4 HN users recommended this explainer4 months2022–2026score 4.5
Years with an HN recommendation, 2007–2026
HN recommends it whenever fitness, aging or cycling comes up, as the clearest statement that city design is the best public health investment.
Not Just Bikes argues that people in walkable, bikeable Dutch cities stay healthy because exercise is built into daily life, which he calls the gym of life. It contrasts this with car-dependent cities that require deliberate workouts.
“The best public investment to promote physical activity is designing cities to enable "the gym of life"!” (HN, 2023)
I can heartily recommend anyone who thinks they dislike cycling to watch Not Just Bikes on youtube[0]. Most of the problem is the city you live in, not the concept of cycling. [0] [this video]
Shows that dislike of cycling is mostly about the city, not cycling.
Live somewhere you can bike and/or walk to work and for your daily needs. Admittedly this can be weather-dependent, so it might not suit your requirement (though even living in Ireland I find rain only rarely causes an issue). I lost about 100 pounds this way. Moving to a new country would be one of the more extreme options but this video describes the idea of "The Gym of Life" well [this video]
Describes how walkable and bikeable cities replace the gym.
If not sugar, then other causes should be taxed if the evidence supports that such taxes would have an impact. I'm not a policy expert myself. The best public investment to promote physical activity is designing cities to enable "the gym of life"! [this video]
Designing cities for physical activity as the best public health investment.
> Daily exercise This can simply be walking a lot, especially if you're in a more urban area, where you don't have to drive everywhere (either figuratively or literally). See "The Gym of Life": * [this video]
Yes, I did consider that. That's exactly my point. He stated he hates (A) and likes (B). I suggested that hating (A) is a poor POV. It would be better to like both (A) and (B) even if you prefer (B). Let's put it another way. If someone says the France sucks, Germany rules. And someone replies "The France doesn't suck, here's a few reasons why". Why do you feel the need to jump in and defend the POV that "France sucks"? I also listed spending time with people as a plus to the city. It's interesting that you left that out. I'd guess if the author had a job they loved with people they loved their attitude about everything else would change. The fact they're in a job they hate arguably taints everything else about their life. Commuting of course sucks if it's to a place you don't want to go in the first place. To me, commuting by public transport rocks because I got, on average, 50+ minutes of walking (25 each way) for free (added to the 20 minutes of standing on the train) [this video]
Because you see no other way to grocery shop than what you're doing right now. [this video] In my case I didn't go by bike, I walked to the local grocery store 500m or so from home. You'd just pop in on your way home from work or from whatever you'd be doing in town. 5 minutes in a small grocery store, back home with a bag weighting max 10kg, usually 2-5. This is close to impossible in many places. Big business killed small living.
Because walking is good for you and good for the environment. Additionally, if everyone walked/biked when possible the roads would be more pleasant for you to drive on. [this video]
Case for walking and biking for health and environment.
Cars were/are inevitable. But they did massive damage to human fitness, which we still haven't recovered from. I intentionally don't own one, and at least some places in the world are starting to wake up and restrict them and build walkable cities. [this video]
Cars damaged human fitness; walkable cities are the response.
Advising people to exercise doesn't work and doesn't scale. Gyms are for people who have plenty of intrinsic motivation and money and time. To improve physical activity at the population scale and over a lifetime, it literally has to be built into the design of the cities, so people get enough exercise while walking to work or grabbing groceries. [this video] [link]
Argues cities should build physical activity into daily life rather than rely on gyms.
Exercise is good, everyone knows. The problem is advising people to exercise doesn't work and doesn't scale. Gyms are for people who have plenty of intrinsic motivation and money and time. To improve physical activity at the population scale and over a lifetime, it literally has to be built into the design of the cities, so people get enough exercise while walking to work or grabbing groceries. [link] [this video]
Argues cities should build physical activity into daily life rather than rely on gyms.
Video list and Hacker News comment labels from HackerTube (prompted by @karpathy), released under ODC-By 1.0, built on the open-index/hacker-news archive. Hacker News data is provided by Y Combinator; comments remain the work of their authors. Video titles, channel names and thumbnails belong to their creators and are shown via YouTube. HackerTube Watch is an unofficial edition. Data export of 2026-10-31.
Plays via YouTube's privacy-enhanced embed
10 Hacker News comments
From the HN archive; up to 20 kept per video, favoring different commenters. Recommendations first.
Citations, criticism and jokes
Read more