Bonus points if the messages are presented in the style or voice of GLaDOS or Cave Johnson.

KFC. Or as I call it: Kan't Find the Chicken. Especially with this!

The Year of the Windows desktop! :P

In Soviet Russia the COVID vaccine experiments on you! I couldn't resist....

You know it's bad when Microsoft is calling you anti-competitive!

So what you're really saying is that dogs make the perfect social distancing enforcement so that others won't get too close to you! :-P

Where you all the bike parts come from? Coincidence? ;-)

Why, why why?! ;-) https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

I think they learned that trick from Microsoft.... Microsoft has a history of just suddenly pulling the plug on anything that isn't a huge success...and usually screwing over their partners in the process too.

I don't think that politicians on either side of the aisle are free from blame here. They have both ratcheted up the rhetoric, mudslinging and outright smearing, slandering and name-calling. The American political system is so polarized now that it's dysfunctional. It's time to throw them all out and come up with another system whatever that may be. These politicians spend more time fighting and squabbling among themselves instead of getting things done for the American people. At this point socialism might actually be more efficient... The current system is a tremendous waste of time, money, and resources. As a Canadian I'm baffled by American politics and wonder why you all have put up with it for so long. Something needs to change. They can't put their differences aside to work together anymore. There's no respect at all like there used to be and without that there's no cooperation between the two parties.

Except so-called "National Socialism" a.k.a what the Nazis called themselves is pretty much the farthest thing from actual socialism that you can get. It's fascism not socialism... Fascism is extreme right wing authoritarianism. Socialism is generally left wing. There are politicians on both sides of the fence who I would consider to be extremists whether or not they try to smear their competition by accusing them of being extremists....

I chalk that attitude up to selfishness and impatience. Motorists incorrectly assume that somehow they should always be the first class traffic on the road merely because they exist. Roads were built for legal vehicles and a bike is a legal vehicle in many areas. It's not cyclists' fault that traffic planners have neglected and ignored them completely in many areas. As a cyclist I do my best not to be an asshole and to share the road with car traffic and not impede anyone unless I have no other choice but to do so in order to stay safe. Sometimes there are hazards on the road that force me to do so. I am legally allowed to do this in such a scenario but I do it to stay safe not to be an asshole and I get out of the way as soon as I am able to do so. Primarily among these roadside hazards are parked cars. Speaking of eliminating impediments I think we should eliminate all car parking on arterial roads because it takes up too much previous road bandwidth that should be reserved for moving vehicles (including bikes). That should be the priority in congested cities not car parking. We subsidize that way too much already in urban downtown areas and should stop subsidizing and effectively rewarding people for using the more inherently selfish and inefficient method of transportation in congested downtown urban areas.

I think some people forget that cyclists (and roads!) existed way before cars were invented. Sure more roads were build when cars became available and eventually affordable but bikes were there first! So it's a fallacy that roads are only designed for cars. Roads are designed for *all* legal vehicles and cars are only one type of legal vehicle. I legally have just as much right to cycle on a public road as someone else does to drive on it in their car. Road construction and maintenance is not only paid for by gas taxes and license fees.... Much of it comes out of general tax revenue which *everyone* pays into not just motorists. Yet some very expensive roads like freeways are exclusive to cars and non-motorist end up still having to pay for that too! There are a lot things that my tax money pays for the doesn't personally benefit me. So the argument that you should somehow be more entitled to the road as motorist than I am as a cyclist doesn't carry any weight with me. I would gladly pay for a bike license (if it were a requirement in my city) if it would negate that silly and untrue arguement that only motorists pay for roads (I'm sick of hearing that tried old argument). But I would also expect there to be more infastructure for cyclists too such as signals and bike lanes.

I think that there is a certain amount of anger among this type of crazy/careless cyclist at being ignored and marginalized by traffic rules and road infrastructure that completely ignore the presence cyclists in many places. I'm not saying that it's a good idea but how would you like it if the rules of the road completely ignored you? Say they didn't give you enough space on the road or they endangered you constantly or they forced you to stop too frequently all the time (say you getting every red light because no one thought about you when timing the traffic lights) or even when you had a lane of traffic for you it would suddenly end without warning or someone would illegally park there blocking your lane and thereby forcing you to endanger yourself. You'd probably be pretty angry too! Try to see it from their point of view! (and yes I am both a cyclist and a motorist)

I think that the larger issue that is that cycling in general has been simply ignored in many American cities for years due to poor planning and a foolish assumption that there will somehow always be sufficient road space for cars therefore no one should consider any other possible mode of transportation instead. It's was completely sight sighted and a massive oversight caused by a car-crazy culture. So in many places not only is there a lack of infrastructure or completely inadequate infrastructure that caters only to cars or only to cars and pedestrians at the expense of anything else. Europe and some Canadian cities like Montreal and Vancouver have plenty of cycling infrastructure especially bike lanes. I wonder how many of the cyclists breaking laws are doing it to simply stay safe because it is dangerous for them on the roads. Blowing through red lights and stop signs is no excuse but the traffic light timings in cities should take bikes into account or even have separate signals for bikes (which is again something that they have in Europe). It all goes back to the idea of whether cities should be designed for cars or designed for *people*. Just because you can buy a car should not always mean that you have the right to be able to drive whether you want yet some motorists get the entitled idea that somehow they are more important than everyone else so they think that they should get priority treatment. That kind of thinking leads to total gridlock in congested urban areas and is completely shortsighted and foolish. In that kind of situation precious road bandwidth is at a premium so the modes of transportation that move the most people or are the most environmentally friendly should be prioritized. I'd be in favor certain downtown city streets being entirely closed to car traffic with only transit, cycling and pedestrians permitted. Here in Toronto we actually had a similar thing happen when section of one of our major streets was recently changed to prioritize the streetcars running on that street during rush hours. Car traffic must turn right at every intersection and straight-through car traffic is not allowed. We have to do to things like this in the face of total car gridlock otherwise no one will be able to get anywhere. That streetcar line moves 85,000 people a day yet before this change it was so slow that it was usually faster to just walk instead. The status quo was unacceptable... An Idaho stop for bikes is a good idea in some places such as quiet side streets that don't have a lot of car traffic. But it's not an excuse for cyclists to blow through stop signs. It's supposed to be a yield sign so at a minimum they should be slowing down if not stopping.