Yeah, I agree it is the same here. What I mean is that if you ride it without paying and then leave it in one of the designated locations or near one of them and there is no permanent damage to the bike the company (I think) will not count it as stolen, will recharge it and keep using it.

So in that sense stolen are only the ones that are impossible to recover.

As someone that lives in a part of a city where Lime doesn't operate, I see people on stolen bikes all the time. The bikes make a clicking sound to try and annoy the thieves, but the thieves don't care.

Imo the article is not good in defining theft here, these bikes lie all around the city and my guess is that when they are hard to reach (like in a river) the company just counts them as stollen.

This is just a company with a very shit work model avoiding responsibility for polluting the environment.

But as the article says, it's the stolen bikes that are dumped, not the legitimately hired ones.

That does make sense about ride share lowering the barrier to entry and not having to lock the bike up.

That's fair. I think I've just rode in mostly suburban environments in areas with frequent rain were they'd be impractical.

Normal people who dress for destination i guess? Kinda depend on the route and the bike setup.

In the ride sharing era, it's quite common to see things that you wouldn't ordinarily. I've seen women on lime bikes in miniskirts.

Who wears white pants while biking?