I literally started just by saying that I have no idea how you came up with the binary choice claim (still don't). Then I clearly highlighted that the answer isn't simply to implement a child lock like you suggested. That's
a very small part of the answer. Like a positive attitude is just a very small part of the answer for curing disease.
> When there is no "the answer" other than "kids and abrasive belts moving at 6 miles an hour don't mix"
Kids don't mix with a lot of things that still fill our houses because we designed them to be as safe as they reasonably can. Even your lowly power outlet isn't just 2 hanging wires with a warning post-it because someone smart enough thought it'd be a bad idea to expect humans to not make mistakes. The live wire buried in the wall, holes covered with plastic, fuses or GFCI/RCBO, etc. to keep you safe. Most of your belongings are designed to enforce some safety measures. But a treadmill operating by itself and dancing around the floor while sucking in a child is OK because the parent should have been there?? That's a bad product and an indefensible position.
Engineering for consumer devices has to be done with safety in mind and compensating for the mistakes that the customers will inevitably make. I'll leave this here:
> "It is believed that at least one incident occurred while a parent was running on the treadmill, suggesting that the hazard cannot be avoided simply by locking the device when not in use," the CPSC said.
So with your answer being categorically classified as "not the answer", the big part of the real answer is to install many protections that Peloton and others skimped on. Some of them I listed and would have prevented anyone from being thrown off, or sucked under of the treadmill unless they were going out of their way to achieve this.
> if it was as easy to make a treadmill "99.9% safe" as you're handwaving it away
It is easy to make them safer than they are now. Manufacturers just choose not to because it's cheaper that way, because regulation doesn't force their hand, and because the occasional injury or death is the cost of doing business. And I say this as someone who saw every step of this, from designing and building (up to and including medical devices to give you an idea of my upper limit for safety and caution), to setting the company strategy, in a time when there was no "move fast and break things, we'll just send an OTA to fix it".
You had multiple opportunities to understand the point I'm making very clearly but chose to focus on covering your weak position. That's too bad.