12:05 PM on July 24, 2005

I don't find moving huge things by bike that nutty. People do it all over the world. Bikes are insanely efficient. And each gallon of gas or petro diesel left unburned is that many more less pounds of pollution to breath in.

The thing that convinced me that his guy was a bit off was the way he moved stuff. Haphazard piles. Odd bungie cord arrangements. A cubby-holed paper filing rack with the papers still in it.

I've probably seen that guy a dozen times from when I was living in Austin, if that's where he's from, in the downtown strip. There's only so many pedicab pushers. Some of those guys were straight out mentally unstable, at the least in their cycling style.

The "weirdos on wheels" that really trip me out are those "skip-bike" guys. Y'know, the ones on those balanced rickshaw-like things you propel by running and skipping along, and then just balancing on the two back wheels. Most of 'em seem to have insane Jim Henson-esque aggregates of random crap strewn all over the vehicle.
posted by loquacious at 1:52 PM on July 24, 2005

I once saw a man riding his bike in the middle of December (it's Alaska: people still ride their bikes at 40 below in many feet of snow) with eight full-length two-by-fours strapped to the sides of his bicycle under his thighs. He didn't have any special trailer on the back of his bike, like this guy seems to. That was the craziest and awesomest thing I have ever seen on a bicycle.
posted by rhapsodie at 3:40 PM on July 24, 2005

Huh? They do this all the time in China. They build skyscrapers using bikes and bamboo. No big deal.
posted by trii at 5:14 PM on July 24, 2005

Yeah, I'm with trii. In Vietnam, they think nothing of strapping full grown pigs, a litter of little pigs, 38 crates of eggs, or 4 family members onto a bicycle or motorbike.

But then again, I was too shy to click the link after all the hubub.
posted by equipoise at 10:12 PM on July 24, 2005

The link the guy has on the bottom of the page to the specialty and work-bike forum is the coolest thing about his site.
posted by OmieWise at 7:34 AM on July 25, 2005

This link.
posted by OmieWise at 7:39 AM on July 25, 2005

I think that guy is on to us, OmieWise.
posted by Balisong at 8:47 AM on July 25, 2005

Years ago when I was in Arizona living off campus from ASU, I broke my leg and had no other means of getting to class save for my mountain bike. So I would strap my crutches on and one legged pedal to class and back. It only took me a couple of bad stops (and comical rolls off the bike) to learn to lean to the side without the broken leg.

If I'd had to move, I would have rented a truck or borrowed one. I applaud this guy's thrift and ingenuity but give him double thumbs down for being an ass with the old man gay pron stuff. That's just rude. A yuckface saying please don't hotlink to my pics would be perfectly fine, making people see nasty old pron is wrong.

OmieWise, agreed, that Bicycleuniverse site is pretty good stuff.
posted by fenriq at 10:24 AM on July 25, 2005

You can rent a medium size u-haul for what, $25 a day for local in-town moves?

Not if you don't have a driver's liscense. I tried - they are a bit touchy about that. I mean, I know where the gas pedal and brakes are. One's on the left and the other on the right, right? Or is it the other way around?
posted by jb at 9:12 PM on July 25, 2005

Actually, last time I moved house for an intown move, I was moved partly by car (a friend), but a goodly amount was actually moved by handcart, including a desk with shelfhutch for about a mile on cracked sidewalks. My roommate wouldn't help me move any more stuff after that.
posted by jb at 9:14 PM on July 25, 2005