4 ms·

I know most people hate on uber, but it has impacted my life a lot. I think the model they've demonstrated is a legit model, and the ruthlessness with which the

I know most people hate on uber, but it has impacted my life a lot. I think the model they've demonstrated is a legit model, and the ruthlessness with which they pursue it should not take anything away from the company's value. In fact, it should add. I want companies to show a giant middle finger to monopolistic city laws that harm citizens.

stephenr 9y ago
When's the last time a mandatory background check to prevent a rapist or child abuser becoming a glorified taxi driver, harmed a citizen?
- dingo_bat 9y ago
  I didn't say background checks are bad.
kbart 9y ago
Not sure what "evil" laws you are talking about, but car safety, maintenance, insurance, fare counter requirements, mandatory drivers background check etc. are all beneficial to the user in my book.
- dingo_bat 9y ago
  > car safety, maintenance, insurance All those laws exist for all cars, not just taxis. > fare counter requirements Classic example of over-regulation, leading to crappy service, low supply, and high prices. > mandatory drivers background check If some person is so suspect that you cannot trust them to drive you around in public while being tracked by GPS continuously, why is he not locked up? This is a bullshit made-up requirement and does not prevent anything.
  - kbart 9y ago
    "All those laws exist for all cars, not just taxis." I don't know where you are from, but here taxi cars have stricter safety, ecology, age (and probably more) requirements than private cars. Which makes sense as they usually spend more time on roads and carry more people. "Classic example of over-regulation, leading to crappy service, low supply, and high prices." Um, no. Fare counter regulations and checks just make sure that it shows distance/fare correctly, and as far as I know, there's no monopoly in this market -- it's much like scales regulation in grocery stores.
  - stephenr 9y ago
    > If some person is so suspect that you cannot trust them to drive you around in public while being tracked by GPS continuously, why is he not locked up? This is a bullshit made-up requirement and does not prevent anything. Are you fucking kidding me? Prison sentences are usually not "for the rest of your natural life", and repeat offending is VERY COMMON. Edit: GPS tracked by a fucking iPhone app. That the driver can turn off. What the fuck fantasy world do you live in that you can't imagine someone who is walking the streets possibly having bad intentions for other people.
    - JBReefer 9y ago
      They still know exactly who was driving. In areas where impersonation by people without working papers has been a problem, they've started to make the drivers photograph themselves to prove their identity. It's a safer system than the existing yellow cab setup - if you go missing, at least they have a pretty good idea about who did it.
Bakary 9y ago
>I want companies to show a giant middle finger to monopolistic city laws that harm citizens. Just wait until a private company holds a monopoly on an essential service, especially one with a history of unethical conduct like Uber. The city laws will seem like the good old days in comparison.
- larzang 9y ago
  e.g Comcast. Doesn't everybody just love having to pick between the diverse internet options of 1) all of Comcast's abusive shenanigans or 2) 2002-era dsl speeds?
- dingo_bat 9y ago
  Why would uber have a monopoly? There are numerous competitors already.
  - Bakary 9y ago
    You don't have to be an outright monopoly in the literal sense to cause damage. An overwhelmingly dominant position like the one Microsoft had in the past is enough.
- TheGrassyKnoll 9y ago
  You can see monopolistic behavior in some cities where the water franchise is in commercial hands (California American Water Co.). They seem to just raise rates with impunity.
matt4077 9y ago
I've heard of a few women whose life was also "impacted a lot". And I fail to see how casual sexism in the office is an adequate way to fight "monopolistic city laws".
- dingo_bat 9y ago
  Casual sexism in the office does not invalidate the business model. And is irrelevant when it comes to creating value for customers. What's your point?
amarka 9y ago
Which monopolistic city laws were hurting your personally before Uber came to the rescue?
- kesselvon 9y ago
  The part where taxi drivers could have a living wage
- dingo_bat 9y ago
  The registered taxis had a mandatory price set by the local government. Because of the price being high, I couldn't use them. I had to take shitty autorickshaws, or get jostled in crowded buses.

stephenr 9y ago

When's the last time a mandatory background check to prevent a rapist or child abuser becoming a glorified taxi driver, harmed a citizen?

dingo_bat 9y ago
I didn't say background checks are bad.

kbart 9y ago

Not sure what "evil" laws you are talking about, but car safety, maintenance, insurance, fare counter requirements, mandatory drivers background check etc. are all beneficial to the user in my book.

dingo_bat 9y ago
> car safety, maintenance, insurance All those laws exist for all cars, not just taxis. > fare counter requirements Classic example of over-regulation, leading to crappy service, low supply, and high prices. > mandatory drivers background check If some person is so suspect that you cannot trust them to drive you around in public while being tracked by GPS continuously, why is he not locked up? This is a bullshit made-up requirement and does not prevent anything.
- kbart 9y ago
  "All those laws exist for all cars, not just taxis." I don't know where you are from, but here taxi cars have stricter safety, ecology, age (and probably more) requirements than private cars. Which makes sense as they usually spend more time on roads and carry more people. "Classic example of over-regulation, leading to crappy service, low supply, and high prices." Um, no. Fare counter regulations and checks just make sure that it shows distance/fare correctly, and as far as I know, there's no monopoly in this market -- it's much like scales regulation in grocery stores.
- stephenr 9y ago
  > If some person is so suspect that you cannot trust them to drive you around in public while being tracked by GPS continuously, why is he not locked up? This is a bullshit made-up requirement and does not prevent anything. Are you fucking kidding me? Prison sentences are usually not "for the rest of your natural life", and repeat offending is VERY COMMON. Edit: GPS tracked by a fucking iPhone app. That the driver can turn off. What the fuck fantasy world do you live in that you can't imagine someone who is walking the streets possibly having bad intentions for other people.
  - JBReefer 9y ago
    They still know exactly who was driving. In areas where impersonation by people without working papers has been a problem, they've started to make the drivers photograph themselves to prove their identity. It's a safer system than the existing yellow cab setup - if you go missing, at least they have a pretty good idea about who did it.

Bakary 9y ago

>I want companies to show a giant middle finger to monopolistic city laws that harm citizens. Just wait until a private company holds a monopoly on an essential service, especially one with a history of unethical conduct like Uber. The city laws will seem like the good old days in comparison.

larzang 9y ago
e.g Comcast. Doesn't everybody just love having to pick between the diverse internet options of 1) all of Comcast's abusive shenanigans or 2) 2002-era dsl speeds?
dingo_bat 9y ago
Why would uber have a monopoly? There are numerous competitors already.
- Bakary 9y ago
  You don't have to be an outright monopoly in the literal sense to cause damage. An overwhelmingly dominant position like the one Microsoft had in the past is enough.
TheGrassyKnoll 9y ago
You can see monopolistic behavior in some cities where the water franchise is in commercial hands (California American Water Co.). They seem to just raise rates with impunity.

matt4077 9y ago

I've heard of a few women whose life was also "impacted a lot". And I fail to see how casual sexism in the office is an adequate way to fight "monopolistic city laws".

dingo_bat 9y ago
Casual sexism in the office does not invalidate the business model. And is irrelevant when it comes to creating value for customers. What's your point?

amarka 9y ago

Which monopolistic city laws were hurting your personally before Uber came to the rescue?

kesselvon 9y ago
The part where taxi drivers could have a living wage
dingo_bat 9y ago
The registered taxis had a mandatory price set by the local government. Because of the price being high, I couldn't use them. I had to take shitty autorickshaws, or get jostled in crowded buses.