It sounds like the residents of DC are the plague and the bikes are just a litmus test to reveal how far gone they really are. The bikes work well in some places.

Which places? This is an honest question because most articles I've read about these kinds of bikes all over the world describe the same problem.

They're popular in Berlin and the system works well. It's only one company, but I've never seen this sort of vandalism.

I also don't understand why it would happen. They have GPS, and the company knows who rents them. Maybe it's inconsiderate riders leaving them in the middle of the sidewalk, plus inconvenienced pedestrians damaging them in revenge?

Even in that somewhat possible scenario: I wonder why people don't similarly take matters into their own hands when inconvenienced by, for example, illegally parked cars.

It's also worth mentioning that no bike, parked anywhere but the middle of a busy street, could create as much inconvenience and health risks as any car.

People always assume a city full of cars as the "default", that has to be accepted. Yet in large cities, a quarter to half of all people (and far more in Manhattan) live good lives without owning a car. Imagine how quality of life would skyrocket if more people made the responsible choice: you'd win back 1/3 of public space that is currently used for parking. Possibly another 1/6th by converting most streets to one-ways, as would be possible if the remaining traffic is just public transport, deliveries & the elderly. With less traffic, most intersections could function without traffic lights.

Biking, walking, and public transport would each become far more attractive than it is right now. Seriously: in dense areas, car usage has become a collective action problem.

>People always assume a city full of cars as the "default", that has to be accepted. Yet in large cities, a quarter to half of all people (and far more in Manhattan) live good lives without owning a car. Imagine how quality of life would skyrocket if more people made the responsible choice: you'd win back 1/3 of public space that is currently used for parking. Possibly another 1/6th by converting most streets to one-ways, as would be possible if the remaining traffic is just public transport, deliveries & the elderly. With less traffic, most intersections could function without traffic lights.

I don't understand this attitude.

You can't solve transportation problems by reducing supply of A and increasing supply of B. You need to increase supply over-all. An over crowded subway, bike lane and highway all suck. Which you prefer to endure is only a matter of personal taste.

If you make transportation via one method expensive (time, money or some other metric) people will do less of that and more of something else but the net result is harm because the cost of physical distance increases and that has a negative impact on quality of life because people are forced to use the wrong tool for the job. Examples include commuting via car or carrying groceries on a bike.

The "food desert" issue is a good example of how a high cost of getting from A to B hurts people. People can't buy good food because they can't afford to go where they can afford to buy it. Sure you could ride your bike 10mi to get groceries but that's not a time/money/quality trade-off most people are ok with (they'd rather eat junk food).

Another example, there's a bunch of clothes that I've been meaning to donate to charity but haven't because my schedule, my SO's schedule and the business hours of the thrift store need to sync up so one of us can circle the block or donating said clothes will cost $8 of parking. If so many people biked or public transit was so good that one of us could find free/cheap parking the thrift store would have the clothes by now.

How do you stop someone from moving something they can pick up? Vehicles are too heavy to move without being turned on.

With Galileo coming online, you can get sub-centimetre position resolution, which would enable you to clearly identify riders misplacing bikes.

In regards to bikes being picked up and moved, a simple alarm might help. But I really doubt that there would be much vandalism against parked bikes that don't get in the way. After all the streets are full of parked bikes, and vandalism is quite rare.

(Yes, I have seen plenty of bikes with parts missing or bent wheels. But these usually remain in place for years, based on my observations, skewing superficial impressions. I've parked my bike on public streets for years, and the only thing that ever happened was my fancy saddle once being stolen.)

Seattle seems ok. There is some vandalism towards bikes, but not much, the bikes themselves aren’t a problem for bystanders.

The only reason I’m not using them is the helmet problem.

I’m picking up at least one bike a day. In Wallingford area of Seattle they just get unceremoniously tossed onto the ground or knocked over by other means. I do hope a single app emerges which can manage across the 3 apps (lime, ofo, spin)

I was recently in a city in SE China which is having great success with these bikes. A scan with Wechat unlocks them. they have team size of guys in Uniform going around clearing them up and cleaning them all the time, which is probably not as feasible in the West

Zurich, for example. Most dockless bikes are parked in or near bike stalls.

A plague is a good way of describing them. There is no concern whatsoever about where the bikes are left. They are often right in the middle of the sidewalk in front of where ever they were ridden to. I have been bitten by the lack of a Capitol Bike share dock more then once, so I understand the benefit, but there needs to be rules like put your things away when you are done using them.

It's a chicken and egg problem. There's no place to park because cities have been built around driving, and then walking. But not biking. In the Netherlands, there are bike racks, bike parking lots.... plenty of space to put them, and a solid social understanding that you cannot leave your bike in the walkway. Give it time.

China has the same but these bikes are still a huge problem. Well, it used to be better: the attended bike parking lots of 15 years ago have disappeared as the sea of bicycles phenomena unfortunately ended.

What's wrong with bikes parked in the street (assuming they're using on-street parking)? They certainly take up less room than a car parked in the same space.

Edited for clarity.

Well, ideally nothing is parked in the street. Otherwise its usefulness as a street is severely diminished.

In my experience, in a crosswalk literally in the street. Although having a dock less bike take up car parking spots I’m trying to use would be infuriating.

What may be infuriating for you, could be delightful for 25 bike riders.

Except in most cases its a car full of frusturated people, and one inconsiderate cyclist. Its a problem on both sides. Being smug helps noone.

it not so much the street as it is the middle of the sidewalk.

Well the city should fine people who do this. Don't the bike share companies know who the last person was to park a bike?

Wouldn't the problem be that the bikes could be moved by people who want to get the last person in trouble?

Personal bikes tend to get locked to fixed objects. Anything that motivates users of dockless shared bikes to treat them more similar to personal bikes will be an improvement, in many ways.

The bigger question is how to generally proceed with making users responsible for anything, without driving them away?

This, I highly doubt that the person who last used the bike (and derived the benefit) is the one who chucked it into the river.

The bike company is ultimately the one responsible for the bike.