3 ms·

Your parents don't follow any news source? The stories about Uber aren't found in obscure niche sites only wonks would read. Uber's problems are routinely featu

Your parents don't follow any news source? The stories about Uber aren't found in obscure niche sites only wonks would read. Uber's problems are routinely featured in front page New York Times stories, for example. The very article this thread discusses is from that paper, not exactly a minor publication.

jasode 9y ago
Your comment prompted me to try a personal unscientific test. I just pinged a woman who reads CNN news on her iPad every morning with coffee and asked her what she knew about Uber. I specifically asked if she "heard any bad things about Uber?" Her only reply was that she heard an Uber driver raped a passenger. That's it. Even with her daily CNN news habit, she does not know about: - Uber workplace sexual harrassment - Uber using grayball against government officials - Uber legal fights about contractor vs employee classifications - Uber lawsuit about corporate espionage Yes, it's just a sample size of 1 but I think it's very easy to overestimate what typical people know about Uber. The HN bubble repeatedly upvotes negative Uber stories that would never cross the radar of most everyone else.
- michaelmrose 9y ago
  Why didn't you ping a random selection of people rather than just one this is not a useful data point.
- michaelmrose 9y ago
  To be clearer the last sentence is fine. The entire section that precedes it is extremely intellectually dishonest. You started with the thesis that regular people aren't aware of negative stories about uber, pinged one user, got the desired result and stopped and presented your argument. You presented her as an avid reader of CNN a functionally irrelevant detail as if to say if even SHE doesn't know about bad press about uber obviously the plebs don't. Unfortunately there isn't any representative sample size of one and the fact that she reads CNN on her ipad tells you little about what she reads on CNN. You could even be correct but the way you prove your point is so badly argued that you do a disservice to your own point. You should avoid making your arguments about appeals to emotional reasoning.

jasode 9y ago

Your comment prompted me to try a personal unscientific test. I just pinged a woman who reads CNN news on her iPad every morning with coffee and asked her what she knew about Uber. I specifically asked if she "heard any bad things about Uber?" Her only reply was that she heard an Uber driver raped a passenger. That's it. Even with her daily CNN news habit, she does not know about: - Uber workplace sexual harrassment - Uber using grayball against government officials - Uber legal fights about contractor vs employee classifications - Uber lawsuit about corporate espionage Yes, it's just a sample size of 1 but I think it's very easy to overestimate what typical people know about Uber. The HN bubble repeatedly upvotes negative Uber stories that would never cross the radar of most everyone else.

michaelmrose 9y ago
Why didn't you ping a random selection of people rather than just one this is not a useful data point.
michaelmrose 9y ago
To be clearer the last sentence is fine. The entire section that precedes it is extremely intellectually dishonest. You started with the thesis that regular people aren't aware of negative stories about uber, pinged one user, got the desired result and stopped and presented your argument. You presented her as an avid reader of CNN a functionally irrelevant detail as if to say if even SHE doesn't know about bad press about uber obviously the plebs don't. Unfortunately there isn't any representative sample size of one and the fact that she reads CNN on her ipad tells you little about what she reads on CNN. You could even be correct but the way you prove your point is so badly argued that you do a disservice to your own point. You should avoid making your arguments about appeals to emotional reasoning.