They’re not going to leave those scooters all over the city, right?
I hear they're free now
As a wise man once said, "the elites don't want you to know this, but the birds at the park are free. You can just take them home"
Look up how to quickly disconnect the batteries before you go hunting, so you can do that before you get them home.
True for the other kind of birds too. Don't want those government surveillance devices to still have batteries in when you take them home.
Free bird
It's not like anyone ever got them to clean them up anyways. Cities tired of this shit should just drive around with a dump truck, tossing all the Bird litter in and depositing it at the Bird HQ or local office. Then send them the bill for collection.
I can't just abandon a bicycle or throw trash on the ground, why is Bird and all of their customers allowed to?
Looks like they're trying to restructure, so not shutting down operations just yet.
But hey, if they do, free scooters!
Free locked down scooters that can't move.
They're easily hackable, especially the older models. Repairs are also easy on them too. Just need the right charger.
Give it time, people are crafty. Someone would find a way to hack them, if they haven't already.
Free batteries and motors, you mean?
If you remove the sim card and control boards they are just bare components.
No theyve already been dumped in the nearest river
Free batteries and motors for the taking.
They’re giving us all the bird.
When Bolt went under they just walked away from their bikes. Thankfully the manufacturer stepped in.
On one hand, the scooters were a pain in the ass. They dumped scooters all over sidewalks blocking the way. People often rode them on sidewalks posing a danger to people walking.
On the other hand, it was a low-pollution way of getting around a city without needing a car, and people actually used the scooters. If we're going to keep the world from melting, there need to be fewer cars. Not just fewer internal-combustion cars, fewer cars in general. If we just replace gasoline engines with electric motors, it's not going to solve the climate crisis. Cars also just make cities awful to walk, bike or use a scooter in. So, even if they were all electric, it would be annoying.
Personally, I always liked the bike sharing options a lot more than the scooter options. Whenever I was a tourist in a city that had those bike share programs, that's always how I preferred to get around. You see a lot more, you can stop anywhere and take pictures, and when you're done you can just plug the bike into the nearest available bike storage stand. But, scooters could be part of the solution. There are probably people who would ride scooters who wouldn't use bikes, even e-bikes. If anything reduces the number of car journeys people take, it's probably a good thing.
These scooters were not a low-pollution way to move around, at least not in France. In Paris, they were so abused and treated like disposable stuff that they had a very short life. All in all, they emitted as much co2 per km per persone as a commercial airplane.
Other towns had better luck with cheap long-term rentals including repairs and battery replacement when necessary, this made people behave more responsibly.
they were so abused and treated like disposable stuff that they had a very short life
I still don't see how this budget model is suppose to work. Hoe do you keep upkeep in check with a reasonable cost per ride?
How many kilometers does someone need to ride on those, before the scooter is paid off?
How often do these get vandalized or thrown in a river?
So a good idea in theory, but ruined by people being dicks? I wonder why some of the scooters were treated better than others.
People often rode them on sidewalks posing a danger to people walking.
I've seen this sentiment around, but where else are you supposed to ride eScoooters and bicycles? Of course ideally they belong in the bike lane, but most places don't have bike lines, so the alternatives are sidewalks or in the road with cars.
If we're gonna get people out of cars, we need to recognize that walking+transit doesn't work for everyone a lot of people and that a bicycle/ eScooter is the solution (look at Amsterdam/ Copenhagen how well bicycles work) , but bike lanes don't get built overnight, especially when few people cycle, if their banished from the safe sidewalk and only allowed to cycle in the dangerous road.
(I've lumped bikes and eScooters together since they both solve the same problem of rapid personal transport, both having speeds of 20-30 kph which is significantly more than pedestrians but less than cars)
where else are you supposed to ride eScoooters and bicycles?
On the road.
I agree that some people will get scared of being on the road with cars, but that's where they belong if there are no bike lanes. The catch-22 is that you can't get enough traffic to justify bike lanes until you have bike lanes. It takes someone to make the gamble that "if you build it, they will come". And, even then, drivers are going to be extremely dangerous. In the Netherlands, drivers largely aren't, but in North America there's a combination of drivers not expecting bikes, so making honest mistakes that get bikers killed, and drivers being evil assholes who don't think bikes belong near them and will drive dangerously and kill people.
Netherlands has reached a state where bikers feel safe because everyone bikes and it's safe. That means drivers always expect bikes. That makes biking safer, so more people are willing to bike.
Still, fundamentally, until there are bike lanes, bikes and scooters need to stay off sidewalks. Scooters and people who aren't experienced cyclists probably shouldn't ride on major roads either. Drivers are just too dangerous, and the speed difference between the two is too big. But, on smaller roads where the top speeds are about 30 km/h, the bikes and scooters will be going similar speeds to the cars. That's not that fast for a vehicle, but it's way too fast for the sidewalk.
Maybe it's a different culture, or matter of car and people density, but in my country (Norway) most people cycle on the sidewalk. Including kids of course, from the age of 10 they can cycle to school instead of having to walk.
Many footpaths here are also officially designated "cycling and walking paths". Generally the only cyclists you see in the road are sports cyclists in racing bicycles and tight skin suits.
The thinking here is that cyclists and pedestrians are both "soft traffic participants" so they share a space, while "hard traffic participants" like cars, trucks and motorcycles are kept separate.
Pedestrians do have right of way over cyclists. As the heavier faster party, cyclists have the responsibility to avoid conflict, by giving right of way, and slowing down and/or chiming their bell to signal their presence before passing pedestrians.
Personally, if I was told that tomorrow I'm only allowed to cycle on the road, I would get rid of my bike. If I'm gonna be on the road full of lorries busses and SUVs going 60kph, I'd rather just be in my car. It's just not worth the risk and constant peril. This is in a more suburban and industrial/commercial setting, where the sidewalks have gaps to buildings, and pedestrians are far apart.
I can however see how in a dense, crowded downtown area where the cars mostly drive slow and the sidewalks are dense with people, that cycling in the road makes more sense.
Thinking about it the only roads with 30kph limit and a sidewalk are in the very center of the city. All other places with 30kph are basically neighbourhoods etc where there are no sidewalks and everybody shares the road. Roads here with a dedicated sidewalk also have higher speed limits that what a casual cyclist can achieve
Road or cycleway. Pedestrian only sidewalk is not place for bicycles or scooters due to their greater speed.
There is combined cycleway and walkways, but there the point is those are wider than mere sidewalks, so there is room for cycles and scooters to safely overtake pedestrians.
I get the sentiment for sure and nothing looks worse than seeing 5 of them knocked over on a sidewalk but they were pretty nice. Here in Seattle it's hilly as fuck so walking down a hill to downtown then scootering back up was nice. Hopefully a good bike share can replace them.
Wow I'm not sure whether to say that took a long time or a short time (since many run in red for a long time).
They named the company Bird because that's what they were flipping city residents as they dropped these pieces of shit in the middle of every downtown.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
In a press release today, Bird confirmed that it had entered into a “financial restructuring process aimed at strengthening its balance sheet,” with the company continuing to operate as normal in pursuit of “long-term, sustainable growth.”
Founded in 2017 by former Lyft and Uber executive Travis VanderZanden, Bird is one of numerous startups to introduce dockless micromobility platforms around the world, allowing city-dwellers to pay for short-term access to electric scooters or bikes.
Things didn’t improve, and with its share price continuing to plummet, CEO VanderZanden departed in June with the company eventually delisted from the NYSE in September.
“This announcement represents a significant milestone in Bird’s transformation, which began with the appointment of new leadership early this year,” Washinushi said.
We remain focused on our mission to make cities more liveable by using micromobility to reduce car usage, traffic, and carbon emissions.”
This latest news comes just a day after competitor Micromobility.com was delisted from the Nasdaq over its failing stock price, three years after it too went public via a SPAC merger.
The original article contains 459 words, the summary contains 174 words. Saved 62%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
I use to see those things thrown into trees
Isn't that where birds belong, though? In trees?
Seems like this bird couldn't fly.
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
