5 ms·

Fast forward a few months and there are no more public scooters - the virus has killed its host.

jacobush 7y ago
Excellent
lovich 7y ago
That is a nuclear hot take on the relationship between individuals and a company who plans on offloading the majority of their real estate costs for parking their fleet on to the public. I suppose youd say the virus has killed the host when white blood cells end up attacking the flu?
- fishnchips 7y ago
  There's a not-so-subtle difference between lawmaking / law enforcement and vigilantism. I'm all for regulation and scrutiny when it comes to scooters, but don't see widespread hacking as a solution.
  - lovich 7y ago
    Calling a group already engaged in theft the "host" and people stealing from them a "virus" is using connotations to give sympathy to a group that is engaged in the same unethical act. If you want to live by the sword then you'll die by the sword. Don't complain about actions you take part in and don't defend a group from actions they take part in
    - fishnchips 7y ago
      > same unethical act At this point, this is your opinion, and you'll see lots of people with different opinions on the same matter, deriving those from different ethical principles. And while you're fully entitled to it, your opinion does not have the same power as the law - especially the law made by democratically elected representatives. As it stands, scooter companies are not breaking the law where I live, while hacking them en masse would be a serious crime.
      - lovich 7y ago
        If the law mattered here, then the companies dumping their litter onto public grounds would be held accountable. I've seen other comments here make a comparison to public parking for cars. They are correct in their analogy in that both sccoters/bikes/cars take up public space to park. The difference is that cars are regulated in where they can park, charged for the use in terms of parking fees or parking passes, and towed when they violate these rules set by the governmental body that was voted in. On the other hand you have companies who want to charge for the use of their scooters and bikes who don't pay a fine to municipalities for the use, thereby offloading the private costs to the public. Any place these companies operate where they got a permit from the governing municipality, I do not have an ethical issue with. When it comes to municipalities like mine however, where the companies dropped their fleet in overnight, and then ignored the local government when they were given a chance to comply, I view as nothing but thieves. I paid in tax money to support this infrastructure. I took part in a voting process for this current government to administer the infrastructure. When a private entity bypasses this system to put money in their pocket, they are stealing from me and every other resident of my municipality. If you think calling stealing something from the public to benefit yourself unethical is an opinion, then I also hold the opinion that you personally have no morals.
        fishnchips 7y ago
        > you personally have no morals About time to mention Hitler, no?
        lovich 7y ago
        No, he at least cared about Germany
mellavora 7y ago
See above regarding theft of public good. A virus which eliminates a known parasite and then goes extinct is actually a pretty good thing. additionally re: scooters. They supposed offer public advantages ("Less carbon!"), but is this claim substantiated? Carbon costs to manufacture, service (the batteries don't recharge themselves), etc-- and "less carbon" would require them to replace carbon vehicles, not foot traffic.
- fishnchips 7y ago
  Is is then permissible to hack an entire fleet of massive SUVs for the same reason? Same concerns - environment impact, use of public space (parking!) etc.
  - flohofwoe 7y ago
    In the end: yes! Although the situation isn't quite the same: if a rental car company would "steal" as much public parking slots for their currently idle vehicles as those Scooters steal sidewalk space from pedestrians, the issue would be swiftly dealt with by the "city authorities". Those Scooters being piled up on the sidewalks are indeed annoying, but we've also become blind about the fact that cars in general steal much more public space.
    - fishnchips 7y ago
      > In the end: yes! OK, so who gets to decide which SUVs are "too large" to be used in cities? You and your friends, just because you're capable of hacking them? I have no love for SUVs, but even less love for the vision of a society where arbitrary decisions by self-appointed judges replace a democratic lawmaking process.

Excellent

That is a nuclear hot take on the relationship between individuals and a company who plans on offloading the majority of their real estate costs for parking their fleet on to the public. I suppose youd say the virus has killed the host when white blood cells end up attacking the flu?

fishnchips 7y ago
There's a not-so-subtle difference between lawmaking / law enforcement and vigilantism. I'm all for regulation and scrutiny when it comes to scooters, but don't see widespread hacking as a solution.
- lovich 7y ago
  Calling a group already engaged in theft the "host" and people stealing from them a "virus" is using connotations to give sympathy to a group that is engaged in the same unethical act. If you want to live by the sword then you'll die by the sword. Don't complain about actions you take part in and don't defend a group from actions they take part in
  - fishnchips 7y ago
    > same unethical act At this point, this is your opinion, and you'll see lots of people with different opinions on the same matter, deriving those from different ethical principles. And while you're fully entitled to it, your opinion does not have the same power as the law - especially the law made by democratically elected representatives. As it stands, scooter companies are not breaking the law where I live, while hacking them en masse would be a serious crime.
    - lovich 7y ago
      If the law mattered here, then the companies dumping their litter onto public grounds would be held accountable. I've seen other comments here make a comparison to public parking for cars. They are correct in their analogy in that both sccoters/bikes/cars take up public space to park. The difference is that cars are regulated in where they can park, charged for the use in terms of parking fees or parking passes, and towed when they violate these rules set by the governmental body that was voted in. On the other hand you have companies who want to charge for the use of their scooters and bikes who don't pay a fine to municipalities for the use, thereby offloading the private costs to the public. Any place these companies operate where they got a permit from the governing municipality, I do not have an ethical issue with. When it comes to municipalities like mine however, where the companies dropped their fleet in overnight, and then ignored the local government when they were given a chance to comply, I view as nothing but thieves. I paid in tax money to support this infrastructure. I took part in a voting process for this current government to administer the infrastructure. When a private entity bypasses this system to put money in their pocket, they are stealing from me and every other resident of my municipality. If you think calling stealing something from the public to benefit yourself unethical is an opinion, then I also hold the opinion that you personally have no morals.
      - fishnchips 7y ago
        > you personally have no morals About time to mention Hitler, no?
        lovich 7y ago
        No, he at least cared about Germany

mellavora 7y ago

See above regarding theft of public good. A virus which eliminates a known parasite and then goes extinct is actually a pretty good thing. additionally re: scooters. They supposed offer public advantages ("Less carbon!"), but is this claim substantiated? Carbon costs to manufacture, service (the batteries don't recharge themselves), etc-- and "less carbon" would require them to replace carbon vehicles, not foot traffic.

fishnchips 7y ago
Is is then permissible to hack an entire fleet of massive SUVs for the same reason? Same concerns - environment impact, use of public space (parking!) etc.
- flohofwoe 7y ago
  In the end: yes! Although the situation isn't quite the same: if a rental car company would "steal" as much public parking slots for their currently idle vehicles as those Scooters steal sidewalk space from pedestrians, the issue would be swiftly dealt with by the "city authorities". Those Scooters being piled up on the sidewalks are indeed annoying, but we've also become blind about the fact that cars in general steal much more public space.
  - fishnchips 7y ago
    > In the end: yes! OK, so who gets to decide which SUVs are "too large" to be used in cities? You and your friends, just because you're capable of hacking them? I have no love for SUVs, but even less love for the vision of a society where arbitrary decisions by self-appointed judges replace a democratic lawmaking process.