For now, the explanation that he did it because he could would suffice for me.
I've always been on board with this, which is the interesting part. That it's obviously worse than a proper bike is why it is also stupid. There's nothing wrong with stupidper se, otherwise there would be no tall bikes, reproduction Ordinaries or lo-pros with risers, but it's rare for any of these clowns to take themselves quite so seriously:
Yesterday the second patent application was filed.
The design-constraint of having two wheels in the same plane is out of the way now! And id like to invite bike-designers, framebuilders, anyone really to imagine how this new technology can be applied in .... flat folding bikes... cargo bikes with better cargo space... wooden bikes....
Going so far as to file patents, build many iterations for testing and indicate that he thinks it has any practical use is where it goes past wilfully comic into laughably misguided
I've always been on board with this, which is the interesting part. That it's obviously worse than a proper bike is why it is also stupid. There's nothing wrong with stupid per se, otherwise there would be no tall bikes, reproduction Ordinaries or lo-pros with risers, but it's rare for any of these clowns to take themselves quite so seriously:
Going so far as to file patents, build many iterations for testing and indicate that he thinks it has any practical use is where it goes past wilfully comic into laughably misguided