4 ms·

From the article: "According to the Mountain View Voice and NBC Bay Area, some Peninsula residents are annoyed by the increase in dumping, in part because they

by nkurz 9y ago

From the article: "According to the Mountain View Voice and NBC Bay Area, some Peninsula residents are annoyed by the increase in dumping, in part because they say Google isn't working harder to prevent the bikes from being stolen in the first place." "The root of the problem, as Wired wrote in 2013, is that the bikes are not locked or tracked, leaving them vulnerable to theft." Are there many people outside the Bay Area who would agree that the "root problem" is with Google failing to adequately protect their property? Am I wrong to think that the real root is the thieves who are stealing the bicycles with apparent impunity, and not with the owners of the bikes? As a transplant to California from a part of the US with stricter standards regarding property crime, I can't help but think that the apparent official tolerance of theft and common "blame the victim" attitude contributes significantly to the high rate of property crimes. "Why Can't San Francisco Stop Its Epidemic of Window Smashing?" https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/04/san-francisco-crime-policy/479880/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/04/san-fra... "Why Oakland Police Can't Solve Crime" https://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/why-oakland-police-cant-solve-crime/Content?oid=4288948 https://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/why-oakland-police-ca...

URSpider94 9y ago
I'm all for property rights, but I think the social contract here is pretty ambiguous. Google just tosses these bikes out on the streets, does nothing to police their usage, doesn't ask the police to go after unauthorized users, and doesn't seem to care too much if you call them about a misplaced bike. Google bikes are closer to litter than to property.
- euyyn 9y ago
  > Google just tosses these bikes out on the streets That's the thieves, not Google. Google tosses the bikes inside the campus only. > doesn't seem to care too much if you call them about a misplaced bike If you ever call them, they'll send a van to collect the bike, as buying a new bike costs more money than rescuing it.
  - URSpider94 9y ago
    Google is not just a campus any longer. There are offices in many different places in Mountain View and Sunnyvale. Even within Mountain View, I'm pretty sure I've seen EMPLOYEES ride them to the train station and Castro Street...
smartician 9y ago
Just like with shopping carts, I think there's a general perception that these bikes are free to use for the public. People treat it like disposable transportation. Not just the homeless and teenagers with questionable morals; I've seen all kinds of people on them, all over Mountain View. I've even seen one where the "owner" attempted to personalize it by painting it white (badly). I think Google should add clearer messaging to these bikes, and maybe ask MVPD to stop anyone they encounter on one of these bikes outside of a 3 mile radius from a Google office.
- euyyn 9y ago
  IIRC, except the old ones, they have a plaque in the basket indicating they're private property. And the campus isn't exactly in the middle of downtown either; it's not like on your walk to the grocery store you cross the Googleplex and take one thinking it's public.
euyyn 9y ago
They even send a van to pick them up if you call 650-253-5353 and tell them. It goes without saying that it costs the company money, even when they get recovered.
vanderZwan 9y ago
Why think in either-or terms? Yes, something should be done about the thieves. But imagine leaving a car unlocked and ready to go. How would you feel about the situation then? Personally, as a Dutchman I find the idea of not having at least two locks on your bikes (preferably different brands, our thieves tend to specialise) absurd.
- nkurz 9y ago
  Why think in either-or terms? It's not either-or, but my question here concerns the societal attitudes toward theft and their effect on its prevalence, not the practicalities of reducing the risk of theft. But imagine leaving a car unlocked and ready to go. How would you feel about the situation then? I'd feel exactly the same. There are still many parts of the US where cars are regularly left unlocked, often enough with the key in the ignition if it's somewhere considered safe like a private driveway. Where I grew up in rural Wisconsin (northern USA) the joke was that you only needed to lock your car in the late autumn, because if you didn't someone might fill it with unwanted zucchini. Inspired by this joke, I filled several teachers' cars with squash after the first frost. In these same areas, it's also the case that many houses are rarely if ever locked. I don't think I've ever saw a key for the house I grew up in, and I'm certain I never had one for myself. In the same way that coins in a blind man's cup are not considered OK to steal just because he is not able to defend himself well, having an unlocked house or car is not considered to be granting permission to thieves. Transgression is viewed very negatively even if the level of difficulty is low. Tying this back to hacking, In 1990, Harper's Magazine published a seminal roundtable article titled "Is Computer Hacking a Crime?" (http://www.textfiles.com/news/hackers.txt http://www.textfiles.com/news/hackers.txt). In it, John Perry Barlow makes this comment: "BARLOW [Day 2. 10:41 P.M.]: I live in a small town. I don't have a key to my house. Am I asking for it? I think not. Among the juvenile delinquents in my town, there does exist a vandal's ethic. I know because I once was one. In a real community, part of a kid's rite of passage is discovering what walls can be breached. Driving 110 miles per hour on Main Street is a common symptom of rural adolescence, publicly denounced but privately understood. Many teenagers die in this quest-two just the night before last-but it is basic to our culture. Even rebellious kids understand that risk to one's safety is one thing, wanton vandalism or theft is another. As a result, almost no one locks anything here. In fact, a security system is an affront to a teenage psyche. While a kid might be dissuaded by conscience, he will regard a barricade as an insult and a challenge." My point isn't that there is one right approach, but that there is an interplay between attitudes and actions. Is it possible for cars and houses to be left unlocked just because it is currently a low-crime area, or might the fact that cars and houses are unlocked --- combined with a lack of tolerance for crime --- help to keep these as low-crime areas where such an approach is possible?
Lunatic666 9y ago
In Germany the owner is responsible for the property, so if something gets stolen and dumped, you have to manage how to get it back. I guess that's why people care more about their stuff and lock it.
jdietrich 9y ago
Someone who leaves a box full of spray paint cans out on their porch may be partly liable if some delinquent kids steal it and vandalise the neighbourhood. The young hoodlums are still guilty of theft and vandalism, but the negligence of the homeowner clearly played a contributory role.

by nkurz 9y ago

URSpider94 9y ago

I'm all for property rights, but I think the social contract here is pretty ambiguous. Google just tosses these bikes out on the streets, does nothing to police their usage, doesn't ask the police to go after unauthorized users, and doesn't seem to care too much if you call them about a misplaced bike. Google bikes are closer to litter than to property.

euyyn 9y ago
> Google just tosses these bikes out on the streets That's the thieves, not Google. Google tosses the bikes inside the campus only. > doesn't seem to care too much if you call them about a misplaced bike If you ever call them, they'll send a van to collect the bike, as buying a new bike costs more money than rescuing it.
- URSpider94 9y ago
  Google is not just a campus any longer. There are offices in many different places in Mountain View and Sunnyvale. Even within Mountain View, I'm pretty sure I've seen EMPLOYEES ride them to the train station and Castro Street...

smartician 9y ago

Just like with shopping carts, I think there's a general perception that these bikes are free to use for the public. People treat it like disposable transportation. Not just the homeless and teenagers with questionable morals; I've seen all kinds of people on them, all over Mountain View. I've even seen one where the "owner" attempted to personalize it by painting it white (badly). I think Google should add clearer messaging to these bikes, and maybe ask MVPD to stop anyone they encounter on one of these bikes outside of a 3 mile radius from a Google office.

euyyn 9y ago
IIRC, except the old ones, they have a plaque in the basket indicating they're private property. And the campus isn't exactly in the middle of downtown either; it's not like on your walk to the grocery store you cross the Googleplex and take one thinking it's public.

euyyn 9y ago

They even send a van to pick them up if you call 650-253-5353 and tell them. It goes without saying that it costs the company money, even when they get recovered.

vanderZwan 9y ago

Why think in either-or terms? Yes, something should be done about the thieves. But imagine leaving a car unlocked and ready to go. How would you feel about the situation then? Personally, as a Dutchman I find the idea of not having at least two locks on your bikes (preferably different brands, our thieves tend to specialise) absurd.

nkurz 9y ago
Why think in either-or terms? It's not either-or, but my question here concerns the societal attitudes toward theft and their effect on its prevalence, not the practicalities of reducing the risk of theft. But imagine leaving a car unlocked and ready to go. How would you feel about the situation then? I'd feel exactly the same. There are still many parts of the US where cars are regularly left unlocked, often enough with the key in the ignition if it's somewhere considered safe like a private driveway. Where I grew up in rural Wisconsin (northern USA) the joke was that you only needed to lock your car in the late autumn, because if you didn't someone might fill it with unwanted zucchini. Inspired by this joke, I filled several teachers' cars with squash after the first frost. In these same areas, it's also the case that many houses are rarely if ever locked. I don't think I've ever saw a key for the house I grew up in, and I'm certain I never had one for myself. In the same way that coins in a blind man's cup are not considered OK to steal just because he is not able to defend himself well, having an unlocked house or car is not considered to be granting permission to thieves. Transgression is viewed very negatively even if the level of difficulty is low. Tying this back to hacking, In 1990, Harper's Magazine published a seminal roundtable article titled "Is Computer Hacking a Crime?" (http://www.textfiles.com/news/hackers.txt http://www.textfiles.com/news/hackers.txt). In it, John Perry Barlow makes this comment: "BARLOW [Day 2. 10:41 P.M.]: I live in a small town. I don't have a key to my house. Am I asking for it? I think not. Among the juvenile delinquents in my town, there does exist a vandal's ethic. I know because I once was one. In a real community, part of a kid's rite of passage is discovering what walls can be breached. Driving 110 miles per hour on Main Street is a common symptom of rural adolescence, publicly denounced but privately understood. Many teenagers die in this quest-two just the night before last-but it is basic to our culture. Even rebellious kids understand that risk to one's safety is one thing, wanton vandalism or theft is another. As a result, almost no one locks anything here. In fact, a security system is an affront to a teenage psyche. While a kid might be dissuaded by conscience, he will regard a barricade as an insult and a challenge." My point isn't that there is one right approach, but that there is an interplay between attitudes and actions. Is it possible for cars and houses to be left unlocked just because it is currently a low-crime area, or might the fact that cars and houses are unlocked --- combined with a lack of tolerance for crime --- help to keep these as low-crime areas where such an approach is possible?

Lunatic666 9y ago

In Germany the owner is responsible for the property, so if something gets stolen and dumped, you have to manage how to get it back. I guess that's why people care more about their stuff and lock it.

jdietrich 9y ago

Someone who leaves a box full of spray paint cans out on their porch may be partly liable if some delinquent kids steal it and vandalise the neighbourhood. The young hoodlums are still guilty of theft and vandalism, but the negligence of the homeowner clearly played a contributory role.