Slashdot Mirror
Feds Say There Isn't A Single Safe 'Hoverboard' (engadget.com)
In the Consumer Product Safety Commission's letter to manufacturers, importers and retailers, it urged them to make sure the scooters they make and sell comply with the safety standards set by Underwriters Laboratories, the organization in charge of certifying that products are safe for use. According to UL Consumer Safety Director John Drengenberg, "no hoverboard has passed the certification process at this time."
There isn't a single [] hoverboard. Big neas.
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
The UL standard is still a draft proposal. I know because I tried to acquire a copy late last week. UL only released the document 1/29 and was prepared to evaluate devices as of 2/6. This is a simply an inflammatory sound byte with no merit.
Here's UL's own blog post for more details.
http://www.ul-energy.com/start/the-new-ul-2272-standard-gets-a-handle-on-hoverboard-safety/
The feds say they must meet a standard. The summary says none are certified to a standard. Those are two different things. A manufacturer could certainly manufacture a product to meet the standard, but not spend the extra time, money and effort to have it certified by a private organization.
Not saying there are ones which comply, only that the summary makes invalid assumptions.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
More importantly, they don't actually hover.
They are lucky we live in a time with rule of law, because if we were living in Roman times, I would go burn down their factory and get away with it. Makes me mad every time I see those liars mentioned.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
There is'n t a single safe hoverboard... all of the safe ones are married.
For me, things like this come down to the not-so-fine line between personal freedom and involuntary involvement in danger.
My view on this is the same for magnetic buckyballs, extreme sports, recreational drugs and virtually every other case of self-harm. We should focus on idiot-proofing idiots rather idiot-proofing their houses. Let capitalism allow for people to make their own wise decisions.
That said, there's a difference between accidentally eating two buckyballs and shoving them down the throat of someone else.
In a word: bullshit. You're presenting the notion that companies would not cut corners without a watchdog. The IDEA that a company would make a product "too safe" for UL to approve is prima facie nonsense. Yeah, we WANTED to make it more expensive, but those bastards at UL wouldn't let us". LOL. This just in: given the opportunity, people will cheat. Full stop.
regardless, hoverboards have been shown to be horribly unsafe. In Australia they had to recall most of them as they are at risk of exploding or causing fires (several fires already caused from them). What I find amusing though (or sad) is that a few months ago there were news articles about how wonderful they were and how one young girl was making a small fortune importing them from china, didn't hear anymore about her after the series of disasters that led to the mandatory recall.
Your main argument is nonsensical.
UL is a private company. If you believe that companies would compromise safety in the name of profit if they could get away with it, why don't you think that UL (a company) would compromise safety in the name of profit?
You're also indirectly making an argument that safer = more expensive, which is idiotic.
OP is stating that UL caused him to make products LESS SAFE to receive their endorsement, which is absurd. You, on the other hand, are arguing that making a product "less safe" is somehow more profitable for UL, which is patently ridiculous.
And no, I'm not "indirectly" saying that safer == more expensive, I am SAYING that "safer (whatever THAT means) increases manufactured cost", which, in my experience, is true; and I've built products both for UL and CSA approvals.
It's not the hoverboards that are unsafe, it's the clumsy idiots riding them that make them unsafe.
Oh wait, their cheap Chinese batteries light on fire and burn your house down. I almost forgot that.
Given these devices would need to pass European Certificate, if they were to be sold in Europe, would the presence of a CE mark be sufficient reassurance that the devices meet some sort of minimum acceptable standard, for sale in the USA? I realise this isn't a US certification, but in the absence of US certification, would this provide sufficient reassurance for them to be sold anywhere? Also, is there a federal US equivalent of the CE mark?
In this context, are there any 'self-balancing two wheel boards' (aka the non-hover boards), that are approved with the CE mark?
Jumpstart the tartan drive.
UL is a private company. If you believe that companies would compromise safety in the name of profit if they could get away with it, why don't you think that UL (a company) would compromise safety in the name of profit?
Circular logic. Why wouldn't a government agency do it too? After all, they're owned by businesses, right?
There are actually some cases where OP is correct; a certifiable product may be less safe than a non-certifiable product given different design priorities.
That said, the same OP's issue is true of every trade organization or "independent" third party. Good luck getting ASHRAE, IEEE, GSM, or any other standards body information freely. If you want a certification, you are stuck paying for it, be it LEED, Uptime Institute, NCEES, or whatever. It was only recently that municipalities had to make building codes available freely online.
Thunderf00t found the problem. These boards have a faulty kill switch on their charging system that prevents the batteries from overcharging, or falling below 1% of battery power. A large number of these boards can be over charged which makes them blow up like they do. This is a defect that should be resolved by a class action against the manufacturer, and a recall of the boards to have the charging system retrofitted and upgraded.
UL is usually for 115v appliances that use an internal supply, low voltage stuff isn't usually UL certified. The wall wart is.
Probably most hoverboards are unsafe, but definitely no all. All Ninebot devices (The owner of Segway) have real time battery temperature monitoring, charge state reporting through bluetooth and even speed throttling. These include even the $300 Ninebot mini. I'm half expecting a knee jerk reaction bill to block the use of an otherwise perfectly fine vehicle just because a couple factories flooded the market with crap. I'll bet it would be soon illegal for me to add my own temperature/charge monitoring circuit to an existing hoverboard pretty soon because I can't get it UL certified for operation.
I have been asked to make changes to products and processes in order to pass some top-of-the-head, non-documented BS that a certification evaluator (I wouldn't give them the courtesy of calling them an engineer) made up, which would have made them less secure. We designed a product to deal with highly sensitive company data and did so with security in mind; the company auditing the security of the product wanted to weaken security, for no good reason other than to obtain their stamp of approval. Some examples from the incredibly long list of wrong:
Passwords must not contain spaces - no reason given
Maximum password length of 31 characters - no reason given
System must send confidential info in plaintext emails, rather than sending an email with a link to a secure encrypted web page requiring login, "so as to allow for auditing"
Electronic documents must be printed, scanned and saved electronically "to prevent tampering" - seriously: they wanted us to print, scan, and shred nearly a thousand records a day, because "paper records can't be forged"
Luckily, there were several companies that could provide that certification, and I told the CEO that it'd be cheaper to get in a competent certification firm than make the changes. Technically not true, but me and the guy they sent had a good laugh going through the first firm's list over lunch, and we got a secure product out the door.
GSM standards, including the test conditions, procedures and expected results are all free. Check 3gpp.org and go to the specs area.
http://blog.newegg.com/hoverbo...
Per newegg:
More importantly, the latest boards are UL certified. “Underwriters Laboratories” is an independent electronic safety certification so getting that UL stamp is a solid start for hovering confidence. Additionally, board makers have also been advertising their batteries as originating from Samsung or LG. So that’s something.
And here's one of the UL certified boards on their site:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...
From the specs, it says, "Battery and Charger are UL & CE Certified"
It doesn't say the board is certified, but does that matter if the batter and charger *are* certified?
NoNon is correct. I also design products that get listed with UL,CSA, & other listing agencies. I've not seen where getting a product certified ever made it "less safe". I suppose it's possible but I can't imagine how.
Getting listed with UL is not all that hard but then I've never sent something to them that wasn't already tested. Bigger problem is timing, meaning getting the fucking marketing pukes to understand it has to be done & takes time & money. Oh & getting the check requests signed off.
SLOWER TRAFFIC KEEP RIGHT
You can only pack so much energy in a small space. People want FAST charging. They don't want slow (SAFER) charging because we are now "instant gratification" humans. We don't want to wait for anything. Plus, you can bet the bulk of these things, if not all of them, are manufactured in China, Mexico, Vietnam or other places where QC isn't the #1 priority. Anytime you pack the energy required to make something that demands a high current needed for these scooter boards, you are going to run into problems.
What they really meant to say is,
"There isn't a single hoverboard".
The closest thing I've seen is the Lexus maglev board+track pair, but that's just a gimmick.
"Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
NoNon is correct. I also design products that get listed with UL,CSA, & other listing agencies. I've not seen where getting a product certified ever made it "less safe". I suppose it's possible but I can't imagine how.
I can. Use of new materials that for every conceivable test are stronger or less brittle or less toxic or whatever other safety measure is considered may constitute a fail if that material hasn't yet been approved by the checklists UL use. Even if TUV and others have approved it, and even recommend it over the less safe alternatives.
Thunderfuck did not find the problem. Everyone knew what the problem was.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Clearly the only safe way to do it is by eliminating all regulations and then via government mandate of lowest bidder privately run monopoly rules. Vote Trump! See also Walker in Wisconsin where the entire Civil Service has been turned into a Governor run patronage brothel.
If you say so, but last I looked UL was doing a good job.
I can. Use of new materials that for every conceivable test are stronger or less brittle or less toxic or whatever other safety measure is considered ...
Is this hypothetical? Or can you actually cite a real example of this happening?
Top Hoverboards - Updated February 2016
Our extensive analysis of the top hoverboards and our pick for your best bet.
http://bestreviews.com/5-best-...
"In the end, it comes down to personal preference. These things are an absolute joy to ride around, and it’s no wonder they have become an international phenomenon. If you have the risk appetite for it, you will be sure to have a lot of fun zipping through the street on the hottest toy in town."
I have been in any number of situations where the businessmen involved were serious and sincere about following the law. They went out of their way to do so. This "people will cheat" nonsense is just outright misanthropic. Amend it to "a small number of people will cheat" and you're more correct.
PS UL is a bitch to deal with, their company is arrogant and expensive.
Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
They're serious about following the law because they think they'll be caught if they don't. If you remove the enforcement -- and enforcement is what safety certifications are for -- then they'll cheat a lot more.
This space intentionally left blank
UL has a reputation to hold up. I can understand such a situation happening, but I can't understand it to last long. UL will have to come up with very good reasons not to approve of a new material/technology that other well established institutes already approved of. If UL would drag their feet, that'd likely mean first loss of business (safety certificates requested from others) and later bad publicity ("we have to lower quality to get UL certification!") leading to loss of reputation.
Actually Arth1 did remind me of a situation caused by not so much listing agencies but of new regulations. California passed the "no-lead" in plumbing law followed by all of the U.S. In the end CSA also adopted it so it covers all of North America. Free machining brass (C360000) can't be used on wetted surface in potable water systems. This brass has been used for quite some time & I am not sure of the science behind the regulation. I've read both sides of the argument & it's hard to know for sure but there is not a lot of evidence that any significant amount of lead leaches into drinking water from 360 brass used in faucets, fittings, or valves.
The result of this is the plumbing industry has turned to low/no-lead brass alloys that pretty much suck. They are much more expensive to buy & machine & have a lot higher failure rates. This is unlikely to be a safety issue but it will result in more leaks & floods in homes. So there is an example!
SLOWER TRAFFIC KEEP RIGHT
I guess you don't have any incandescent light bulbs then?
Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
Why didn't you challenge the findings? You always have that option.
I see the glass as full with a FoS of 2.
Media's obsession with the pleasant lie is something we may never solve, but we don't have to encourage them.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
This is unlikely to be a safety issue but it will result in more leaks & floods in homes. So there is an example!
I see. So my pipes would be less likely to leak if I was more willing to accept neurological damage and lower IQ in my children. Great example.
The plumbing in my house is PVC. It doesn't leak.
PVC cracks & leaks all the time. However, chances are good that you won't have a problem (as with all indoor plumbing systems, it works 99.9% of the time). Unless your complete plumbing system is a new, you have fittings/valves/faucets made out of C360000 brass. If memory serves, it has 3% lead in it. Sooo... TO LATE! No worries though, really. As I said, they outlawed it with no science, just lobbyists from the owners of the IP around the low-lead alloys. Your plumbing system will not poison your children.
The new fittings/valves/faucets made from these proprietary alloys have a higher rate of failure but again, most people will never have a problem.
SLOWER TRAFFIC KEEP RIGHT
It seems the libertarian Sci-Fi authors were right. It is illegal to redesign the skateboard with fewer wheels and add electric motors.
LOL!
Is there a single safe federal government?
43% of US voters view federal corruption as their main concern.
>>The only reason UL exists is to generate income for UL. Having been through several "certification" cycles on various products, it's very clear that they exist only to run a highly-organized shakedown.
That's true. UL is ripping off companies. The US market often does not accept the lawful alternatives (NRTLs), and often you have to explain US law to a US customer. Strange. FYI, a UL certification from UL costs 2-3 times more than the exact same certification according to the exact same UL/ISO/IEC standards from any other NRTL.
>>UL, the organization in charge of certifying that products are safe for use.
That's wrong. UL is one of the organizations that are allowed to certify according to "UL standards" ( which are now mostly IEC anyway)
>>it urged them to make sure the scooters they make and sell comply with the safety standards set by Underwriters Laboratories
NRTL safety tests are needed only in products used at the workplace. But it's good to have it NRTL certified for any product.
aaaaaaa
The AC bullshit-artist at the root of this thread clearly has never had to deal with devices that work in explosive or flammable atmospheres, or for that matter, the distinction between "power" and "intrinsically safe" circuitry in sensor suites. As such, his opinion is of no weight. If he weren't an AC, then it might be worth replying to her directly, but she is an AC, so her opinion does not deserve direct refutation.
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"