22 ms·

> Banks are to financial startups what taxi driver unions are to Uber. Not quite - taxi driver unions are less competitive (in part at least) because they choo

> Banks are to financial startups what taxi driver unions are to Uber. Not quite - taxi driver unions are less competitive (in part at least) because they choose not to disregard regulations.

Florin_Andrei 12y ago
Also because they have less money - by many, many orders of magnitude.
- WaxProlix 12y ago
  They should have disrupted more! Meritocracy, motherfuckers.
  - Terr_ 12y ago
    * taps the dial of his sarcasmometer, puzzled * If by "disrupting" and "meritocracy" you mean "break the law" and "kleptocracy"...
    - WaxProlix 12y ago
      HN downvoter herd mentality types can't handle the individuality and personal responsibility of libertarian utopias that Uber and its ilk will usher in, so they fight back with the only tools at their disposal. Stupid laws are meant to be broken, and 'kleptocracy' is a shibboleth, identifying you as a poor (or, worse, a poor-sympathizer).
      - obastani 12y ago
        The laws put in place are not stupid -- they are put in place to protect both riders and drivers against well-known market failures such as information asymmetry and market-for-lemons [1,2]. They may be outdated and in need of revision, but I think it's premature to conclude that Uber has all the right answers. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Market_for_Lemons http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Market_for_Lemons [2] http://time.com/3592035/uber-taxi-history/ http://time.com/3592035/uber-taxi-history/
        WaxProlix 12y ago
        I was being sarcastic, and if that's not fairly apparent I should probably change my approach; there's a tendency for HN to go full meritechnocrat in these situations and side with whoever seems the most disruptive. I find it obnoxious for exactly the reasons you've posted here, among others.
        eru 12y ago
        Just try less sarcasm next time. I know it feels good, but it seldom furthers any debate.
        Florin_Andrei 12y ago
        > I was being sarcastic, and if that's not fairly apparent Erm... your audience here is mostly literal-minded computer techies.
        ensignavenger 12y ago
        While I agree that many of the laws aren't stupid and should be followed, I can't figure out any justification, other than greed, for restricting supply the way many cities do. If you can, please share.
darkarmani 12y ago
And because they choose to disregard user experience.

> Banks are to financial startups what taxi driver unions are to Uber. Not quite - taxi driver unions are less competitive (in part at least) because they choose not to disregard regulations.

Florin_Andrei 12y ago

Also because they have less money - by many, many orders of magnitude.

WaxProlix 12y ago
They should have disrupted more! Meritocracy, motherfuckers.
- Terr_ 12y ago
  * taps the dial of his sarcasmometer, puzzled * If by "disrupting" and "meritocracy" you mean "break the law" and "kleptocracy"...
  - WaxProlix 12y ago
    HN downvoter herd mentality types can't handle the individuality and personal responsibility of libertarian utopias that Uber and its ilk will usher in, so they fight back with the only tools at their disposal. Stupid laws are meant to be broken, and 'kleptocracy' is a shibboleth, identifying you as a poor (or, worse, a poor-sympathizer).
    - obastani 12y ago
      The laws put in place are not stupid -- they are put in place to protect both riders and drivers against well-known market failures such as information asymmetry and market-for-lemons [1,2]. They may be outdated and in need of revision, but I think it's premature to conclude that Uber has all the right answers. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Market_for_Lemons http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Market_for_Lemons [2] http://time.com/3592035/uber-taxi-history/ http://time.com/3592035/uber-taxi-history/
      - WaxProlix 12y ago
        I was being sarcastic, and if that's not fairly apparent I should probably change my approach; there's a tendency for HN to go full meritechnocrat in these situations and side with whoever seems the most disruptive. I find it obnoxious for exactly the reasons you've posted here, among others.
        eru 12y ago
        Just try less sarcasm next time. I know it feels good, but it seldom furthers any debate.
        Florin_Andrei 12y ago
        > I was being sarcastic, and if that's not fairly apparent Erm... your audience here is mostly literal-minded computer techies.
      - ensignavenger 12y ago
        While I agree that many of the laws aren't stupid and should be followed, I can't figure out any justification, other than greed, for restricting supply the way many cities do. If you can, please share.

darkarmani 12y ago

And because they choose to disregard user experience.