this post was submitted on 09 Aug 2026
891 points (98.6% liked)

Today I Learned

31356 readers
317 users here now

What did you learn today? Share it with us!

We learn something new every day. This is a community dedicated to informing each other and helping to spread knowledge.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must begin with TIL. Linking to a source of info is optional, but highly recommended as it helps to spark discussion.

** Posts must be about an actual fact that you have learned, but it doesn't matter if you learned it today. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.**



Rule 2- Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding non-TIL posts.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-TIL posts using the [META] tag on your post title.



Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.

If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.

For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.

Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.



Partnered Communities

You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.

Community Moderation

For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] thisbenzingring@lemmy.today 90 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I once got two jaywalking tickets in 5 minutes at 9pm in Seattle. Cop was just a jerk. His car was the only car to be seen.

I crossed after he passed, I was in the fucking crosswalk. And then a block later I crossed during the blinking caution and made it to the other side before it was solid.

I contested it in court but this is before Seattle stopped letting cops abuse the law. The judge couldn't really do anything and said that if a cop gives you a ticket you're basically guilty and that's that.

Thankfully Seattle changed it's law after getting bad press for one incident when a Japanese girl was visiting to see Ichiro and the Mariners. When the game got out everyone was walking out and a fucking cop singled her out because she left the crosswalk but there was literally 20 other people doing that same thing. It was clearly racist and to try and keep a massive lawsuit from happening they changed the laws of jaywalking. I'm sure the cops still abuse it for minorities or punks walking around in an empty downtown after hours

[–] zaph@sh.itjust.works 82 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

if a cop gives you a ticket you're basically guilty and that's that

Good thing we only let the most upstanding citizens have that kind of authority...

[–] Crankenstein@lemmy.world 22 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

That kind of authority fundamentally should not exist within a just society.

[–] AmyAye@nord.pub 3 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Man, people cannot be trusted to just, "not be dicks". There are dumb laws but there are also plenty that exist to protect people from assholes and idiots.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] AzuranAurora@piefed.ca 62 points 3 weeks ago (11 children)

I "jaywalk" all the time, and so do many others in my town. Thankfully I live in a country where such nonsense does not exist.

[–] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Same here. Technically, jaywalking is illegal but the police does not enforce it.

[–] jol@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

But in case of accident, you might be at fault. In my country, if there's a crossing within some number of meters, you need to use it. Otherwise, it's not illegal.

[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 13 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Here it's always the driver at fault, pedestrians are zero-fault (even if it should be their fault)

[–] AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 3 weeks ago

Well yeah, it's obvious it should be

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] Miller@lemmy.world 42 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Oddly most other countries have laws which protect people not industry.

[–] lugal@sopuli.xyz 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Citation needed. I'm not 100% sure about written law, but in Germany we learn to look before crossing the street and using a traffic light if one is near.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 41 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

'Jay' was, back then, a word that roughly meant 'fool' 'idiot' 'knave' 'hill billy' 'loud mouth' ... something like that.

It literally means 'idiot walking' or 'walking like an idiot'.

They made cars, and decided to tell us we were (and are) all idiots for doing basically the most human thing there is, walking around an environment, as we have been, for literal 10s of thousands of years.

[–] ArmchairAce1944@discuss.online 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

It was also a slur against Irish people.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] TIEPilot@lemmy.world 37 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Would you like to hear how the auto industry destroyed electric trolleys so GM could sell diesel buses?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_conspiracy

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

Who Framed Roger Rabbit was basically a documentary.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] pelley@lemmy.world 31 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Also the word “accident.” A collision caused by negligence is not an accident.

[–] flandish@lemmy.world 12 points 3 weeks ago

fun fact : in my industry (firefighting) we have started to move to calling them “mvcs” (mot veh collisions) and not mva (mot veh accidents) for, i assume, that reason. i welcome it!

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com 28 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

America is so inventive!!

You must have removed that stupid law a long time ago right.

Right?

(In France it's always the motorists fault versus a pedestrian. ALWAYS.).

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 8 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

It hasn't been removed, per se, but the definition has changed. It's not necessarily jaywalking to cross outside of a crosswalk. If you look both ways and only cross when it's safe, you're fine. If you walked out directly into oncoming traffic, then you can get a ticket, even tho the law also states pedestrians always have the right of way and cars need to yield to them.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] tigermountain@lemmy.world 22 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

People would be quite surprised to know how many things like this have happened in the last hundred years from both business and government. If you want an eye opener read Propaganda by Edward Bernays.

[–] monotremata@lemmy.ca 5 points 3 weeks ago

The documentary Century of the Self is also educational if you want an overview of Bernays' life and crimes against humanity. (Adam Curtis is such a good filmmaker.)

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] TigerAce@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Also, the word was "Jay"walking was because being called a" jay" is was an insult. It's like a slow person if I remember correctly.

[–] Carl@anarchist.nexus 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

“Jay” was a term for a country person who moved to the city. Like “hick” or “yokel”. They called it jaywalking because jays would visit the city and wander across the street without checking for traffic first. Because they weren’t used to the road being busy out in the country. So it became a fairly common thing for traffic to get held up because some yokel casually wandered across the street while looking at billboards and shop signs, instead of looking at the traffic. Thus, jaywalking.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Gammelfisch@lemmy.world 10 points 3 weeks ago

The USA needs the "Verkehrsberuhigter Bereich or Living Street" traffic rule for city center areas packed with restaurants, pubs, and stores. Better yet, close the street to motor vehicles.

[–] kevinsky@feddit.nl 9 points 3 weeks ago (5 children)

The US is also in an fairly select minority with having laws around where you can cross the road as pedestrian.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

One of the most surprising thing in old timey movies is that streets were truly mixed-use spaces, people walked there, rode horses, sold things from carts, etc. I guess that was possible because horses and horse-drawn carts were slower than cars, plus horses would generally try to avoid crashing into something, even without orders from their rider or driver.

I always thought that a "street" and a "road" were synonyms, until I heard the term "stroad" from Not Just Bikes. It turns out that in modern planning, a street is meant as a paved path intended to provide local access to homes, shops, and other things. A road is supposed to be a way to get from A to B. A "stroad" is a derogatory term to refer to a street that has been combined with a road, so you get high speed traffic that wants to travel through an area next to homes and businesses.

Stroads are the worst of both worlds because you end up with people who just want to get through an area dealing with kids playing, cars turning onto and off the path, other drivers slowing down to spot an address, etc. It also sucks for the locals because the way onto their driveway or school has to deal with large volumes of high-speed traffic.

IMO we're not going back to horses and carts. High speed movement of people is here to stay. But, we really need to use modes of transport that separate people who are passing through on their way somewhere from people who are exercising, playing sports, shopping, hanging out outside their homes, etc.

The best way to do that is public transit, especially light rail and subways which pack a lot of people into a really efficient people-mover. Subways additionally move the people-mover underground to an area where there's nobody who isn't trying to travel. Light rails are easier to build, but they have to share the above-ground with people doing other things. But, at least when they're on rails the only shared space is the rail, and the pedestrians know that as long as they're not standing on rails they don't have to worry about the light rail vehicles.

For North America, giving up cars might be too difficult, at least in the short term. But, it seems like in newly built neighbourhoods, the least they should do is make it so every second "street" is pedestrian / bicycle only. Or, maybe allow local vehicles but with an incredibly low speed limit, less than 10 km/h and a rule that they must yield to pedestrians at all times. That way someone can still pull into their driveway but they'll only drive half a block on the local street to get there.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Snapz@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago

"Carbon footprint"

[–] bluesheep@sh.itjust.works 6 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (2 children)

I remember asking a cop in my country if it was okay to "jaywalk". He looked at me like I was fucking stupid and said no ofcourse not, after which I said "ah okay it's just that I read that it's illegal in America". He responded by saying "well this isn't America is it".

Kinda goes to show how america centric the Internet is, and how idiotic some of America's laws are

[–] Ibisalt@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago

It makes no sense what you are writing. Was your intend to say "of course it is (okay to jaywalk)"?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Scotty_Trees@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Oh wow, first time seeing this on Lemmy! Been seeing this exact post on Reddit for over a decade though.

[–] Thebeardedsinglemalt@lemmy.world 5 points 3 weeks ago (3 children)

Did you know Snoop Dogg sold weed to Cameron Diaz in high school or Steve Buscemi was a volunteer firefighter on 9/11

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 5 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Most jaywalking is fine, but there are instances in which it's legit dangerous.

This is a law that's only as good as how it's enforced by the pigs.

[–] Evotech@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

To be fair. It is illegal to walk access highways in Europe too. But it’s not a generic law.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] yermaw@sh.itjust.works 5 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Ive been told that given the language of the time, it roughly translated to "jackass-walking"

[–] lugal@sopuli.xyz 4 points 3 weeks ago

According to ethymonline:

by 1912, American English (said in original citation to be a Kansas City term), from jay, perhaps with notion of boldness and impudence. Related: Jaywalk; jaywalker.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 5 points 3 weeks ago

Not surprised at all. I don't even need to check it out because I know they deliberately inhibited public transportation to increase profits.

[–] vrek@programming.dev 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

The real question is : who is Jay?

[–] magikmw@piefed.social 13 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

Jay was a deregatory term for country immigrant to the city. Like "yokel".

[–] SeductiveTortoise@piefed.social 3 points 3 weeks ago

Yokelwalking would be so much better

[–] misterztrite@piefed.social 3 points 3 weeks ago

You need to go farther back than that. The term jaywalking seems to have originated in Kansas City, MO. I have a feeling they were still just a little salty the Jayhawkers won.

[–] vrek@programming.dev 3 points 3 weeks ago

That's not fun, I wanted it to be like it was actually Jay Smith who walked across a street in Boston and the cars stopped, resulting in a massive traffic jam, as a result they passed this law.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›