4 ms·

No, they didn't play us. They did exactly what they promised. Thanks to Uber, I don't get racially discriminated against on a daily basis. Before Uber I did. S

No, they didn't play us. They did exactly what they promised. Thanks to Uber, I don't get racially discriminated against on a daily basis. Before Uber I did. Some folks may hate them because of Susan Fowler, but that doesn't change the fact that they've drastically improved the world for consumers.

bogomipz 9y ago
Yet there's also been plenty of allegations of racism with Uber as well: https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/10/uber-lyft-and-the-false-promise-of-fair-rides/506000/ https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/10/uber-ly...
- yummyfajitas 9y ago
  Read the actual study cited by that clickbait article. Racism at Uber is vastly smaller than racism via traditional taxis.
  - bogomipz 9y ago
    >"Racism at Uber is vastly smaller than racism via traditional taxis." And that makes racism more acceptable? Also I guess you are not familiar with The Atlantic. It is a 160 year old institution, it is very well-respected. Past writers include Ralph Waldo Emerson, Oliver Wendell Holmes and Harriet Beacher Stowe. It does not trade in Clickbait.
    - cmdrfred 9y ago
      A lesser quantity of racism is more acceptable than a greater quantity in my opinion. The rest of your comment is basically the "argument from authority" logical fallacy.
      - bogomipz 9y ago
        Oh the tired old accusation of "that's just a ______ fallacy", the rest of my comment is simply pointing to that fact that the publication is not one whose business model is clickbait a la Buzzfeed. There is no claim of "authority" in that.
        cholantesh 9y ago
        A venerable institution can fall on hard times and make decisions that reflect poorly on it, but generate revenue. And even in the best of times, a dud can slip through the editorial cracks.
        bogomipz 9y ago
        How did you come to the conclusion that the Atlantic has fallen on hard times? An article being a "dud" is highly subjective, even if you yourself haven't found an article to be a worthwhile read does not qualify qualify an article as "clickbait". There is nothing sensational in the article, it is simply discussing findings in a study. The Atlantic has actually fared pretty well: [1] "The Atlantic saw the highest increase in circulation, expanding slightly by 2% in 2015." http://www.journalism.org/2016/06/15/news-magazines-fact-sheet/ http://www.journalism.org/2016/06/15/news-magazines-fact-she... This 2016 is the most recent data available.
        cholantesh 9y ago
        >How did you come to the conclusion that the Atlantic has fallen on hard times? I haven't. I'm simply pointing out that their venerability doesn't guarantee that everything they put out is of the highest caliber. The bevy of think (or whine) pieces it has published about millennials and safe spaces speaks to that, I feel. >There is nothing sensational in the article, it is simply discussing findings in a study. Which is sufficient as a rebuttal to the claim that it is clickbait.
    - snakeboy 9y ago
      They in no way said it was more acceptable. Just that to the individual, it is more pleasant to have to deal with a company which is less explicitly racist. Certainly there is still room for improvement. For reference on the logical fallacies used in your comment, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_fallacy.
      - bogomipz 9y ago
        Maybe you should read the comment above it then. Why even mention the fact that although there was still racism there was less racism? Why would that fact be relevant it wasn't a counterpoint to something else? You have made an incorrect interpretation of the nature of my comment, which is a sincere question. But wow how very presumptuous and condescending of you to provide wikipedia links and make accusations of fallacy.
        yummyfajitas 9y ago
        The comment two levels above said that Uber reduces my daily dose of racism to levels far lower than "daily". The comment one level up says that the study your clickbait article cites supports this point.
    - yummyfajitas 9y ago
      Yes, a small amount of racism that I don't even notice is far more acceptable than a large amount which inconveniences me daily. Racism isn't like homeopathy, where any quantity at all has the same effect. More is worse, less is better. In that study, the median black taxi rider is passed by 2 taxis before being picked up, vs 0 for the median white (see fig A.6). The difference for Uber is not remotely as large.
    - areyousure 9y ago
      > It does not trade in Clickbait. When I just opened up the Atlantic now, it showed me ads -- err, "content" -- from Revcontent, which is some of the worst clickbait on the Internet.
gotothedoctor 9y ago
I found that to be true at the beginning. But now, Uber drivers are Lyft drivers are taxi drivers. They all use apps now. And evidence suggests drivers adapted and found new ways to discriminate. https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/10/uber-lyft-and-the-false-promise-of-fair-rides/506000/ https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/10/uber-ly... The only difference now is who is taking how much out of the driver's paycheck--and whether or not that company is paying taxes or just extracting wealth from any given city.
- yummyfajitas 9y ago
  Read the study cured by the Atlantic. Uber is vastly less racist than traditional taxis.
  - gotothedoctor 9y ago
    I have read the study; there is just no longer a difference. "Traditional" taxis now use apps & drivers now drive for Uber, Lyft and local taxi companies.
    - yummyfajitas 9y ago
      Of course there's a difference. In a taxi you can rip off a firangi or fail to pick up a black passenger at your leisure. With Uber, this will cause your ratings to drop below 4.3, or your acceptance rate/cancellation rate to drop below/above whatever threshold they use. Then you get kicked off the platform. Uber is providing the necessary regulation of the system that governments fail to provide.
      - gotothedoctor 9y ago
        Since taxis also operate via apps & the drivers are the same people, this is simply no longer true. While I'll agree that Uber used to provide a higher quality experience (nicer cars etc), this is no longer the case. The rating system is also broken-eg it now offers too much power to drunk customers. Uber now operates only to benefit itself-not its customers, not the drivers and certainly not the public. Perhaps you'd prefer to be regulated by the whims of a corporation & their pursuit of profit extraction rather than the democratic legitimacy of government, but thankfully, most of us would not. Hence, even if its taken some time for local & national governments to get up to speed, Uber is being banned, taxed, and forced to abide by the public & workplace safety rules every other company must follow.
urbanj 9y ago
> Thanks to Uber, I don't get racially discriminated against on a daily basis. Before Uber I did No you didn't. Chrissy.
TeMPOraL 9y ago
They're still giving us exactly what they promised - promised not by just words, but actions. Initially, Uber set itself out as the hero of the day, riding on a shining horse to fight the Evil Taxi Mafia. Anyone who looked closely at how they did that could easily predict that what they want to become is the new, but worse, Taxi Mafia. They've been assholes almost from the start, they continue to be assholes now. That so many people only got angry after sexism accusations, of all the things, only makes me sad about the state of humanity.
- yummyfajitas 9y ago
  How are they a worse taxi mafia? They provide more convenient service with fewer ripoffs and far less racism at lower prices. As a consumer, what exactly should I be angry about?
  - TeMPOraL 9y ago
    As a homo economicus blindfoldus - nothing. Cheaper and better service here right now? Yay, party time! As a responsible citizen of a civilized society however, one should be interested in how such a service comes to be, and what it means to people involved and the society at large. -- BTW. I'm founding a biotech startup now; we provide personalized medication for free, OTC, ordered through our mobile app. We can do that because of our innovative manufacturing model, which involves doing BSL-4 level work with pathogens in our garage. I.e. we're disrupting the corrupt dinosaur regulations to provide a cheaper and better service.
    - yummyfajitas 9y ago
      That's a lot of nice sounding platitudes, but it doesn't really tell me anything concrete beyond "TeMPOraL dislikes Uber".
      - TeMPOraL 9y ago
        You're a HN regular, so you've probably seen pretty much every single Uber misbehaviour over the last few years. I don't think there's more to be added.
rmxt 9y ago
Were you racially discriminated against by your pre-Uber taxis, or were you simply discriminated against because you are rich relative to your peers?

bogomipz 9y ago

Yet there's also been plenty of allegations of racism with Uber as well: https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/10/uber-lyft-and-the-false-promise-of-fair-rides/506000/ https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/10/uber-ly...

yummyfajitas 9y ago
Read the actual study cited by that clickbait article. Racism at Uber is vastly smaller than racism via traditional taxis.
- bogomipz 9y ago
  >"Racism at Uber is vastly smaller than racism via traditional taxis." And that makes racism more acceptable? Also I guess you are not familiar with The Atlantic. It is a 160 year old institution, it is very well-respected. Past writers include Ralph Waldo Emerson, Oliver Wendell Holmes and Harriet Beacher Stowe. It does not trade in Clickbait.
  - cmdrfred 9y ago
    A lesser quantity of racism is more acceptable than a greater quantity in my opinion. The rest of your comment is basically the "argument from authority" logical fallacy.
    - bogomipz 9y ago
      Oh the tired old accusation of "that's just a ______ fallacy", the rest of my comment is simply pointing to that fact that the publication is not one whose business model is clickbait a la Buzzfeed. There is no claim of "authority" in that.
      - cholantesh 9y ago
        A venerable institution can fall on hard times and make decisions that reflect poorly on it, but generate revenue. And even in the best of times, a dud can slip through the editorial cracks.
        bogomipz 9y ago
        How did you come to the conclusion that the Atlantic has fallen on hard times? An article being a "dud" is highly subjective, even if you yourself haven't found an article to be a worthwhile read does not qualify qualify an article as "clickbait". There is nothing sensational in the article, it is simply discussing findings in a study. The Atlantic has actually fared pretty well: [1] "The Atlantic saw the highest increase in circulation, expanding slightly by 2% in 2015." http://www.journalism.org/2016/06/15/news-magazines-fact-sheet/ http://www.journalism.org/2016/06/15/news-magazines-fact-she... This 2016 is the most recent data available.
        cholantesh 9y ago
        >How did you come to the conclusion that the Atlantic has fallen on hard times? I haven't. I'm simply pointing out that their venerability doesn't guarantee that everything they put out is of the highest caliber. The bevy of think (or whine) pieces it has published about millennials and safe spaces speaks to that, I feel. >There is nothing sensational in the article, it is simply discussing findings in a study. Which is sufficient as a rebuttal to the claim that it is clickbait.
  - snakeboy 9y ago
    They in no way said it was more acceptable. Just that to the individual, it is more pleasant to have to deal with a company which is less explicitly racist. Certainly there is still room for improvement. For reference on the logical fallacies used in your comment, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_fallacy.
    - bogomipz 9y ago
      Maybe you should read the comment above it then. Why even mention the fact that although there was still racism there was less racism? Why would that fact be relevant it wasn't a counterpoint to something else? You have made an incorrect interpretation of the nature of my comment, which is a sincere question. But wow how very presumptuous and condescending of you to provide wikipedia links and make accusations of fallacy.
      - yummyfajitas 9y ago
        The comment two levels above said that Uber reduces my daily dose of racism to levels far lower than "daily". The comment one level up says that the study your clickbait article cites supports this point.
  - yummyfajitas 9y ago
    Yes, a small amount of racism that I don't even notice is far more acceptable than a large amount which inconveniences me daily. Racism isn't like homeopathy, where any quantity at all has the same effect. More is worse, less is better. In that study, the median black taxi rider is passed by 2 taxis before being picked up, vs 0 for the median white (see fig A.6). The difference for Uber is not remotely as large.
  - areyousure 9y ago
    > It does not trade in Clickbait. When I just opened up the Atlantic now, it showed me ads -- err, "content" -- from Revcontent, which is some of the worst clickbait on the Internet.

gotothedoctor 9y ago

I found that to be true at the beginning. But now, Uber drivers are Lyft drivers are taxi drivers. They all use apps now. And evidence suggests drivers adapted and found new ways to discriminate. https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/10/uber-lyft-and-the-false-promise-of-fair-rides/506000/ https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/10/uber-ly... The only difference now is who is taking how much out of the driver's paycheck--and whether or not that company is paying taxes or just extracting wealth from any given city.

yummyfajitas 9y ago
Read the study cured by the Atlantic. Uber is vastly less racist than traditional taxis.
- gotothedoctor 9y ago
  I have read the study; there is just no longer a difference. "Traditional" taxis now use apps & drivers now drive for Uber, Lyft and local taxi companies.
  - yummyfajitas 9y ago
    Of course there's a difference. In a taxi you can rip off a firangi or fail to pick up a black passenger at your leisure. With Uber, this will cause your ratings to drop below 4.3, or your acceptance rate/cancellation rate to drop below/above whatever threshold they use. Then you get kicked off the platform. Uber is providing the necessary regulation of the system that governments fail to provide.
    - gotothedoctor 9y ago
      Since taxis also operate via apps & the drivers are the same people, this is simply no longer true. While I'll agree that Uber used to provide a higher quality experience (nicer cars etc), this is no longer the case. The rating system is also broken-eg it now offers too much power to drunk customers. Uber now operates only to benefit itself-not its customers, not the drivers and certainly not the public. Perhaps you'd prefer to be regulated by the whims of a corporation & their pursuit of profit extraction rather than the democratic legitimacy of government, but thankfully, most of us would not. Hence, even if its taken some time for local & national governments to get up to speed, Uber is being banned, taxed, and forced to abide by the public & workplace safety rules every other company must follow.

urbanj 9y ago

> Thanks to Uber, I don't get racially discriminated against on a daily basis. Before Uber I did No you didn't. Chrissy.

TeMPOraL 9y ago

They're still giving us exactly what they promised - promised not by just words, but actions. Initially, Uber set itself out as the hero of the day, riding on a shining horse to fight the Evil Taxi Mafia. Anyone who looked closely at how they did that could easily predict that what they want to become is the new, but worse, Taxi Mafia. They've been assholes almost from the start, they continue to be assholes now. That so many people only got angry after sexism accusations, of all the things, only makes me sad about the state of humanity.

yummyfajitas 9y ago
How are they a worse taxi mafia? They provide more convenient service with fewer ripoffs and far less racism at lower prices. As a consumer, what exactly should I be angry about?
- TeMPOraL 9y ago
  As a homo economicus blindfoldus - nothing. Cheaper and better service here right now? Yay, party time! As a responsible citizen of a civilized society however, one should be interested in how such a service comes to be, and what it means to people involved and the society at large. -- BTW. I'm founding a biotech startup now; we provide personalized medication for free, OTC, ordered through our mobile app. We can do that because of our innovative manufacturing model, which involves doing BSL-4 level work with pathogens in our garage. I.e. we're disrupting the corrupt dinosaur regulations to provide a cheaper and better service.
  - yummyfajitas 9y ago
    That's a lot of nice sounding platitudes, but it doesn't really tell me anything concrete beyond "TeMPOraL dislikes Uber".
    - TeMPOraL 9y ago
      You're a HN regular, so you've probably seen pretty much every single Uber misbehaviour over the last few years. I don't think there's more to be added.

rmxt 9y ago

Were you racially discriminated against by your pre-Uber taxis, or were you simply discriminated against because you are rich relative to your peers?