There’s a good case for this
-
To be clear: the Segway as released was •not• a very good product. But it was not a worse product than, say, the Apple-1, which was also clumsy, nerdy, impractical, expensive. ($3400 in today’s money and it didn’t even have a keyboard!)
Yet in the latter case the response was “This is the future! Let’s do this! Let’s figure it out!” And with the Segway, the response was “How mockable, nobody should ever try to build anything like this ever again!”
A crumb went down the wrong way with micromobility in 2001, and I’m not willing to lay that entire at the feet of one product’s marketing team. We collectively screwed up.
ETA: This •started• as a thread about e-bikes and e-scooters; scroll up
@inthehands Maybe the overhype? I recall they tried to build suspense for a long while, with hyperbolic claims of a revolutionary invention, and then they unveiled an expense, weighty, bulky device.
-
@inthehands Maybe the overhype? I recall they tried to build suspense for a long while, with hyperbolic claims of a revolutionary invention, and then they unveiled an expense, weighty, bulky device.
@MonniauxD I repeat myself:
••• I’m not willing to lay that entire at the feet of one product’s marketing team. We collectively screwed up. •••
-
…I’m asking us to pause all of that entrenched reaction, and think about why our reaction was:
“What a bad product! How douchy! Ha ha!”
…instead of what was in hindsight probably a much better reaction:
“Oh, what a good idea for a product •direction•! All-electric human-sized transportation…huh, that might just change the world! If we can improve on this very clumsy first attempt at execution….”
@inthehands the direction still has some significant problems: useful in cities but less so else where and only accessible to some people. Tech tends to favour groups unaffected by problems like that. I reckon that some of the negative reactions comes from people clocking that the product is borne of a vision of the world that doesn’t include them.
-
@grechaw
That is where the thread started, yes@inthehands erg. Rtfm, Charles .
-
…I’m asking us to pause all of that entrenched reaction, and think about why our reaction was:
“What a bad product! How douchy! Ha ha!”
…instead of what was in hindsight probably a much better reaction:
“Oh, what a good idea for a product •direction•! All-electric human-sized transportation…huh, that might just change the world! If we can improve on this very clumsy first attempt at execution….”
I'd certainly be in the market for something that helps me move around on uneven ground while preventing falls.
I don't actually expect the device to warn me away from the edge of a cliff, though that might be nice.
-
@inthehands I would say the real problem is that our society is hard wired to think that anything that is in any way whatsoever associated with "laziness" in any form whether right or wrong is pure, unadulterated evil. Anyone who in any way whatsoever desires to do a thing that is considered by others to be lazy is evil and bad.
It's a complete load, but society needs us to think of "lazy" as "useless" and "a drain on society."
Aka work until you hurt and then die.
@inthehands I have to add on to this, the more I think about it, this actually predates even capitalism.
Humans have, for ages and ages been trained from birth to think of anything that may be perceived as laziness as actually evil. In some cases I mean that's quite literal even. Actually "evil" religiously/etc. To be hated and to be punished.
It also carries over to other things like hating on disabilities and etc.
-
To be clear: the Segway as released was •not• a very good product. But it was not a worse product than, say, the Apple-1, which was also clumsy, nerdy, impractical, expensive. ($3400 in today’s money and it didn’t even have a keyboard!)
Yet in the latter case the response was “This is the future! Let’s do this! Let’s figure it out!” And with the Segway, the response was “How mockable, nobody should ever try to build anything like this ever again!”
A crumb went down the wrong way with micromobility in 2001, and I’m not willing to lay that entire at the feet of one product’s marketing team. We collectively screwed up.
ETA: This •started• as a thread about e-bikes and e-scooters; scroll up
@inthehands
But isn't it back with those little electric razor-type scooters? Same thing functionally but inline wheels. -
@inthehands
But isn't it back with those little electric razor-type scooters? Same thing functionally but inline wheels.@lackthereof
That’s what the thread is specifically about; scroll up -
To be clear: the Segway as released was •not• a very good product. But it was not a worse product than, say, the Apple-1, which was also clumsy, nerdy, impractical, expensive. ($3400 in today’s money and it didn’t even have a keyboard!)
Yet in the latter case the response was “This is the future! Let’s do this! Let’s figure it out!” And with the Segway, the response was “How mockable, nobody should ever try to build anything like this ever again!”
A crumb went down the wrong way with micromobility in 2001, and I’m not willing to lay that entire at the feet of one product’s marketing team. We collectively screwed up.
ETA: This •started• as a thread about e-bikes and e-scooters; scroll up
@inthehands I think e-bikes took that mantle. It does require more from the user, but wasn't a conceptual bridge too far
-
(I also wonder how much social countermarketing petrochem slipped in to kill it. If that story’s known, it’s not known to me.)
@inthehands I bet there’s a direct line between this and the megatrucks we have today
-
@inthehands I think e-bikes took that mantle. It does require more from the user, but wasn't a conceptual bridge too far
@matthew That’s where the thread started
-
I periodically think about the hype around the Segway, how luminary types were over the moon for it in private demos but then the general public decided it was uncool, and think maybe actually the luminaries had it right and it’s the public that biffed it.
@inthehands I really don’t think tepid or even vaguely hostile reactions to the Segway slowed the micromobility revolution. I think battery tech evolution and production capacity are more likely.
-
To be clear: the Segway as released was •not• a very good product. But it was not a worse product than, say, the Apple-1, which was also clumsy, nerdy, impractical, expensive. ($3400 in today’s money and it didn’t even have a keyboard!)
Yet in the latter case the response was “This is the future! Let’s do this! Let’s figure it out!” And with the Segway, the response was “How mockable, nobody should ever try to build anything like this ever again!”
A crumb went down the wrong way with micromobility in 2001, and I’m not willing to lay that entire at the feet of one product’s marketing team. We collectively screwed up.
ETA: This •started• as a thread about e-bikes and e-scooters; scroll up
@inthehands Thing was, not many people hurt themselves on the Apple.
-
R relay@relay.infosec.exchange shared this topic
-
@inthehands I really don’t think tepid or even vaguely hostile reactions to the Segway slowed the micromobility revolution. I think battery tech evolution and production capacity are more likely.
This may well be the case — though I do suspect that tech might have advanced faster if investors & the public believed in the applications sooner
-
@retech @inthehands @Nicovel0 It's been speculated on for almost a decade now, but the recent releases essentially confirmed it. This article summarizes everything from pre-"The Files" release if you want to learn more. https://christine-negroni.medium.com/jeffrey-epstein-dean-kamen-connection-through-aviation-influencer-bb0e767dbfcf
There's still no legal proof, but for anyone capable of critical thought the evidence is extremely damning.
@retech @inthehands @Nicovel0 I guess I should clarify that the Epstein file releases included pictures of Kamen on Epstein's island with Epstein (and Richard Branson), and there is at least one photo with a woman in an inexcusable position.
Epstein also discussed in his emails people he knew who, as guests of Kamen, attended events for Kamen's youth robotics org.
For all the good Kamen did for the world with his intentions, it's well past time to separate the man from his work.
-
@inthehands Thing was, not many people hurt themselves on the Apple.
@annehargreaves
Yet the high injury rates from class 3 e-bikes have not slowed their adoption. And speaking of injuries…have you ever heard about cars? -
…I’m asking us to pause all of that entrenched reaction, and think about why our reaction was:
“What a bad product! How douchy! Ha ha!”
…instead of what was in hindsight probably a much better reaction:
“Oh, what a good idea for a product •direction•! All-electric human-sized transportation…huh, that might just change the world! If we can improve on this very clumsy first attempt at execution….”
@inthehands I think this is a good thought exercise, and helpful to reflect on when considering new products.
Also worth mentioning that a lot of Kamen's messaging at the time was along these lines, that electrified personal transportation could change the world in substantial ways, it just happened that Segway was the *only* version in existence.
-
This may well be the case — though I do suspect that tech might have advanced faster if investors & the public believed in the applications sooner
@inthehands I mean, maybe, but… they’re so good at manufacturing demand, I have a hard time pinning this on consumers, particularly given how organically enthusiastic ebike riders took to the products once they became popularly available.
Maybe it’s a chicken-egg thing. Maybe capitalism is not in fact all that amazing at discovering and satisfying preferences.
Good lines of thought to chew on!
-
To be clear: the Segway as released was •not• a very good product. But it was not a worse product than, say, the Apple-1, which was also clumsy, nerdy, impractical, expensive. ($3400 in today’s money and it didn’t even have a keyboard!)
Yet in the latter case the response was “This is the future! Let’s do this! Let’s figure it out!” And with the Segway, the response was “How mockable, nobody should ever try to build anything like this ever again!”
A crumb went down the wrong way with micromobility in 2001, and I’m not willing to lay that entire at the feet of one product’s marketing team. We collectively screwed up.
ETA: This •started• as a thread about e-bikes and e-scooters; scroll up
@inthehands I think it's a little of both because the aesthetics were atrocious and it feels like the inventors must never have had a job that requires you to stand. Just looking at those made my knees hurt. When tech companies think they can make a better UI, they're more often wrong. I think those rental scooters are something there was a strong negative reaction to because of how they'd clog up streets, but it helps having stuff like that to reduce dependence on automobiles in the city.
-
@inthehands I think this is a good thought exercise, and helpful to reflect on when considering new products.
Also worth mentioning that a lot of Kamen's messaging at the time was along these lines, that electrified personal transportation could change the world in substantial ways, it just happened that Segway was the *only* version in existence.
@inthehands Another good thing to keep in mind when thinking about the Segway is that it was a byproduct of, and a way to fund, the development of the iBOT, a wheelchair which allows users to be eye-height with standing people, use counters and other objects designed for users at standing height, and ascend/descend stairs.
It was and still is a revolutionary product for accessibility, but definitely did not benefit from the lambasting of the Segway.
