> Navigation might be Google Maps or Waze, but everything else is Uber. My point is that Uber is 100% serious about mapping and they are investing a ton of reso

> Navigation might be Google Maps or Waze, but everything else is Uber. My point is that Uber is 100% serious about mapping and they are investing a ton of resources into it. They're likely one of the few players who are doing this at scale, internationally. So you're comparing scaling out a mapping back end to building and running massive transit infrastructure? > With respect to your point about Airports, they're not even close to being paid for by the airlines in any meaningfully fair way. Take a look at JFK. Airlines absolutely do pay significant amounts into airports. > Absolutely wrong. I use Uber/Lyft every day. I don't have a car. Uber/Lyft are nothing like a bus route - not even close. To even suggest that they're similar to a traditional bus service route is to reveal that you haven't used the services in any meaningful way. FWIW, BART doesn't run buses. > Ride sharing is creating a whole class of jobs that have a very important role to play in society. Minimum wage jobs with no benefits (thus externalizing the cost of providing the jobs)? That's not much of a win in my book. > Now, should these be the only career options for people? Obviously not. I think that's where most people's concerns are valid. We can't create a society where this is the only type of work available. But can this type of work exist alongside other meaningful options? Of course! And absolutely none of that means Uber is doing something more challenging than running a transit agency like BART or NYMTA. Uber's externalized most of their costs, disregarded most laws, and is scaling a very specific part of their software stack. It's not surprising to see growth under those circumstances.