5 ms·

As Austin example demonstrated, once cat is out of the box it's virtually impossible to ban ride-sharing, people will create a black market using makeshift apps

As Austin example demonstrated, once cat is out of the box it's virtually impossible to ban ride-sharing, people will create a black market using makeshift apps, Google docs, Facebook groups, etc.

TeMPOraL 7y ago
Ride sharing isn't a problem, and Uber isn't ride sharing (despite the tech media insistence on this doublespeak), it's just a pirate taxi.
- atq2119 7y ago
  Uber Pool is a kind of ride sharing, and it's arguably the only really good thing that has come out of Uber. The question is whether it makes sense in Europe at scale, or whether it should be limited to the kind of low-density urban developments that are typical for the US.
- onion2k 7y ago
  a pirate taxi That sounds pretty awesome, to be fair.
  - concerned_user 7y ago
    Except the part where Uber is being a greedy captain and taking most of the plunder.
  - TeMPOraL 7y ago
    Yeah, I spent a minute or two looking for a different phrasing, but I couldn't find one. What's the word for pirates that actually form a global organized crime ring with enough wealth to defy governments?
    - cmendel 7y ago
      Either a corporation or a cartel typically.
    - IfOnlyYouKnew 7y ago
      Olympics Taxi
    - VMG 7y ago
      "European Union"
    - PeterStuer 7y ago
      neo-liberals
    - pgeorgi 7y ago
      Mafia taxi cartel? At least "taxi cartel" is a very popular phrase in Uber's PR.
- logicallee 7y ago
  By that standard all startups are pirates. Why do you need special permission from the State to let people buy someone's driver services through your site? It's just commerce. Pay taxes on it, sure, but call it being a pirate? Whose property rights are you pirating? Let's look at an alternative end game: drivers start to market themselves to passengers directly, and keep all the money. Well how do they do that - obviously on the same place, it has to be centralized somehow, there has to be a place to look them up. So there would be some cheap free alternative where drivers can sign up but keep all of the cash from each ride. All right, nobody's built that yet. Since it costs just a few tens of hours of development time and hosting that is just a few dollars a month, suppose you build that. Should you, TeMPOraL, be legally forbidden for making that free web site, yourself, literally coding up a place where where drivers can coordinate with passengers and keep all of their earnings? Because, after all, by your standard this makes you a pirate.
  - TeMPOraL 7y ago
    You miss my point. I'm not complaining about a startup popping up and enabling things that weren't before possible. I'm complaining about startups that enable things explicitly forbidden by law, exploiting the inertia of local governments, burning investor money to keep the law enforcement at bay, all in order to unfairly dominate their competition. Uber isn't a small underdog that bends some rules here and there. They're a large multinational backed by billions of dollars, whose modus operandi is blatant disregard of the law and antisocial behavior.
    - logicallee 7y ago
      all right, fair. Could you explain why it is (why it should be) forbidden by law? What's any reason to do so?
      - TeMPOraL 7y ago
        Does it matter? The laws are what they are. Uber may or may not have a good argument that some of the laws in some of the places are wrong, but they didn't present it. They didn't bothered to work from within the system, or even to address it. They just show up everywhere and ignore the local regulations. Personally, I do believe most of the intellectual property laws range from bad to wrong to batshit insane, but I don't start a company whose main business model is violating these laws, and using investor money to keep the enforcement at bay.
- Kiro 7y ago
  In my country Uber cars are actual taxis with all the permits, taximeters, yellow registration plates etc. They're no different from any other taxi company.
  - iamtew 7y ago
    Sounds similar to here in NL. Ubder drivers need to be licensed taxi drivers with all the appropriate permits and insurances. There are taxi companies, but people are free to get a taxi permit and be a taxi driver without a boss. These guys use Uber now, and it seems to be working good. The rating of drivers and customers seems to be well received, especially from my conversations with drivers. Also you have history in the Uber app, so if something happens, you forgot something, you know which car and which driver, or the driver knows which customer. This is almost impossible in a regular taxi unless you take time to bother to write down the driver details and the taxi car number. There is still some issues with drivers not getting appropriately compensated for trips, and there's been a lot of attention to drivers not getting the extra cut of the surge pricing, Uber takes it all. Obviously not fair, but in the bigger picture of things it is good.
cabraca 7y ago
For years there is ride-sharing in germany. its simply not as hyped as uber. Just google for "Mitfahrzentrale". The key difference is: these people dont do it as their main job and dont do it for profit.
- solstice 7y ago
  Modern day version would be blablacar
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- jhoechtl 7y ago
  This is a valid point. Monetizing a service which has been previously provided out of altruism could effectively ruin it.
- njb311 7y ago
  In the UK too, I first used a ride-sharing company back in 1993, and have been a member of BlaBlaCar since 2012. Uber is nothing like a ride-sharing company because you aren't sharing a ride, you're booking a taxi. The journey didn't exist until you requested it, except in the case of Uber Pool but even then only the second rider is sharing, if there happens to be a match. And they, along with AirBnb, are certainly not part of the 'sharing economy'. In the same way that Couchsurfing is sharing economy while Airbnb is running an accommodation business, Blablacar is sharing economy/ride-sharing, Uber is a taxi booking company just like the thousands of minicab firms that already exist. I welcome innovation and Uber clearly has a useful product (though by no means unique), and if investors are happy to risk billions of dollars being spent in market entry that's fine, but your growth strategy can't be to trample over regulation. If it's bad regulation, sure you can lobby to change it and then structure your business around that. But a level playing field in which all competing business operate is essential both to ensure businesses themselves comply and consumers know the levels of protection they can expect.
dao- 7y ago
This court ruling doesn't attempt to ban ride sharing.

As Austin example demonstrated, once cat is out of the box it's virtually impossible to ban ride-sharing, people will create a black market using makeshift apps, Google docs, Facebook groups, etc.

TeMPOraL 7y ago

Ride sharing isn't a problem, and Uber isn't ride sharing (despite the tech media insistence on this doublespeak), it's just a pirate taxi.

atq2119 7y ago
Uber Pool is a kind of ride sharing, and it's arguably the only really good thing that has come out of Uber. The question is whether it makes sense in Europe at scale, or whether it should be limited to the kind of low-density urban developments that are typical for the US.
onion2k 7y ago
a pirate taxi That sounds pretty awesome, to be fair.
- concerned_user 7y ago
  Except the part where Uber is being a greedy captain and taking most of the plunder.
- TeMPOraL 7y ago
  Yeah, I spent a minute or two looking for a different phrasing, but I couldn't find one. What's the word for pirates that actually form a global organized crime ring with enough wealth to defy governments?
  - cmendel 7y ago
    Either a corporation or a cartel typically.
  - IfOnlyYouKnew 7y ago
    Olympics Taxi
  - VMG 7y ago
    "European Union"
  - PeterStuer 7y ago
    neo-liberals
  - pgeorgi 7y ago
    Mafia taxi cartel? At least "taxi cartel" is a very popular phrase in Uber's PR.
logicallee 7y ago
By that standard all startups are pirates. Why do you need special permission from the State to let people buy someone's driver services through your site? It's just commerce. Pay taxes on it, sure, but call it being a pirate? Whose property rights are you pirating? Let's look at an alternative end game: drivers start to market themselves to passengers directly, and keep all the money. Well how do they do that - obviously on the same place, it has to be centralized somehow, there has to be a place to look them up. So there would be some cheap free alternative where drivers can sign up but keep all of the cash from each ride. All right, nobody's built that yet. Since it costs just a few tens of hours of development time and hosting that is just a few dollars a month, suppose you build that. Should you, TeMPOraL, be legally forbidden for making that free web site, yourself, literally coding up a place where where drivers can coordinate with passengers and keep all of their earnings? Because, after all, by your standard this makes you a pirate.
- TeMPOraL 7y ago
  You miss my point. I'm not complaining about a startup popping up and enabling things that weren't before possible. I'm complaining about startups that enable things explicitly forbidden by law, exploiting the inertia of local governments, burning investor money to keep the law enforcement at bay, all in order to unfairly dominate their competition. Uber isn't a small underdog that bends some rules here and there. They're a large multinational backed by billions of dollars, whose modus operandi is blatant disregard of the law and antisocial behavior.
  - logicallee 7y ago
    all right, fair. Could you explain why it is (why it should be) forbidden by law? What's any reason to do so?
    - TeMPOraL 7y ago
      Does it matter? The laws are what they are. Uber may or may not have a good argument that some of the laws in some of the places are wrong, but they didn't present it. They didn't bothered to work from within the system, or even to address it. They just show up everywhere and ignore the local regulations. Personally, I do believe most of the intellectual property laws range from bad to wrong to batshit insane, but I don't start a company whose main business model is violating these laws, and using investor money to keep the enforcement at bay.
Kiro 7y ago
In my country Uber cars are actual taxis with all the permits, taximeters, yellow registration plates etc. They're no different from any other taxi company.
- iamtew 7y ago
  Sounds similar to here in NL. Ubder drivers need to be licensed taxi drivers with all the appropriate permits and insurances. There are taxi companies, but people are free to get a taxi permit and be a taxi driver without a boss. These guys use Uber now, and it seems to be working good. The rating of drivers and customers seems to be well received, especially from my conversations with drivers. Also you have history in the Uber app, so if something happens, you forgot something, you know which car and which driver, or the driver knows which customer. This is almost impossible in a regular taxi unless you take time to bother to write down the driver details and the taxi car number. There is still some issues with drivers not getting appropriately compensated for trips, and there's been a lot of attention to drivers not getting the extra cut of the surge pricing, Uber takes it all. Obviously not fair, but in the bigger picture of things it is good.

cabraca 7y ago

For years there is ride-sharing in germany. its simply not as hyped as uber. Just google for "Mitfahrzentrale". The key difference is: these people dont do it as their main job and dont do it for profit.

solstice 7y ago
Modern day version would be blablacar
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
jhoechtl 7y ago
This is a valid point. Monetizing a service which has been previously provided out of altruism could effectively ruin it.
njb311 7y ago
In the UK too, I first used a ride-sharing company back in 1993, and have been a member of BlaBlaCar since 2012. Uber is nothing like a ride-sharing company because you aren't sharing a ride, you're booking a taxi. The journey didn't exist until you requested it, except in the case of Uber Pool but even then only the second rider is sharing, if there happens to be a match. And they, along with AirBnb, are certainly not part of the 'sharing economy'. In the same way that Couchsurfing is sharing economy while Airbnb is running an accommodation business, Blablacar is sharing economy/ride-sharing, Uber is a taxi booking company just like the thousands of minicab firms that already exist. I welcome innovation and Uber clearly has a useful product (though by no means unique), and if investors are happy to risk billions of dollars being spent in market entry that's fine, but your growth strategy can't be to trample over regulation. If it's bad regulation, sure you can lobby to change it and then structure your business around that. But a level playing field in which all competing business operate is essential both to ensure businesses themselves comply and consumers know the levels of protection they can expect.

dao- 7y ago

This court ruling doesn't attempt to ban ride sharing.