So what is the collective noun for Segways?

Still this forum is populated by nanny state nimby’s who consider living life to be whinging about who stole their favourite postit notes in the office and why does so and so have a monitor 1? bigger than me. (watto23)

no, it is populated by the act community, which includes people with something seemingly unfamiliar to you, a sense of humour…

… an exemption of segways?

it’s called a swarm of segways – go carts are better

love this thread; haven’t laughed so much in ages … & keeping to topic, un atout

a confusion of…
a delusion of ….

Pork Hunt said :

p1, you are often the voice of reason in a sea of fools and now you do this to me…
The company who sought the exemption did so following an oversight on their part. The gov’t looked at their proposal and saw it was good. I don’t see a major problem.[/quote>

I may have let myself run away with the rant… 😉

I think Segway rentals by the lake is a great idea, I might even give it a try sometime myself. I just get frustrated at the way laws get written.

p1 said :

Pork Hunt said :

So now it’s the governments fault that only “one” company applied for an exemption?

You mean “only one company failed to realise they were setting up a business which hired out vehicle for use illegally, and the government bailed them out with an exemption?”

Pork Hunt said :

I’d be pretty sure that Chinese copies (if and when they arrive) would be included in the exemption. Again, hardly the gov’ts fault that only one company makes these things.

Pretty sure the company will do everything it can to protect its intellectual property, so I can’t see knockoffs any time soon.

And while that isn’t really the governments fault, the issue here is that this is a development in technology (as the introduction of the car was). Difference being that when the car was developed lots of competing companies built them. Only one company makes a twatmobile two-side-by-side-wheeled-gyroscopically-self-balancing-electric-scooter-device (that I am aware of). Other companies do make devices which I would consider to be competing in the same market (electrically powered mobility devices of one sort or another), but these are mostly banned.

So we have a conflict whereby the IP laws that protect the company’s ability to profit from its invention also make it unfair for the government to legalise its use.

p1, you are often the voice of reason in a sea of fools and now you do this to me…
The company who sought the exemption did so following an oversight on their part. The gov’t looked at their proposal and saw it was good. I don’t see a major problem.

p1 said :

watto23 said :

Try living life for once, stuff happens. Dangerous things are banned. This is not any more dangerous than most of the currently legal forms of transport so get over it.

This, for me isn’t about wanting “dangerous” things banned, it is the other way ’round. I am pissed off that the government is going to change the law or issue exemptions or whatever, to allow a device that I have no interest in buying for myself, (an expensive device that the majority of the population isn’t going to buy even if they wanted one), while those same laws prohibit me from buying and using something which is similar, i.e. a good electric scooter/bike.

You could always use a Segway or an electric scooter in your backyard. Don’t even have to wear a helmet.

watto23 said :

Try living life for once, stuff happens. Dangerous things are banned. This is not any more dangerous than most of the currently legal forms of transport so get over it.

This, for me isn’t about wanting “dangerous” things banned, it is the other way ’round. I am pissed off that the government is going to change the law or issue exemptions or whatever, to allow a device that I have no interest in buying for myself, (an expensive device that the majority of the population isn’t going to buy even if they wanted one), while those same laws prohibit me from buying and using something which is similar, i.e. a good electric scooter/bike.

p1 said :

Pork Hunt said :

So now it’s the governments fault that only “one” company applied for an exemption?

You mean “only one company failed to realise they were setting up a business which hired out vehicle for use illegally, and the government bailed them out with an exemption?”

Pork Hunt said :

I’d be pretty sure that Chinese copies (if and when they arrive) would be included in the exemption. Again, hardly the gov’ts fault that only one company makes these things.

Pretty sure the company will do everything it can to protect its intellectual property, so I can’t see knockoffs any time soon.

And while that isn’t really the governments fault, the issue here is that this is a development in technology (as the introduction of the car was). Difference being that when the car was developed lots of competing companies built them. Only one company makes a twatmobile two-side-by-side-wheeled-gyroscopically-self-balancing-electric-scooter-device (that I am aware of). Other companies do make devices which I would consider to be competing in the same market (electrically powered mobility devices of one sort or another), but these are mostly banned.

So we have a conflict whereby the IP laws that protect the company’s ability to profit from its invention also make it unfair for the government to legalise its use.

so what? get on with something important !!
Just because no one else makes a segway device yet. There may come a time where something similar but different can be added to the new proposal.

Seriously I’ve never ridden one, might try it, but personally rather ride a bike, segways seem lazy to me. Still this forum is populated by nanny state nimby’s who consider living life to be whinging about who stole their favourite postit notes in the office and why does so and so have a monitor 1″ bigger than me.

Try living life for once, stuff happens. Dangerous things are banned. This is not any more dangerous than most of the currently legal forms of transport so get over it.

Pork Hunt said :

So now it’s the governments fault that only “one” company applied for an exemption?

You mean “only one company failed to realise they were setting up a business which hired out vehicle for use illegally, and the government bailed them out with an exemption?”

Pork Hunt said :

I’d be pretty sure that Chinese copies (if and when they arrive) would be included in the exemption. Again, hardly the gov’ts fault that only one company makes these things.

Pretty sure the company will do everything it can to protect its intellectual property, so I can’t see knockoffs any time soon. And while that isn’t really the governments fault, the issue here is that this is a development in technology (as the introduction of the car was). Difference being that when the car was developed lots of competing companies built them. Only one company makes a twatmobile two-side-by-side-wheeled-gyroscopically-self-balancing-electric-scooter-device (that I am aware of). Other companies do make devices which I would consider to be competing in the same market (electrically powered mobility devices of one sort or another), but these are mostly banned.

So we have a conflict whereby the IP laws that protect the company’s ability to profit from its invention also make it unfair for the government to legalise its use.

a Wall-E of segways