Why new technology fails...

[Lock]

...when it gets into the wrong hands...
[youtube]YLt8P_kNwzA[/youtube]

sigh

 

[paultrafalgar]

200 hours community service pedalling THAT "bike" with no batteries.
Must cover 20 miles in that time or repeat until achieved.

 

[Lock]

These "ebikes" are causing real grief in my town. The hardcore pedal bike folks don't like em... A lotta ppl don't like `em... I've walked completely illegal standup electric scoots on/off transit vehicles for almost ten years with no complaints from transit folks or anybuddy else... This new crop of Chineesy bikes fit within the definition of our new law enabling ebikes, but perhaps not the spirit of the law. AFAIK, lighter vehicles offer better acceleration and braking, better energy efficiency, etc... Hard to talk to ppl like the person in that video :x
Lock

 

[Lock]

Oh yah... and just to ice the cake, I've just found out that at some point in the recent past our "bike-friendly" transit service has modified their definition of the word "bicycle":
TTC By-law No. 1
1. Definitions
1.1 In this by-law, unless the context otherwise requires:
c) “bicycle” includes a tricycle and unicycle but does not include a motor assisted bicycle;

 

[northernmike]

Yes Lock but the electric bike laws define a "motor assisted bicycle" as a moped - with a gas burning engine... and a "power assisted bicycle" is an e-bike.

so motor = gas, power = electric - according to the City of Toronto.

 

[Lock]

so motor = gas, power = electric - according to the City of Toronto.

Right... so, I see Ontario definitions:
http://www.search.e-laws.gov.on.ca/...7e97b/1/frame/?search=browseStatutes&context=
"bicycle" includes a tricycle, a unicycle and a power-assisted bicycle but does not include a motor-assisted bicycle; ("bicyclette")
"motor assisted bicycle" means a bicycle,
(a) that is fitted with pedals that are operable at all times to propel the bicycle,
(b) that weighs not more than fifty-five kilograms,
(c) that has no hand or foot operated clutch or gearbox driven by the motor and transferring power to the driven wheel,
(d) that has an attached motor driven by electricity or having a piston displacement of not more than fifty cubic centimetres, and
(e) that does not have sufficient power to enable the bicycle to attain a speed greater than 50 kilometres per hour on level ground within a distance of 2 kilometres from a standing start; ("cyclomoteur")

and
"power-assisted bicycle" means a bicycle that,
(a) is a power-assisted bicycle as defined in subsection 2 (1) of the Motor Vehicle Safety Regulations made under the Motor Vehicle Safety Act (Canada),
(b) bears a label affixed by the manufacturer in compliance with the definition referred to in clause (a),
(c) has affixed to it pedals that are operable, and
(d) is capable of being propelled solely by muscular power; ("bicyclette assistée")


and the Federal definition from subsection 2 (1) of the Motor Vehicle Safety Regulations :
http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/acts-regulations/regulations-crc-c1038-1-2.htm
"power-assisted bicycle" means a vehicle that:
(a) has steering handlebars and is equipped with pedals,
(b) is designed to travel on not more than three wheels in contact with the ground,
(c) is capable of being propelled by muscular power,
(d) has one or more electric motors that have, singly or in combination, the following characteristics:
(i) it has a total continuous power output rating, measured at the shaft of each motor, of 500 W or less,
(ii) if it is engaged by the use of muscular power, power assistance immediately ceases when the muscular power ceases,
(iii) if it is engaged by the use of an accelerator controller, power assistance immediately ceases when the brakes are applied, and
(iv) it is incapable of providing further assistance when the bicycle attains a speed of 32 km/h on level ground,
(e) bears a label that is permanently affixed by the manufacturer and appears in a conspicuous location stating, in both official languages, that the vehicle is a power-assisted bicycle as defined in this subsection, and
(f) has one of the following safety features,
(i) an enabling mechanism to turn the electric motor on and off that is separate from the accelerator controller and fitted in such a manner that it is operable by the driver, or
(ii) a mechanism that prevents the motor from being engaged before the bicycle attains a speed of 3 km/h; ( bicyclette assistée )



Do you think transit employees will understand this distinction?

Any links to any City or transit By-laws that make this difference clear?
Lock

 

[Lyen]

I can see the reason why the new technology fails is because he was not polite.

 

[BiGH]

I think with grey areas of the law, appearance is everything. ie a mountain bike thats got electric assist wouldn't raise an eyebrow, those scooter things that have pedals (but essentially look like 50cc scooters). In Australia we've had issues with them too - they get targeted by police a lot more than the converted bikes.

much like riced up cars in victoria have massive issues, yet stock standard ones (or ones that appear lightly modified on the outside seem to be fine)

 

[John in CR]

I didn't even bother to turn on the sound, but if the subway/train/whatever was that empty what difference does it really make? They should however get on the ball wrt what is ok and what isn't, because that thing takes up enough space that the guy should be paying for at least 5 rail tickets, 1 for him and 4 for the scooter with pedals. If 100 people wanted to get on at the same time with their same scooters, that clearly wouldn't work. On the other hand if they were popular enough and there was a car tailored just for bikes and scooters with proper entrance and exit of the facility, and an appropriately higher fare, then it could make a lot of sense.

Technology fails when either it wasn't appropriate to begin with, or it wasn't made dummyproof enough and stupidity gets in the way. There are going to be growing pains, but the better ambassadors we are along with being vocal in smart ways, the more likely we can get things set up in good ways. Here's a small list of my views, regardless of the fact that I live where there are no rules as of yet. You bet you ass once the rules start to be proposed that my voice will be heard.

1. Vehicles for biking/walking paths need lower speed and/or power limits than those on roads. Speed limits are what apply to all other vehicles, so the same should be true. It will require monitoring and enforcement on the paths, but today's technology makes that pretty cheap and it will create jobs that make people safer, a far better use of public funds than studies of the mating habits of Ethiopians during different lunar phases. Plus, I'd argue that the multiplier effect of a real job directly created in an urban environment actually more than pays for itself in taxes, and is not a new cost.

2. ALL vehicles should require some type of license, including a course that must be passed. Again, this will create jobs. We just have to make sure that what is taught actually makes people safer. ie traffic laws are NOT the be-all-to-end-all in terms of safety. Let's make sure everyone on our roadways knows what they are doing and are proficient at it. Honestly who here would give a few hours a week to teaching kids how to ride regular bikes, and exposing them a bit to the potential of ebikes? I love baseball and would sign up in a NY minute to coach little league, but I would be even more enthusiastic about this, and believe me when I say I'm one of the least involved people you'll ever meet. This is different, because I know this is the future, and if we don't get involved in some way up front, the dumbasses in our capitals will surely find a way to really screw things up. Truly, the safer we make everyone on the roads, the safer the roads will be for us, and ebiking is dangerous stuff, easily made a whole lot safer.

3. Vehicles of all types really do need proper lighting, signals, and regular inspection. Here's another job creator for stimulus money. Plus with the changes required on vehicles, it's small businesses that will benefit in terms of sales and service. All vehicles need proper lighting or they shouldn't be on the road well before sunset and well after sunrise. Regardless of the time of day, they need to be able to properly signal to others their intentions well in advance.

I'm sorry if this rubs the radical no-rules, no-regulations, and frock-the-government-and-what-they-stand-for crew. You guys are my bro's, and I agree with that pov in a lot of respects because the government typically doesn't look out for anyone but themselves. HOWEVER, here we're looking a a whole new ball of wax that has the potential to be much closer to our way of thinking. If we stick to our non-involvement repel any regulation ways, then sure enough a few kids with zero training or appropriate regulation are going to get hurt/killed in ways that could have been easily avoided, and stupid, useless, mandated rules will follow. This is our opportunity to do things the smart way from the beginning. If we don't, it's really going to suck, because stupid, onerous, and ridiculous rules will follow that make no sense to the common e-biker.

John

 

[spinningmagnets]

A while back I was given some soda bottles by a beer-distributor friend. They were prototypes. they were soda, but had "cool" labels that looked like...well...beer. It was completely legal, teens drinking soda from bottles that "looked like" beer.

If I was a temporarily unemployed senior who decided to get a financial edge by living in a van for a few months, would you feel comfortable with me becoming friends with your often-ignored teen girls and boys? Just because I'm not doing anything illegal (or even immoral) I fully expect to be occasionally questioned by the local police at the request of concerned citizens.

Its completely legal to use a hypodermic needle to inject liquid vitamins into your own muscle tissue, perhaps even at a public park? But, wouldn't you question a friend of your teen child that you saw using a hypodermic needle?

If you want to get into an argument with a transit cop on a regular basis over an electric scooter that "looks like" a gasoline scooter from a distance, you may even win the argument every time...but you can't REALLY be suprised when you get stopped and hassled.

(yes, I KNOW it has pedals and legally its a bicycle, the "Burning Man" rendevous had a car with pedals, pedals don't make it a bicycle. Its still a scooter with pedals)

 

[BiGH]

(yes, I KNOW it has pedals and legally its a bicycle, the "Burning Man" rendevous had a car with pedals, pedals don't make it a bicycle. Its still a scooter with pedals)

And therefore i defer back to "if it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck it probably is a duck"

I agree we do need some form of regulation. The problem becomes when the government / laws are out of touch with what is happening in industry. Take the australian example - 250w power limit. It essentially makes the use of ebikes pointless to the majority of mainstream users esp in hilly areas.

I agree with the original poster, that in the hands of di*k heads, technology can suffer, however I think with this video, he's more comming across as a tool than putting a bad light on ebikes. It is getting awareness to some of the issues that have arisen due to the government's out of touch-ness. I see bikes like this guy's one will become classed as a moped or scooter.

I also think advertising influences how products are taken up, this and cost. There are a number of startups in electric motorbikes that have invested a lot in image and design, but are selling bikes at extremely high costs. Advertising creates a demand. I just happen to be watching a PBS Frontline special on "the other drug war" - and they're talking about how advertising and marketing are creating demand. The problem is that most of the ebike companies just don't have the advertising budget.

I think Jozzerbikes (and Jozzer himself) have taken it in the right direction - entering high profile events such as the TT. Marketing directly to their target audience. One of best ways to advertise a vechicle is via racing. This is where electric is having issues, because of the inability to refuel as fast as ICE machines, e-vechicles are limited to short course time trials, or drag racing.

Sorry my post is a bit all over the place - doing about 6 things at once atm.


Just a quick final thought. I think that ebikes won't fail. They might evolve slightly, but especially in Australia (regardless of our stupid laws) electric bikes are slowly increasing in popularity.

 

[northernmike]

It could be argued that the TTC is failing, in lots of ways, not specifically in this video - but they're having a bit of a media crisis these days. Operators slacking, parking streetcars to go get a Starbucks for 15 minutes, sleeping on the job whilst entrusted with ticket sales... I can't stand riding the TTC and avoid it at all costs, to be honest. A 16km trip yesterday took me well over an hour, with only two changeovers...

Anyway, the guy is an idiot. His bike is going to fail in the next 12-15 months anyway, it's a piece of junk. Engineered disposability.

 

[FeralDog]

In your face technology attitude = FAIL

 

[njs]

1. Vehicles for biking/walking paths need lower speed and/or power limits than those on roads. Speed limits are what apply to all other vehicles, so the same should be true. It will require monitoring and enforcement on the paths, but today's technology makes that pretty cheap and it will create jobs that make people safer, a far better use of public funds than studies of the mating habits of Ethiopians during different lunar phases. Plus, I'd argue that the multiplier effect of a real job directly created in an urban environment actually more than pays for itself in taxes, and is not a new cost.

2. ALL vehicles should require some type of license, including a course that must be passed. Again, this will create jobs. We just have to make sure that what is taught actually makes people safer. ie traffic laws are NOT the be-all-to-end-all in terms of safety. Let's make sure everyone on our roadways knows what they are doing and are proficient at it. Honestly who here would give a few hours a week to teaching kids how to ride regular bikes, and exposing them a bit to the potential of ebikes? I love baseball and would sign up in a NY minute to coach little league, but I would be even more enthusiastic about this, and believe me when I say I'm one of the least involved people you'll ever meet. This is different, because I know this is the future, and if we don't get involved in some way up front, the dumbasses in our capitals will surely find a way to really screw things up. Truly, the safer we make everyone on the roads, the safer the roads will be for us, and ebiking is dangerous stuff, easily made a whole lot safer.

3. Vehicles of all types really do need proper lighting, signals, and regular inspection. Here's another job creator for stimulus money. Plus with the changes required on vehicles, it's small businesses that will benefit in terms of sales and service. All vehicles need proper lighting or they shouldn't be on the road well before sunset and well after sunrise. Regardless of the time of day, they need to be able to properly signal to others their intentions well in advance.

I'm sorry if this rubs the radical no-rules, no-regulations, and I want to hug-the-government-and-what-they-stand-for crew. You guys are my bro's, and I agree with that pov in a lot of respects because the government typically doesn't look out for anyone but themselves. HOWEVER, here we're looking a a whole new ball of wax that has the potential to be much closer to our way of thinking. If we stick to our non-involvement repel any regulation ways, then sure enough a few kids with zero training or appropriate regulation are going to get hurt/killed in ways that could have been easily avoided, and stupid, useless, mandated rules will follow. This is our opportunity to do things the smart way from the beginning. If we don't, it's really going to suck, because stupid, onerous, and ridiculous rules will follow that make no sense to the common e-biker.

John

Here I was thinking you moved to Costa Rica to get away from the absurd blankets of regulations in the US. Here you say we don't have enough? The idiocy on these forums never ceases to amaze me. Perhaps we could give people jobs writing useless propaganda on the internet. A job is a job afterall, no matter how little economic output it creates or how many jobs it destroys in taxing to pay for it.

 

[dozentrio]

If I am not mistaken, the guy says he lost his license. Because he didn't feel like paying for insurance. Then he discovered, lo and behold! a form of transportation in its legislative infancy! Not yet idiot-proof, and the perfect oppourtunity to abuse the system. Some people think they are ENTITLED to special treatment, because the rules are INCONVENIENT for them. This dude needs to get a grip himself, and realize that the wealth and conveniences he enjoys are only due to living in a large cooperative (i.e. modern society) and that without laws like, "thou shalt not bring thine oversized, overweight vehicle onto the public transit" none of those conveniences would be possible. Imagine if even 10% of subway riders tried to bring their scooters on board. It wouldn't work very well.