Pretty sure theyre joking

You forgot to mention that they will let you use it for cheap until everyone got used to it and then crank up the price by 500%

I donno, maybe I misinterpreted your tone but your comments all sound really condescending to me. With the “iTs cALled macOS not MacOS” and stuff

Dont start a comment with ‘you poor innocent soul’

Maybe people would listen to you if you werent such a prick

Thanks

You did get the /s in my comment tho right?

Exactly! Since when is it their job to keep track of political debates and news around the world? Politicians have their own shit to handle, we cant just keep pestering them with public worries.

I dont know how you cant understand the physics behind this, doesnt seem so hard, especially since you seem to think you understood it pretty well. Maybe you just havent even read my comment, its not even worth answering then but here I go in case you just misunderstood. There is a motor accelerating for balance, that same motor can brake. If you stop the wheel from going faster than 15 km/h then it wont. What I think you actually mean is ‘you cant stop the user from trying to go faster by leaning forward’. You cant, but they will know they cant push the limits after a few failed attempts and as long as the limit is low enough the risk of serious injury until then is minimal. Im not trying to avoid stopping the board by nosediving, which I said multiple times but you seem to ignore. What Im suggesting is stopping the board from nosediving at ridiculously high speeds, which is the problem at hand.

Nosedives happen all the time. The deadly cases are those where it happens at very high speeds or unexpectedly. When you feel the board stops accelerating you have to rebalance, Im not talking about a full stop at X km/h. Of course some buzzing or whatever would assist that, but not letting the user reach dangerously high speedy in the first place would have higher benefit imo. Idiots who want to push the limits will still do if they know they can, with or without haptic feedback.

absolutely zero way to prevent this

Youre joking right? Install a speed threshold, problem solved. It is no witchcraft, but they probably dont want to invest the research needed or dont see the need.

It IS the part malfunctioning though, it says so pretty clearly. Boards come with risks but the board malfunctioning is neither inherent nor unavoidable. Thats the whole point.

If the maximum speed is 120, the car wont go over 120. You cant advertise a car with ‘only go 120 or the car will kill you’.

No, its like paragliding without a helmet, which a lot of people do btw.

You wouldnt recall the windshield because thats not the part malfunctioning. If a car keeps braking randomly while going 120 on the highway, it doesnt matter if you use a seatbelt or not, the car is faulty and thats what would get recalled.

I reread the text passage, it says pretty clearly ‘the Onewheel was malfunctioning’.

Just because you didnt follow the instructions to wear a seatbelt doesnt make it okay to be killed. Thats like saying running over pedestrians is alright if they are jaywalking, they dont count as traffic casualties. If the only deaths counted are those where every party involved perfectly obeyed all rules and acted 100% correctly, there wouldnt be many left. Cars would be considered completely safe.

Maybe not but logic isnt yours either

No its not and I cant believe I even have to say this lol. If I shoot you with a gun its on you for not wearing kevlar right? If your car explodes out of nowhere thats also on you for not wearing a seatbelt I suppose?

Not sure how not wearing a helmet makes it okay to be killed by a faulty product.

Thanks for that link, very interesting. I didnt cite the 94% though, I didnt even know about that statistic. Also, even if it isnt 94%, its probably close to that. Even if its just half of that, you cant blame the other half directly on the cars malfunction, those accidents are probably caused by many factors. So like I was saying, in this case the fault seems to lie entirely with the product.

The difference as far as I could tell from the text would be that car accidents are usually the users fault while this is attributed to the products failure or bad usability.