I personally cannot argue with the value of human powered transport, but why must we choose "muscle" or "motor" when there is no implied mutual exclusion. Let's face it, this could be a great augmentation. It takes up about as much floor space as a person would anyway, it can go at speeds slow enough to not be a hazard in malls or stores, and you can park it in your cube with you at work. Most of the public transport systems are designed to only carry 2 bicycles max, because a bike takes up a lot of room. If you can still ride a bike, or need that little extra bit of cargo capacity, then stay with the bike. But not everybody can use bikes, boards, scooters, or even hike that far. My knees are going out on me, and if I ride up a hill of moderate size, I can't bike for a week. As for the original argument of "has it been over hyped?", no. It has been over hyped for people that would research it out, but with the average American attention span being measured in seconds now, maybe we need to focus on hype for things we care about rather than reasonable arguments. An informational presentation will usually take at least 6 minutes while a commercial that sells an extended cab 4x4 pickup truck just waves a flag at us for 30 seconds. Maybe the problem with getting people to adopt a non-destructive way of life is the lack of well designed, broadly viewed, non-accusatory blip-verts associated with it all. I think that it is time for some extra hype about something that just may be a step toward changing the world. If you need to escape the hype, read a good book. I’ll guarantee that there are no banner ads, radio spots, or commercial breaks about the Segway in “The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy.” Just don’t read while riding your bike.
|
- Arlough 4-24-2003 8:14 pm