4 ms·

Well, this doesn't even contradict what Corbyn is saying. Corbyn is saying that new technology should be used to enable a more socialistic society and having Ub

by devdad 9y ago

Well, this doesn't even contradict what Corbyn is saying. Corbyn is saying that new technology should be used to enable a more socialistic society and having Uber as a broker isn't really needed if the tech development is shared between the drivers.

dogma1138 9y ago
The problem is that it’s a fallacy. There were plenty of ride hailing apps before Uber all of them sorta failed becuase of bad tech, business model or both. Uber made it with millions if not billions of funding and sure now it’s more easy to copy since the model and the tech is better understood but that’s just it it too capitalism to refine the model and now they want to effectively socialize it. This might sound cool but in reality it won’t work since this is a chicken and the egg problem and while you can socialize the chicken some one had to design the hen and optimize it before hand. Taxi unions had no intention to take the risks Uber did despite likely having just as much access to funds with 40-50,000 cab drivers each could’ve easily funded a mini Uber with a few 100s to a few 1000s £s over several years but they chose not too.
- devdad 9y ago
  And Uber has from the start been anti-worker by it's pure existence. Their "successful" business model is based on illegal business actions, evading laws and regulations and turning poor people into API calls. Uber is also still losing lots of money. Which is often a great place to start turning the business into worker owned and aligning it with the workers best interest.
  - vixen99 9y ago
    its pure existence
  - dogma1138 9y ago
    I don’t think Uber’s model is sustainable with human drivers. Im pretty sure their plan from was to build a large enough user base to be in a leading position to switch to robotaxis as soon as they are available and I think that’s what many of their backers are funding. With robotaxis being likely about 5 year or so from being approved in major metropolitan areas without any shenanigans from the cab cartels Uber can afford to bleed money until then and then just switch. Audi is releasing L4 cars in Europe this year which will allow you to take the back seat during traffic. While I don’t think anyone will be releasing L5 before 2020 I wouldn’t bet against that for a 2022-2023 time frame. Don’t get me wrong I dislike Uber and AirB&B with passion for their predatory practices but I also don’t like cartels the cab and car hire companies in London had a decade to get their shit together when the ride hailing apps / websites began popping up in the late 2000s and in all honesty they only turned worse.
    - umanwizard 9y ago
      What are your predictions based on?
      - dogma1138 9y ago
        Hardware and software availability and what the car companies are saying. NVIDIA is set to deliver their L5 platform in mid 2018, they have the automotive safety certification and compute power (300> TOPs of int8 inference) to meet expected L5 requirements. And they aren’t alone in this game. Beyond this it’s a legal issue once a precedent will be set however I think it will open the flood gates.

by devdad 9y ago

dogma1138 9y ago

The problem is that it’s a fallacy. There were plenty of ride hailing apps before Uber all of them sorta failed becuase of bad tech, business model or both. Uber made it with millions if not billions of funding and sure now it’s more easy to copy since the model and the tech is better understood but that’s just it it too capitalism to refine the model and now they want to effectively socialize it. This might sound cool but in reality it won’t work since this is a chicken and the egg problem and while you can socialize the chicken some one had to design the hen and optimize it before hand. Taxi unions had no intention to take the risks Uber did despite likely having just as much access to funds with 40-50,000 cab drivers each could’ve easily funded a mini Uber with a few 100s to a few 1000s £s over several years but they chose not too.

devdad 9y ago
And Uber has from the start been anti-worker by it's pure existence. Their "successful" business model is based on illegal business actions, evading laws and regulations and turning poor people into API calls. Uber is also still losing lots of money. Which is often a great place to start turning the business into worker owned and aligning it with the workers best interest.
- vixen99 9y ago
  its pure existence
- dogma1138 9y ago
  I don’t think Uber’s model is sustainable with human drivers. Im pretty sure their plan from was to build a large enough user base to be in a leading position to switch to robotaxis as soon as they are available and I think that’s what many of their backers are funding. With robotaxis being likely about 5 year or so from being approved in major metropolitan areas without any shenanigans from the cab cartels Uber can afford to bleed money until then and then just switch. Audi is releasing L4 cars in Europe this year which will allow you to take the back seat during traffic. While I don’t think anyone will be releasing L5 before 2020 I wouldn’t bet against that for a 2022-2023 time frame. Don’t get me wrong I dislike Uber and AirB&B with passion for their predatory practices but I also don’t like cartels the cab and car hire companies in London had a decade to get their shit together when the ride hailing apps / websites began popping up in the late 2000s and in all honesty they only turned worse.
  - umanwizard 9y ago
    What are your predictions based on?
    - dogma1138 9y ago
      Hardware and software availability and what the car companies are saying. NVIDIA is set to deliver their L5 platform in mid 2018, they have the automotive safety certification and compute power (300> TOPs of int8 inference) to meet expected L5 requirements. And they aren’t alone in this game. Beyond this it’s a legal issue once a precedent will be set however I think it will open the flood gates.