And if motorists kill people, they get a minor traffic offence.
Like this guy, who killed a young e-scooter rider, but only gets a "fail to yield" charge because humans outside of cars don't matter.
Showroom7561
joined 2 years ago
And how would they prove that what you said was truthful, and not just fucking around with ChatGPT?
Also, wouldn't this be easy to poison? Have a script randomly ask ChatGPT wholesome things all day... and then your defence lawyer can use that to bolster your character in court, no?
His excuse is he hangs out with a lot of rapists
And just how casually that comes out, too.
I'd love to see a breakdown of the weight of the motor, battery, and frame on its own. Many carbon-framed bikes are around 20 pounds, so the fact that this one is only 10 pounds more and still has to account for everything else makes me very suspicious as to where corners were cut and if the specs are actually true.
I’d argue that at least where I live, the amount of electric vehicles that has appeared over the precious decade is very clearly a majority bikes, scoots and other personal transport, instead of a car.
Me too, and I love it! Just the number of private e-scooters out this year has blown my mind! I'm not sure if it's due to accessibility (they are <$1000) or if our rental e-scooter program showed people the value in micromobility, so they invested in a personal e-device.
And while the rent-a-scoots are pretty obnoxious at times, they do support the public transport insanely well in a city like mine
My city does not have great public transportation, however, the data from our first year of rental e-scooters has shown that people are using them for trips that would be "car first" at any given time. This is positive, and that's with an enormous amount of push-back, lacklustre infrastructure, and the growing-pains that come from such a new and highly regulated form of transportation.
But they are talking money now! LOL
Given they have Gary Fisher onboard, I’d be very surprised if they launch without any method to mount accessories.
Gary is the only reason why this bike is making headlines. The charging thing isn't really a pull if the rest of the bike has no mass appeal.
10 km is pretty far.
That's "up to 10km", not that every trip is 10km.
In that context, it's going to be easier/faster to bike or take an e-scooter to your destination.
If it's under 2km, then walking really shouldn't be a problem.
And if public transportation is available for medium distance trips, that should be first (as it is in cities/countries that are not built around car-dependency).
but that metric fails to account for the fact that few people will walk 2 hours one way for an errand.
Look at the bigger picture. We should be walking a minimum 10,000 steps a day (something like 8,000 to 12,000, realistically). That's 8km a day as a bare minimum for minimum basic health.
Driving costs more time, because you now have to allocate time to drive + time to get those steps in. Why not walk that 2km errand instead?
At those short distances, we aren't talking about massive differences in time to destination. And I think anyone can use the mental health benefits of movement, too.
Fast charging would be useful in touring and bikepacking;
I agree, but THIS bike is not it! It doesn't even have fork mounts or rack mounts from what I can see. Who is this bike actually for?
I wish that happened. It's very difficult to convince an EV owner to take a train or bus, even if they are electric.
The more convenient we make driving in cars, and the better drivers "feel" about driving an EV, the more difficult it is to move away from car dependency.
Here's a survey from CAA (Insurance company in Canada, like AAA in the States):
Drivers were more likely to drive more in a battery-powered EV than even a Hybrid.
And this part kills me: "The majority of trips for both BEV and PHEV drivers are relatively short, typically staying within 10 kilometers of home. This pattern reflects the convenience of electric driving for routine commutes and local errands."
UCDavis Institute of Transportation Studies also found that EVs are driven more than gas cars (SOURCE).
No mention of range, which could be the deal-breaker.
If you're getting decent range, then 15-minute charging really isn't wanted/needed.
This might be good for people who do food delivery, but the bike itself isn't designed to be used like that...
Moving away from fossil fuels is a good thing.
Yes, but not if it promotes destructive behaviours such as increased car dependency.
EVs are like low-calorie sweeteners: they do nothing to stop obesity, and actually encourage more eating (and more obesity).
I'm no genius, but can't the exact same ruling be used in favour of urgently expanding cycling networks and infrastructure?
The lack of this infrastructure is putting "people at increased risk of harm and death, which engages the right to life and security of the person", does it not?