Slashdot Mirror
A Software Malfunction Is Throwing Riders Off of Lime Scooters (qz.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Quartz: Riders in Switzerland and New Zealand have reported the front wheels of their electric scooters locking suddenly mid-ride, hurling riders to the ground. The malfunction has resulted in dozens of injuries ranging from bruises to broken jaws. Lime pulled all its scooters from Swiss streets in January when reports of the incidents surfaced there. When the city of Auckland, New Zealand voted to suspend the company earlier this week following 155 reported cases of sudden braking, the company acknowledged that a software glitch was causing the chaos. The company claims that fewer than 0.0045% of all rides worldwide have been affected, adding that "any injury is one too many." An initial fix reduced the number of incidents, it said, and a final update underway on all scooters will soon be complete. "Recently we detected a bug in the firmware of our scooter fleet that under rare circumstances could cause sudden excessive braking during use," Lime wrote in a blog post Saturday. "[I]n very rare cases -- usually riding downhill at top speed while hitting a pothole or other obstacle -- excessive brake force on the front wheel can occur, resulting in a scooter stopping unexpectedly."
They use electronically activated brakes to keep people from using the scooters without paying.
Maybe I'm to old to understand the attraction to these things.
Imagine, if you can, that there is a place you need to physically be. Let's say it's a place you could physically walk to, but maybe doing so would take longer than you'd like, plus if you're not in good physical condition -- which I'd expect a old person would be able to sympathize with! -- it may be physically taxing or difficult to walk that long. Even for a young, fit person, if the weather isn't very nice, you might arrive either all hot and sweaty or half-frozen.
Now, imagine that I've got a vehicle you can ride that will get you there in a third of the time and with minimal physical effort, and it'll only cost you about a dollar. To top it off, you don't have to worry about maintenance or security. Do you see the attraction now?
Karma: Terrifying (mostly affected by atrocities you've committed)
Posting a software fix for this "very rare" occurrence - that has happened in at least 155 reported instances in New Zealand alone, according to TFS - isn't going to do Lime any good, at this point. It's going to face product liability suits, personal injury suits, and class-action suits (despite the laughable prohibition against filing or participating in class action suits in Section 5.8 of its User Agreement, and other language restricting its users available forum for remedies to binding arbitration, and - rather hilariously, IMnsHO - attempting to limit Lime's maximum financial liability for any injury a user might suffer to a princely $100) that are unquestionably going to be financially ruinous for the company.
Fatally so, because it's a venture-capital-funded startup, and the lawyers for Uber, Google Ventures, and other firms that have financed it to the tune of more than $300 million thus far are undoubtedly going to advise their respective management teams that it's now time to cut their losses, write off their investment in Lime, and apply the losses to offset taxes on companies they've funded in the past that are now producing actual profits, rather than liabilities.
The thing that gets me is how the idiots running Lime's software development team decided that rolling out untested code to their deployed fleet of vehicles could in any way have been considered a good idea. I mean, it's one thing for Mark Zuckerberg to flog his coders to "move fast and break things." Bugs in Facebook's code have no potential to physically injure or kill its users. Motor vehicles operated by biological humans on non-virtual streets, in real-world traffic conditions. are a completely different matter. They entail a whole different order of risks: both to their riders' lives, physical health, and safety, and to the company's own existence, should it be found legally liable for any injuries suffered by the former due to its employees' negligence.
And it almost certainly will be held liable. All a plaintiff's lawyers have to establish is that the code that caused the brake lock-ups had not been sufficiently-well tested (if, indeed, it was tested at all) before it was rolled out to the fleet of scooters that Lime's customers paid it to rent, and it's "Game over! Thank you for playing," because I can't see any court in any country ruling that the company's attempt to duck liability for its negligence via the ham-handed provisions of its User Agreement as enforceable, or in any way reasonable or fair.
Disclaimer: IANAL. If Lime's broken-ass software has caused you to sustain an injury of any kind, I strongly advise you to consult an actual, admitted-to-practice-before-the-bar-type barrister about it - preferably one who has a long record of winning product liability cases against companies with a history of employing predatory user agreements to try to prevent their customers from holding them responsible for their negligence ...
Check out my novel.