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
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
Slow speed turns. Bumps, pot holes, debris, ruts, grates, gravel, wet manhole covers and paint stripes. Avoiding FUCKING SUVS. Visual direction control. Lean angles, peg weighting, body english, counter-steer. Decreasing radius turns.
Balancing a one-in-front-of-the-other 2 wheeled vehicle traveling at over 70mph through rain, crosswinds and traffic without killing yourself isn't exactly *easy*. It's not really anything like a Segway, and I'm quite angered by this authors belittlement of something that I've spent a very large part of my life learning how to do well. I bet you half of the Segway riders can't even operate a clutch in the first place. He obviously has absolutely no fucking clue.
Actually, a bicycle is not gyroscopically balanced. The angular momentum in the bicycle wheel is tiny compared to the overall mass and moment of inertia of bicycle and the rider. It's actually the rider's own sense of balance (whether the hands are on the handle or not) that keeps the bicycle standing, and which is why you have to learn to ride one.
This isn't to say, of course, that Segways are superior just because they use a gyroscope.
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.