Slashdot Mirror
A Hypothesis On Segway Hate
theodp writes "Admit it, IT is ingenious. Also, IT is surprisingly effective for certain uses, including real cops and mall cops. And if you tried IT, you probably smiled to yourself. So why all the Segway hate? Paul Graham looks into The Trouble with the Segway and offers a hypothesis about what prompts people to shout abuse at Segway riders: 'You look smug. You don't seem to be working hard enough.' Not that someone riding a motorcycle is working any harder, adds Graham, but because he's sitting astride it, he appears to be making an effort. When you're riding a Segway you're just standing there. Make a version that doesn't look so easy for the rider — perhaps resembling skateboards or bicycles — and Segway just might capture more of the market they hoped to reach."
We just don't see the need for a personal transport device that costs too much for people who are perfectly capable of either walking or biking.
The technology is pretty sweet, but really. If you can stand, you should be walking. If you can stand but can't walk, then okay. But how much of the population fits that profile?
It makes me think of the humans in Wall-E.
If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
standing is a lot more fatiguing than walking actually...
If Pandora's box is destined to be opened, *I* want to be the one to open it.
There are few situations where a bicycle wouldn't be a better, cheaper, and more efficient option. The segway is cool, but it's a solution looking for a problem. It's over engineered, too expensive, and in the vast majority of situations offers no benefit over the alternatives.
If you build it, nerds will come. Soylentnews.org
No. I think most people resent Segway owners because they can _afford_ a multi-thousand dollar replacement that the rest of us poor suckers have to earn using the old left-foot->right-foot technique.
If Segway's had a reasonable cost that resentment would go away really quick.
In Las Vegas fat or lazy people can rent sit-n-go scooters to cart them around the casino because walking would be too much effort. And at that point, you're doing less work than someone standing and only slightly more work than someone sitting in a chair. It's popular because it's cheap, and people have absolutely no shame in using them if they're just lazy.
And interesting theory that there are deep psychological issues but way off the mark. They just cost too much. If they were $500 everyone would have one.
and sometimes cyclists and even bikers... I have the same problem with all of them: I usually walk because I'm in no rush and i want to (daydream) think deeply about life, the universe, and everything. These guys rush by on MY walkway, stirring me out of my reverie at least, sometimes forcing me to jump out of the way.
They are to walkways what SUVs are to streets.
The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
People shout abuse for that, too.
The Segway is a wheelchair for people who's only disability is extreme laziness. No wonder Americans are so goddamn fat.
My objection to the Segway is that we already HAVE a two wheeled, gyroscopicly balanced transport device: It is called a bicycle. Works much better, and is better for you. In the event that the distances you are covering are too far for that, but you still want an efficient two wheeled transport, there's scooters and motorcycles. Even smallish ones can usually reach highway speeds.
I just don't see the point in the Segway, especially given the price. It can't go that fast, it can't go that far, so it isn't a replacement for a motorized transport. While it technically might be a replacement for a bike... Why? What's wrong with a bike?
Also the whole package seems kinda... well... stupid. Why all the effort to balance the thing on two, side by side wheels. Why not do as Maddox noted and add a third wheel (http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=segway_more_complicated_than_it_needs_to_be)? To me it seems like a tech demo, more than a useful thought in transportation.
Finally there is the point that a lot of Segway owners are, like the author of this, smug dickheads. They have this attitude of "Oh this thing is so amazing, and I feel so sorry for all you plebs who are uninitiated in to the glory of Segway." My response is "I feel sorry that you spent ten times what I did on my bike for something that goes half the speed."
My dislike of the Segway stems from the ridiculous hype that was spread far and wide about the product before it actually came out. It was built up to be some fantastic device that would cure the common cold, end world hunger, prove the existence of life on Mars, get me the woman of my dreams, and just about anything else one could imagine. Then when it came out, it was nothing but a fancy-ass moped for rich people who were too lazy to walk.
I want a new quote. One that won't spill. One that don't cost too much. Or come in a pill.
Except we're on Slashdot, not on some inner city single black moms site. (No offense to those, just using them as an example of someone who actually has financial problems.) We have plenty of people here who were arguing against taxing incomes over 250k a year because it would personally affect them.
Trust me, there are plenty of us who could afford a Segway without problems. Not to brag, but I could buy one out of my day-to-day account at the moment, no need to even withdraw from the savings account or cancel any investments.
There also are a lot of us around who are into new gizmos and gadgets just because they're new gizmos and gadgets.
When the combination of the two tells you that they see no point in a Segway, then maybe, just maybe, and I know it might sound crazy, they just don't see the point of a Segway.
What for? It doesn't really go any faster than I can walk, it doesn't even go everywhere where I can walk, it's nowhere as maneuverable on a crowded sidewalk as walking (wake me up when it can just sidestep to get out of the way of someone running), it's extra effort to haul it to where it can be recharged after each trip (it can't go up or down stairs), it takes up space in your trunk if you want to drive anywhere and still use it there (it's not like you can just commute on it), etc. And most importantly, standing for long periods of time is actually less comfortable than walking.
Plus, you need _some_ movement or you'll get thrombosis sooner or later, and/or end up looking like a beached whale. So the few calories you save by just standing on it, it's calories you'll have to exercise to shed later. You haven't actually saved any effort, you just did the opposite of smart time management. Instead of profiting from that short walk to the groceries store to also get some minimal exercise out of it, you've just created the case for allocating more time for it later. It's a net loss.
Yes, but it's sit-n-go. At least it's more comfortable than walking, if you're tired or lazy, whereas standing isn't. Do you understand that point? It doesn't even have that saving grace.
Or maybe the only ones with deep psychological problems are the twits who need to project them on everyone who isn't awed by their conspicuous consumption.
In fact, I suspect that if segways did cost only 500, they'd actually lose sales, because then those twits would need something else to say, "look at what I can afford."
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
Because they were designed for use among pedestrians. When you are on foot you do not want these things anywhere near you. They are obnoxious and dangerous to a pedestrian.
They do not belong on the sidewalk and you would be an idiot to use them on the road. For them to ever become popular, cities would need a redesign.
They cannot be easily moved up or down stairs, they are not acceptable on an elevator unless it is a freight elevator, they are difficult to get in or out of a car, they cannot be brought on public transportation.
Well, that's what they said, isn't it? "These will change the way cities are designed"
I didn't notice too many people translating this properly to: "these are broken."
-- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
Apart from being insanely expensive you can't ride it legally in most places,
And why would you want to? For most people, 'it' is inferior in every way to a bicycle.
Costs more, slower, less reliable, and gives you no exercise.
OK, so maybe it is hot and 100% humidity where you live, you are fit and ideal weight, so the exercise is not a bonus. How does 'Ginger' beat a folding electric bike?
This is geeky-cool tech no doubt, and I'd love to try one. But it has zero practical value, which could not clash more with all the hype that this gadget arrived with.
It's suddenly a hardship to walk for a living? You realise how American that sounds, right?
I read the posts and the article, and I can't believe no one else understands the "hate." People on Segways look like idiots. You're perched up high with a dorky bicycle helmet where everyone can see you. You look sort of like Rick Moranis in Spaceballs.
I had NEVER thought about Segways much until a recent trip to Vienna. Sure, I'd seen that photo of the Chinese riot cops on Segways or Sameways or whatever, and my reaction was, hmm, that makes sense. But in Vienna people were renting Segways to tool around the city. You could see them in the distance, tall dorky mushroomy touristy goobuses. Maybe it was the backdrop of florid Art Deco/Historicist architecture or the way everyone was nicely dressed.
Appearances alone. That's enough to inspire the so-called "hate." It's clear that the article's author doesn't get anything about style when he compares the Segway to a motorcyle. Let me set this straight: Marlon Brando on motorcyle, cool; Wozniak on a Segway, not cool. The problem is nerds have a messed-up idea of cool, or at least one not shared by the population at large. Aesthetics matters. I'm not saying this is perfect or right; it just is. And the general population has some dumb aesthetics. But appearances still matter.
It just doesn't look natural. Time and again scientists, engineers or artists design a more efficient process or item and yet it never penetrates beyond a small group of fanatics. The segway just looks awkward. For comparison consider the Pontiac Aztec (generally considered to be the ugliest car of the last 25 years) It could be practical, have tons of space, and it is still ugly. Same reason we are not all living in geodesic (sp?) domes.
Function over form rarely works and without a sudden artistic shift to the accepted (think Sideburns or bellbottoms) I doubt IT will ever win a wider audience.
It was the "It will change the way cities are built" that pretty much did it. They didn't come CLOSE to delivering on that. Tons of hype, hugely oversold, and really, it's only good for a few specialized uses. Great for those, but so what?
My blog: http://www.seebs.net/log/ --- My iPhone/iPad app: http://www.seebs.net/seebsfrac/
That's it. Not that hard is it. It looks stupid - if I were on it I would look even more stupid than I already do. Never in a million years - take your junk and recycle it.
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Who really wants to look like Baron von Harkonen floating about the town?
The author of this piece missed a key point: scooters are normally ridden in the street; segways are normally ridden on the sidewalk. If people rode scooters on the sidewalk, scooters would be hated too.
People who chose to walk already have a tough enough time from cars while crossing busy streets. We don't want to deal with motorized vehicles on our sidewalks, nor should we have to.
Causation does not mean correlation.
I'm going through the mental contortions right now trying to think of a way that this sentence could be correct.
I'm coming up short.
If moderation could change anything, it would be illegal.
Maybe ya'll forgot but the Segway was trotted out as "the next big thing" right when the Dot-Con bubble burst.
Seastead this.
I see lots of posts saying that the reason people don't like the Segway is because they're "like wheelchairs for people too lazy to walk."
So what does that make cars, then?
www.eissq.com/BandP.html Ball and Plate System. Amuse your friends. Crush your enemies.
The guy with a Mac sitting at Starbucks blogging about his new car. The dude at the bar with a bluetooth headset in his ear while he's not even on the phone. They guy tooling down the street with a Segway to get to the Apple store for the new iPhone. They all fit into the category of 'look at me, I'm important, please take notice of this so I can feel better about myself.'
The kid with the netbook directly jacking into the school server to change his grades. The Navy Seal with the headset and mic relaying position information. They dude on the skateboard doing an ollie over some trash while trying to get to work on time. They're all doing something functional, and look pretty damn cool doing it.
Shouldn't he be comparing a Segway to a car, rather than motorcycle, if you'll even make such a lame comparison?
If anything, it is the car where you sit in one position and place, and the extent of your work is pressing one of two levers. On a bike, you're doing something with both your feet (gear lever and rear brake) and multiple tasks with each hand, while changing your body position for turns and road hazards.
And comparing it to any motorized vehicle that travels at 50mph is plain dumb as you can't commute to work 10 miles away on a Segway, travel on public roads, or go on a 200 mile day trip. It's supposed to replace walking, and that's what people might take issue with: that a Segway rider finds walking too arduous.
All the slowness of a bicycle without any of those nasty health benefits, plus it burns electricity. Move slow, stay fat, and waste environmental resources... America! FUCK YEAH!!