3 ms·

> Uber drivers auctioning their time is not one of them, because Uber drivers do want a benefit that's only possible with centralization: vetting/banning of pas

> Uber drivers auctioning their time is not one of them, because Uber drivers do want a benefit that's only possible with centralization: vetting/banning of passengers. I'm nearly certain that there are quite a lot of drivers out there who would be willing to forgo this if it meant taking home the huge share of their revenue that's currently going to Uber.

smt88 5y ago
> I'm nearly certain that there are quite a lot of drivers out there who would be willing to forgo this if it meant taking home the huge share of their revenue that's currently going to Uber. I wholeheartedly disagree. It's not even easy to get a female driver in certain places because they're afraid of riders. And most women would never use a service where the drivers aren't identified, background-checked, and banned upon their first incidence of assault. But if you're right, where is decentralized Uber? Or decentralized Twitter? Or literally decentralized anything? All we have right now is tokens.
nonameiguess 5y ago
Is Uber extracting revenue right now? I thought their business model to this point largely relied on stock appreciation with value extraction from that happening in the form of lower costs to users compared to normal taxis, not more revenue per ride to Uber. The bigger issue is it's not clear drivers going on the blockchain is even legal. Uber and Lyft provide some minimal vetting and certification. Prior to them, drivers directly owned their own taxi businesses, but needed medallions, which also involved regulatory compliance. Uber and Lyft could get away with operating in legal gray areas because of huge legal departments funded by VCs and stock holders. Can individual drivers do that or will cities just hammer them?
- mandelbrotwurst 5y ago
  Yes, Uber takes a cut of rides, and that is where most of their revenue comes from. They do lose money on some rides (primarily short ones) and it's not a flat percentage per ride or a rate that hasn't shifted over time, but they are definitely taking a solid chunk on average. I may be misremembering, but I think I heard The Rideshare Guy say it's been around 28% as of late. It used to be a flat 20% years ago but the model has gotten a lot more complex. > Can individual drivers do that or will cities just hammer them? This is a good question. Personally, I think it's a risk that many drivers would be willing to take and that enforcing this sort of law on a per driver basis would prove extremely difficult.

smt88 5y ago

> I'm nearly certain that there are quite a lot of drivers out there who would be willing to forgo this if it meant taking home the huge share of their revenue that's currently going to Uber. I wholeheartedly disagree. It's not even easy to get a female driver in certain places because they're afraid of riders. And most women would never use a service where the drivers aren't identified, background-checked, and banned upon their first incidence of assault. But if you're right, where is decentralized Uber? Or decentralized Twitter? Or literally decentralized anything? All we have right now is tokens.

nonameiguess 5y ago

Is Uber extracting revenue right now? I thought their business model to this point largely relied on stock appreciation with value extraction from that happening in the form of lower costs to users compared to normal taxis, not more revenue per ride to Uber. The bigger issue is it's not clear drivers going on the blockchain is even legal. Uber and Lyft provide some minimal vetting and certification. Prior to them, drivers directly owned their own taxi businesses, but needed medallions, which also involved regulatory compliance. Uber and Lyft could get away with operating in legal gray areas because of huge legal departments funded by VCs and stock holders. Can individual drivers do that or will cities just hammer them?

mandelbrotwurst 5y ago
Yes, Uber takes a cut of rides, and that is where most of their revenue comes from. They do lose money on some rides (primarily short ones) and it's not a flat percentage per ride or a rate that hasn't shifted over time, but they are definitely taking a solid chunk on average. I may be misremembering, but I think I heard The Rideshare Guy say it's been around 28% as of late. It used to be a flat 20% years ago but the model has gotten a lot more complex. > Can individual drivers do that or will cities just hammer them? This is a good question. Personally, I think it's a risk that many drivers would be willing to take and that enforcing this sort of law on a per driver basis would prove extremely difficult.