4 ms·

>- Public policy (scooters being pushed on to people) I'm not sure what you're getting at here. Policy changes will almost always be reactive. Should we just d

>- Public policy (scooters being pushed on to people) I'm not sure what you're getting at here. Policy changes will almost always be reactive. Should we just defacto outlaw everything?

dvdhnt 7y ago
I think the GP is saying that in most cases, constituents probably didn't ask for (in this case) scooters. They were most likely lobbied for by the companies who offer them or by some extremely small subset of the public. Your point seems to skip over the fact that policy creation itself should be reactive - sparked by an obvious public need or because of a prediction backed by science.
- EpicEng 7y ago
  Creation as well, of course. I doubt there are all that many products that constituents actively lobby for before they're available/invented.
  - dvdhnt 7y ago
    Interesting thought. It seems most likely that the public lobbies generally against a problem without much of a solution in mind, or at least without doing all that much research beforehand. I can see how the public might complain about a lack of public transit and end up with lawmakers delivering scooters.
TeMPOraL 7y ago
If GP meant what I think they meant, it's because scooter startups executed an Uber on cities. It's not that we should outlaw everything. It's that there's a civilized way of introducing innovation which involves sorting out main issues before deployment, and then there's the Uber way which involves dumping externalities left and right on the unsuspecting populace, while showing the middle finger to local regulations because "we have venture capital money therefore we make the rules". I propose the Uber way should be banned and punished with extreme prejudice.
- EpicEng 7y ago
  >I propose the Uber way should be banned and punished with extreme prejudice. I'm not arguing here, just thinking it through... What is the alternative? Do I need to haggle with literally every city I want to have a presence in? Even though there's no law against doing what I want to do? Seems like the scooter rental business would simply never exist in the first place, it would be a huge deterrent.
  - TeMPOraL 7y ago
    > Even though there's no law against doing what I want to do? There is, or at least there are in case of Uber, pretty much in every city around the world. I'm not that familiar with the regulatory situation of scooter business in general, but there are a law against littering, and the scooters end up as trash in the cities, creating danger (e.g. to people with no or low vision) and having to be picked up by the police. In my city (Kraków, Poland), a few startups recently decided to clone the Uber-for-scooters and it turned out to be a huge nuisance. Some interesting tidbits include: - A few weeks after deployment, the city announced it's calling an emergency meeting about the scooters, because apparently none of the companies bothered to come and talk the parking situation through. - A lot of noise in the media was created by the blind community, who reported instances of people tripping over scooters left on the sidewalk. - A friend tested available scooters few months ago, and his report mentioned bad technical condition, and low-quality and sometimes broken brakes. - Deployment in Kraków and other cities triggered an upcoming update to traffic rules, in which electric scooters will get reclassified as motor vehicles, i.e. forced to drive on the road. And rightfully so, because they reach dangerous speeds and pose serious risks to pedestrians. - Speaking of which, there were at least two confirmed deaths in Poland caused by these scooters, and it's not even half a year since deployment. Where to park them and how they can safely participate in traffic are two basic issues that absolutely should have been talked through with the officials before. I'm only disappointed the companies involved weren't just banned by fiat. FWIW, in my experience in dealing with relevant people, the city of Kraków is quite supportive of innovations in the city space. But one has to actually go and talk with them. Apparently, in their desire to be first to market, these companies didn't. EDIT: My wife was almost hit by some careless electric scooter driver while being 9 months pregnant. She didn't tell me back then to not upset me. And perhaps for the best. If they hit her, I'd be suing and campaigning to get them off the sidewalks.

>- Public policy (scooters being pushed on to people) I'm not sure what you're getting at here. Policy changes will almost always be reactive. Should we just defacto outlaw everything?

dvdhnt 7y ago

I think the GP is saying that in most cases, constituents probably didn't ask for (in this case) scooters. They were most likely lobbied for by the companies who offer them or by some extremely small subset of the public. Your point seems to skip over the fact that policy creation itself should be reactive - sparked by an obvious public need or because of a prediction backed by science.

EpicEng 7y ago
Creation as well, of course. I doubt there are all that many products that constituents actively lobby for before they're available/invented.
- dvdhnt 7y ago
  Interesting thought. It seems most likely that the public lobbies generally against a problem without much of a solution in mind, or at least without doing all that much research beforehand. I can see how the public might complain about a lack of public transit and end up with lawmakers delivering scooters.

TeMPOraL 7y ago

If GP meant what I think they meant, it's because scooter startups executed an Uber on cities. It's not that we should outlaw everything. It's that there's a civilized way of introducing innovation which involves sorting out main issues before deployment, and then there's the Uber way which involves dumping externalities left and right on the unsuspecting populace, while showing the middle finger to local regulations because "we have venture capital money therefore we make the rules". I propose the Uber way should be banned and punished with extreme prejudice.

EpicEng 7y ago
>I propose the Uber way should be banned and punished with extreme prejudice. I'm not arguing here, just thinking it through... What is the alternative? Do I need to haggle with literally every city I want to have a presence in? Even though there's no law against doing what I want to do? Seems like the scooter rental business would simply never exist in the first place, it would be a huge deterrent.
- TeMPOraL 7y ago
  > Even though there's no law against doing what I want to do? There is, or at least there are in case of Uber, pretty much in every city around the world. I'm not that familiar with the regulatory situation of scooter business in general, but there are a law against littering, and the scooters end up as trash in the cities, creating danger (e.g. to people with no or low vision) and having to be picked up by the police. In my city (Kraków, Poland), a few startups recently decided to clone the Uber-for-scooters and it turned out to be a huge nuisance. Some interesting tidbits include: - A few weeks after deployment, the city announced it's calling an emergency meeting about the scooters, because apparently none of the companies bothered to come and talk the parking situation through. - A lot of noise in the media was created by the blind community, who reported instances of people tripping over scooters left on the sidewalk. - A friend tested available scooters few months ago, and his report mentioned bad technical condition, and low-quality and sometimes broken brakes. - Deployment in Kraków and other cities triggered an upcoming update to traffic rules, in which electric scooters will get reclassified as motor vehicles, i.e. forced to drive on the road. And rightfully so, because they reach dangerous speeds and pose serious risks to pedestrians. - Speaking of which, there were at least two confirmed deaths in Poland caused by these scooters, and it's not even half a year since deployment. Where to park them and how they can safely participate in traffic are two basic issues that absolutely should have been talked through with the officials before. I'm only disappointed the companies involved weren't just banned by fiat. FWIW, in my experience in dealing with relevant people, the city of Kraków is quite supportive of innovations in the city space. But one has to actually go and talk with them. Apparently, in their desire to be first to market, these companies didn't. EDIT: My wife was almost hit by some careless electric scooter driver while being 9 months pregnant. She didn't tell me back then to not upset me. And perhaps for the best. If they hit her, I'd be suing and campaigning to get them off the sidewalks.