As a 4+ mile/day pedestrian, the biggest complaint I have is many of them are ridden on the sidewalk. I've had too many close calls to count. I can't wait for the rainy season to start, so I won't need to worry about them anymore.

In CA, there is a state law that prevents them from being ridden on the sidewalk, yet the police in my city won't enforce it. Mayor told them "hands off" and near as I can tell, the Mayor is working a deal with the scooter companies. Money over safety. Disgusting.

It doesn't surprise me that there are teething issues. Scooters are new and most people haven't learnt how to ride one without making other people feel uncomfortable. That will change in time.

Also, from my experience with traffic in general, it doesn't take many assholes to make a situation uncomfortable, nor does it take an asshole to be inconsiderate. If one in ten road users or pedestrians I meet every day has a sudden lapse in judgement, that's enough for it to feel uncomfortable.

Ah, there's the disconnect. Where you live people are a whole lot nicer to each other.

I've have 4-letter words and middle fingers given to me when I ask niced for them to ride in the bike lane. I've had people threaten me, as well.

but that's not the fault of the scooter they're riding on.

Did I ever say it was?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18332259

It will never work, for the reasons I stated, unless the scooter operators go at the same pace as pedestrians, and we know they won't do that.

Actually, that's exactly what I do whenever I'm behind a walker and don't have space to pass.

I'm aware not everybody on a scooter behaves like that, but things will improve as time goes on. You are allowed to tell people when they are riding irresponsibly. They might do things differently the next day.

Pedestrians do not have lanes. When I step around the dog crap in front of me, I could be hit be a scooter operator not giving me enough space for my maneuver.

This is a strange thing to say. It's clearly false, and the alternative (putting them on the road) is clearly less safe.

I do think that the current model where Bird etc allow new users to jump on and go is problematic. It will probably work fine in the future when everybody knows how you are expected to ride them (i.e. full speed on the foot path is not cool), but at the moment things are a bit of a free for all. There's too much excitement when you get on for the first time, and no experienced riders to cool you down.

Homeless drug addicts = Losing money

Hence why San Francisco did something about the scooters.

So sad that it’s now becoming known globally as poop city.

I come every couple of years for a conference in downtown SF (Moscone Center) and always stay a whole week (so I can walk around town before/after the conference - usually going north and west towards the shore/golden gate bridge).

I have not throughout the years noticed the supposed infestation of human faeces. I see a lot of homeless people, but not more than, say, Berlin. And I would say the parts of the city I walk through (and especially the parks!) are actually cleaner than Berlin (and Berlin is not that dirty).

Am I just not staying/walking through the really bad parts? Or missing something else? Or does it just take longer exposure to notice?

Parks in Berlin are littered with beer bottles and cigarette butts because smoking and drinking in public are acceptable there. In many US cities you are not allowed to smoke in a public park where children are playing. Some cities banned smoking in all public parks. Drinking outdoors is banned so you don't see many beer bottles.

The problem in SF is different. You can stare into a park in Berlin and see litter. In SF, a park may seem clean but if you stumble upon one hypodermic needle or human faeces, you may not feel like it's so clean anymore.

My neighborhood in Berlin (Mitte) has homeless people hanging around parks and subways stations, but they don't seem to suffer from mental illness at the same rate as the homeless in SF. As far as number of homeless, Mitte vs the Moscone area are comparable.

    Coming from Boston or Copenhagen, SF feels like 
    an extremely dirty and grimy city. So does Berlin.

It reminds of when I lived in Vienna & had a Swiss coworker telling me how bad the transit is in Austria (if you're unfamiliar - transit is amazing in Austria, to the point where you can live in a small alpine village and not need a car. Switzerland just happens to be one of the handful of countries with even better transit).

[1] I haven't visited Miami in a long time but last I went it was far seedier and grimier than SF, despite lots of rain.

Next time walk down Howard until you hit 6th St. Talk a walk up 6th to Market Street. Then take your pick of Eddy or Turk for fecalspotting.

Also, the shit residents experience is usually there in the morning and someone washes it away by noon, so if you're attending conferences during the day, you probably won't see it by the time you get out.

Personally, I would say San Francisco's cleanliness is similar to Paris', but with more overt drug use.

And I would venture a guess that NO parks within anywhere remotely central locations in Berlin are as clean as this one - not just no used needles/broken bottles but not even "pedestrian" litter like thrown packaging or paper. I don't think you would even commonly find cigarette butts on the grass.

Basically don't do anything but sit, eat your lunch, and look at your phone. The amount of staff people there during the daytime is unlike any other park in SF.

SF doesn't actually have more homeless per capita, they just have more unsheltered people. And most come from the bay area.

I don't know the exact cause of the problem, but if it was a problem money could solve on its own it would have been done already. The homelessness issue in SF is pereniall bad press for tech companies.

Actions show that, not lip service.

Shitting in front of me? The world is ending.

Imagine drug dealers actually cared about using some of their profits to take care of people, and hoping that they maintain the use of their drugs - helping the user become more productive, have more money, therefore be able to buy more drugs.. I suppose that's what legalizing drug use is all about, bringing it into the public eye, and allowing government and other health services more access to people to help them.

[1] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0165832/

Private cars are at least used and placed by individuals. (As are private scooters, which nobody objects to.) Companies have no intrinsic right to convert public space to their place of business. Asking them to get a permit and limiting the amount of public space given for free to venture-funded companies seems fine by me.

If you're serious about fighting the problem of excess space devoted to cars, then you'll surely be strongly for establishing the principle that the city should work to make public space for the public.

I also strongly question your theory that the SF's transportation agency could or should be working on drug abuse and homelessness. I think San Francisco employs enough people that different departments can and should stick to what they're tasked with..

Likewise, something I rarely seen is the indirect cost of the reduced safety/increased accidents/collisions related to scooter use brought up as part of the big picture; who's paying for that depends on each country's current state of healthcare.

There's further analysis that could go into this - to then decide if or when it is a reasonable idea to cover the cost.

Another consideration/question is that I believe in many places the tax on gas helps pay for infrastructure, and I don't know if electric vehicles have this tax to cover the same road-related costs.