> And then the conclusion is that the most bicycle-like one is best because it's more bicycle-like. Seems like a category arbitrage rather than a fair analysis of mobility options.

And refusing to take bike paths with not-a-bike is apparently eliminatory rather than making the device shoot up to the top of the ranking.

Give the article opens up with

> they want the rights of a pedestrian, the rights of a bicycle, and the rights of a car, all at the same time, which is an incredibly dangerous mindset.

that'd be hilarious if it weren't so maddeningly lacking in self-awareness.

Also

> And it has Bluetooth speakers, so you can play your music from the bike itself, freeing you from having to dangerously (and in Santa Monica, illegally) ride on the street wearing headphones.

fucking great, because if there's one thing I want more than an electric moped doing 30km/h on a bike path, it's that moped blaring shit music.

I understand that rules for bike paths depend on local jurisdiction, but why wouldn't an e-scooter fit a bike path in Venice, CA?

Over here (Finland, like all of Europe) we have roads, we have bike paths, and we have pedestrian pavements. E-scooters are always good for bike paths, and if they move faster than 15 km/h, they are not to be ridden in pedestrian areas, only bike paths, even if they are not exactly bikes.

If there is a road, a bike path and a pavement, each group has their own lane. If there's only a road, everyone uses it, with pedestrians on the side and bikes next.

If there's a road and a pavement, then pedestrians and slow e-scooters use pavement and bicycles and fast e-scooters use the road.

If there is only road and bike path, motor vehicles use the road and everyone else uses the bike path, with pedestrians on the side.

I do agree what you say about music blasting mopeds...

> Over here (Finland, like all of Europe) we have roads, we have bike paths, and we have pedestrian pavements. E-scooters are always good for bike paths

Are you sure about that? Because it's not an EN15194 LEV, so whether it's considered a bike (allowed on bike paths) or a moped (not so) [edit: or are completely illegal as jdietrich reminds me] is a local / national concern.

For instance France just passed a law which will allow e-scooters on bike lanes with various limitations (and requirements, like a horn and both front and back lights). The law passed in February, and will take effect in September. E-scooters on bike paths is currently illegal there.

This kind of e-scooter is illegal to use anywhere in the UK, because they don't comply with EN15194 - you can't use them on the road because they don't meet the standards for a motorcycle, nor can you use them on pavements or cycle lanes. The government has mooted creating new regulations to legalise e-scooters, but we're a bit preoccupied at the moment with, well, you know.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/mar/09/electric-sco...

Indeed, thanks for reminding me, I completely forgot to note that in the initial listing despite my very example demonstrating this case: e-scooters are currently illegal in france (because as you say they comply with neither EN15194 nor motorcycle standards), they may be legal next september.

Yes, in Germany e-scooters are legal to drive on bike paths and streets this week. You have to have insurance though, there is a max. speed of 20km/h and it needs lights and everything.

But if these scooters fit the requirements, they seem similar enough to bikes to allow them to drive on bike paths and streets.

Berlin has lovely bike paths covering much of the city and people still ride bikes on pedestrian sidewalks, especially (but not only) if there's no bike path there and they are supposed to use the street.

Some of the younger ones blasting music (yay bluetooth speakers) but I actually think that part is legal as long as they don't operate their phones while in motion.

So, yes, Europe is good at making traffic rules, but two-wheeled traffic has a lot of the same issues as in the US. (Maybe not in Finland?)

"Over here (Finland, like all of Europe) we have roads, we have bike paths, and we have pedestrian pavements. E-scooters are always good for bike paths, "

These escooters aren't even legal to use at all in any place that is public in the Netherlands, let alone that it would be decided where they should ride.

Ah, right: cycle paths are generally like this everywhere, but e-scooters going on them not necessarily. They're all over cities in Finland, Sweden and Denmark, though, and I've also seen them in Berlin.

Good. The Netherlands is so flat that there's no legitimate reason not to just use a shitty, beat-up, stealable bicycle like everybody else ;-)

In Los Angeles, Motorized vehicles are not permitted on sidewalks and paths. As a rider, you are liable for all personal injuries that result from your riding. Without insurance, you are putting your financial life in jeopardy. Think about it!

>Without insurance, you are putting your financial life in jeopardy. Think about it!

In addition to riders, if the scooter is a rental, I think there is a pretty solid claim to be made against the tech companies who scatter these scooters throughout cities (often times illegally) and allow them to be rented by anyone (with no training, no education of rules of the road, no offering of helmets, I’m not sure these thing come equipped with safety lights of any kind, etc...).

> I think there is a pretty solid claim to be made against the tech companies who scatter these scooters throughout cities (often times illegally)

I don't know about that, the device itself is not illegal, only its use on public way. And technically ignorance of the law is not a valid excuse.

It’s not just use of these devices on certain roadways, bike paths and sidewalks that may be illegal from jurisdiction to jurisdiction...but leaving them all over public spaces the way they do is also illegal in multiple jurisdictions (hence why city’s/counties began confiscating them and the scooter companies pulled out of a number of markets).

It’s not about ignorance of the law, if I get hurt by one I can sue both the rider and the scooter company.

The law is concerned with both actions and their intent. While placing the scooters on the street may not be illegal, the entire reason for doing so is for people to ride them. Its pretty clear intent to incite people to break the law for profit.

That very much makes the company involved with what happens when people do just that.

I agree, but, the practical reality in LA is that the police very rarely ticket people for riding these vehicles on the sidewalk. The insurance angle you mention is interesting, but let me ask the question: practically speaking, how would any pedestrian who is injured by a scooter rider in LA actually hold the scooter driver financially responsible? What is the mechanism? Will police actually even respond to a call for such an incident?

> how would any pedestrian who is injured by a scooter rider in LA actually hold the scooter driver financially responsible? What is the mechanism?

Same way they would if they were injured by a car, or by someone punching them in the face.

> Same way they would if they were injured by a car

oh. interesting. do these scooters have something like a license plate that one could use to trace back to the rider? do scooter companies service requests from random injured pedestrians for info about the rider of a particular scooter? does the DMV have a database of these vehicles? will the police help a pedestrian who tells them she was hit by a scooter and the rider just took off? if so, how do they find the rider? I mean, how does all that work?

> As a rider, you are liable for all personal injuries that result from your riding.

As a walker, you're liable for all personal injuries that result from your walking

As a dog owner, you're liable for all personal injuries that result from your dog.

> Without insurance, you are putting your financial life in jeopardy.

Most drivers are underinsured if they send a few people to the hospital. On a scooter though, covering the average cost of a scrape or the beyond costs of a broken bone isn't nearly as peril.

Let me restate my point;

Very few people have bicycle liability insurance, yet scooter liability insurance is a concern?

The scooter apps instruct you to use bike paths when available. That's why most of them are limited to 15mph so you can still use these paths, as you are moving just as fast as someone on a bike would anyway.

I regularly ride my e-bike in SF but have also dabbled with the rental scooters. I have a hard time understanding the scooters' popularity, compared to a rentable e-bike like the Jump or Lime bikes. In my experience e-bikes have the advantage in top speed, stability, comfort and safety. Other than taking up marginally more space when parked, I can't think of any downsides. This matches the article author's conclusion. Can anyone explain to me what I'm missing?

I take both Jump e-bikes as well as various scooters on the regular. Honestly I prefer Jump Bikes - it's almost always cheaper and faster and safer. I definitely feel more "seen" by cars as well.

That being said, with a scooter you aren't pedaling at all. Even on an e-assist bike you're still getting the adrenaline pumping and sorta sweaty. And a lot of people are afraid of riding bikes in traffic, so while even though bikes are actually much safer, there's a lower mental barrier to entry with scooters. People who almost never ride normal bikes (which is most people) have a harder time adopting the mindset of taking a bike share, e-assist or not.

Plus scooters are straight up more fun to ride with a group of friends - it's a genuinely fun thing to have out of town friends do.

> And a lot of people are afraid of riding bikes in traffic, so while even though bikes are actually much safer, there's a lower mental barrier to entry with scooters.

In LA it's not legal to ride scooters on the sidewalk, so, in theory, people should fear riding scooters too because they're supposed to ride scooters in traffic -- just like the bikes. Of course, in practice, almost everyone rides everything on the sidewalks in LA. Traffic codes are mainly unenforced here.

Oh yeah - I've seen plenty of not-confident-bikers hop on scooters and ride them in the street.

Even though riding a scooter in the street is often fairly terrifying, I feel like there's some kind of easy mental jump that has people getting on without nearly as much reservation as they would have hopping on a bike.

Yeah, taking out-of-town friends to the Emergency Room is fun too. Sorry if I sound snarky, but as a former EMT who has ridden scooters I know the damn things are deathtraps.

Yep, found this out the hard way and almost killed myself. Not clamoring for prohibition though. Also would never climb on one again. My remaining balance on Lime will be forever unused. Best part was the notification asking me to rate my ride which I received as I was regaining consciousness. :)

Care to share more?

I assume not wearing a helmet, going fast, downhill?

Interestingly, my first scooter experience was on one without brakes. I suppose I'm just athletic enough to jump off at ~10mph and keep running

Wish there was a way to get notified of replies on HN.

Anyway if you happen to see this I was not wearing a helmet, on flat ground. Not proud to say but I was on sidewalk and the rear wheel slipped off the side into soft ground bringing the entire apparatus to a quick halt from prob 15mph. Woke up a few min later with my face on the sidewalk and my legs curled up beneath me. Luckily I was wearing a thick stocking cap which prevented me from more serious injury. Total damage was bruised brow ridge and lip/chin, missing chunk of leg flesh apparently from hitting the handlebars, broken hand, and broken ribs.

Barrier of entry.

Folks like me that haven't ridden a bike since they were a kid are scared as hell of riding around traffic. Scooters are much more approachable.

Looks can be deceiving.

I ride a push bike, and had an electric one for a while. I've had my fair share of accidents. The last one was when the local council put in a drain at the bottom of a hill - and then didn't bother to place a proper road mix over it before sealing it with asphalt. Trucks then turned into something that looked more like corrugated iron with 300mm corrugations, which being at the bottom of a hill I hit at about 70km/hour. I lost a lot of skin (I pitched over the handle bars and slid along the bitumen) - but walked away.

That would not have been the outcome had I been on a e-scooter. I've tried an e-scooter when on holidays, found myself effortlessly doing doing 30km/hr, my first thought was "gee this is dangerous". The wheels are tiny, so a small obstacle is going to bring you undone. Your position is all wrong - standing on the thing you are a pole waiting to be vaulted through the air and slammed head first into the road, or possibly skewered by the handle bars on the way down. (Push bikes tend to send you over flying the handle bars which sounds bad but you don't hit the road - you slide along it.)

I'm not at all surprised to see serious accident and death rates and took a sudden surge upwards with the introduction powered scooters. They are inherently far less safe than bikes, yet as you say appear attractive and safe to inexperienced riders. It's a recipe for disaster.

Space? Scooters are smaller, which means they can be more plentiful, which as a transit solution means more reliable.

He was referring to e-bikes.

edit: Sorry, I think I misread your comment. But he does mentions space as a minor downside of e-bikes.

It's trivial to take your e-scooter with you in the subway, in your car and in your office.

Yeah, but we're talking about rentals.

Have you tried the rental e bike? I've only tried Lime's and it was hell to ride.

All these devices are absolutely abused. My lime's seat was skewed to the right, the handlebars skewed to the left, and it was the best one out of the clump when I picked it up. As soon as you touch the pedal the thing flies off nearly to top speed, which wouldn't be so jarring if the geometry of the bike didn't have you leaning forward on the seat and awkwardly holding the wide and unhelpful handle bars.

I'm sure a 'proper' e bike is much nicer, but these things are beach cruiser style bikes which have all the cons associated with beach cruiser style bikes. They really should have been mountain bikes with nice comfortable handlebars and a balanced upright position.

The scooter on the other hand, all you do is stand up straight and twist the handle. No clumsy positioning, no jarring electric assist. They are pretty fun to ride assuming you've picked a relatively unabused scooter, otherwise that too is pretty terrible and dangerous to ride.

The difference is we in SF have serious hills. Therefore bikes are a better form factor for us.

Scooters are fine if you're doing 10 flat miles.

In Atlanta and I've come to a similar conclusion; Bikes for anything > 1 mile away. Scooters handle 5 blocks pretty well.

Maybe partly because scooters are less regulated (at least until they started doing this...)

There were multiple fair metrics given for it being the best.

Maybe it means scooters aren't the ideal form-factor for this service.

> There were multiple fair metrics given for it being the best.

The unfair part is that they included one bike-like service, but didn't compare it to other bike-like services.