4 ms·

If losing primarily means losing one's job, then it is social organization and culture that should be blamed not technological advancement. IMHO.

magicmu 11y ago
I agree with this sentiment, but I do think that there's validity in the claim that the disruptive nature of startups can have negative consequences for uninvolved parties. I don't think it's a matter of "blame," though, so much as a matter of responsibility -- it is the responsibility of those pushing these disruptive technologies to simultaneously incubate and encourage the social reform necessary to prevent such situations.
- vixen99 11y ago
  You don't say! New rules for entrepreneurs: sit down and consider the disruptive consequences of your new startup. Next, take on the responsibility of simultaneously incubating and encouraging the social reform necessary to prevent such situations. Oh, and don't forget to spare some time for the startup. If you're a journalist or someone benefiting from the new startup, you're 'pushing it' so you have a job to do as well.
emodendroket 11y ago
It seems like cheating to demand that the rules be changed so Uber can operate, the claim that the makeup of society is to blame for the consequences.
braythwayt 11y ago
I didn't think Uber is a "technological" advancement, so much as a company gambling that it can get away with disrupting the legal quagmire. Same for AirBnB.
- JoeAltmaier 11y ago
  Be fair, lots of folks had the same idea and didn't execute so well. The devil is in the details; thus, technology. Even the marketing/lobbying is a technical issue of sorts.
  - braythwayt 11y ago
    The details might be sales and marketing. The details might be raising a lot more money than your competitors, using a flashy technological demo, but spending the money running at a loss and starving your competition that is trying to grow organically. Or like the gun lobby, the details might be backroom dealings that get laws passed in your favour. Not all details are "untie this technological knot." Not all companies that fail do so because they didn't get the technology right.
  - grp 11y ago
    I don't think technology has some dark magical power where we can put our scruples into. Those scurple coming from that absurd job struggle. Are we so bored with the struggle for life? Is that game really fun?
crdoconnor 11y ago
Uber isn't a technological advancement. Its core competence is lobbying and business development, not android and ios development. It probably wouldn't be a bad thing if most cities just banned uber and created their own apps (or hired a company to do it for them). The network effects in the taxi market are so strong that one company will inevitably end up being a monopoly. Once the monopoly is locked in the winning company will just milk it for all its worth, simultaneously raising prices and crushing wages. That's bad for everybody (except them).
- tacone 11y ago
  Well said.
- makeitsuckless 11y ago
  Not even that. It's core competence is to publicly break the law on an unprecedented scale for mainstream company and get away with it.
- crusso 11y ago
  1. Maybe Uber doesn't look like a technological advancement compared to Google, but Uber is an enormous technological advancement over the status quo in the industry. 2. Uber is breaking the very foundations of the monopolization of the taxi industry. The only monopoly they will maintain moving forward is through customer loyalty based upon perceived value. If Uber falters, there is very little protecting them from a competitor gobbling up their market share.
  - crdoconnor 11y ago
    >If Uber falters, there is very little protecting them from a competitor gobbling up their market share. Which taxi company's app are you going to use as a passenger? The one with 5 drivers within a 5 minutes' drive, or the one with 1 driver, 25 minutes away? Which taxi company will you sign up with as a driver? The one which has customers everywhere or the one which doesn't? Why pretend that network effects do not exist in this industry? Sure would be nice if it were just about customer service and value, but it isn't. It's about network dominance.

magicmu 11y ago

I agree with this sentiment, but I do think that there's validity in the claim that the disruptive nature of startups can have negative consequences for uninvolved parties. I don't think it's a matter of "blame," though, so much as a matter of responsibility -- it is the responsibility of those pushing these disruptive technologies to simultaneously incubate and encourage the social reform necessary to prevent such situations.

vixen99 11y ago
You don't say! New rules for entrepreneurs: sit down and consider the disruptive consequences of your new startup. Next, take on the responsibility of simultaneously incubating and encouraging the social reform necessary to prevent such situations. Oh, and don't forget to spare some time for the startup. If you're a journalist or someone benefiting from the new startup, you're 'pushing it' so you have a job to do as well.

emodendroket 11y ago

It seems like cheating to demand that the rules be changed so Uber can operate, the claim that the makeup of society is to blame for the consequences.

braythwayt 11y ago

I didn't think Uber is a "technological" advancement, so much as a company gambling that it can get away with disrupting the legal quagmire. Same for AirBnB.

JoeAltmaier 11y ago
Be fair, lots of folks had the same idea and didn't execute so well. The devil is in the details; thus, technology. Even the marketing/lobbying is a technical issue of sorts.
- braythwayt 11y ago
  The details might be sales and marketing. The details might be raising a lot more money than your competitors, using a flashy technological demo, but spending the money running at a loss and starving your competition that is trying to grow organically. Or like the gun lobby, the details might be backroom dealings that get laws passed in your favour. Not all details are "untie this technological knot." Not all companies that fail do so because they didn't get the technology right.
- grp 11y ago
  I don't think technology has some dark magical power where we can put our scruples into. Those scurple coming from that absurd job struggle. Are we so bored with the struggle for life? Is that game really fun?

crdoconnor 11y ago

Uber isn't a technological advancement. Its core competence is lobbying and business development, not android and ios development. It probably wouldn't be a bad thing if most cities just banned uber and created their own apps (or hired a company to do it for them). The network effects in the taxi market are so strong that one company will inevitably end up being a monopoly. Once the monopoly is locked in the winning company will just milk it for all its worth, simultaneously raising prices and crushing wages. That's bad for everybody (except them).

tacone 11y ago
Well said.
makeitsuckless 11y ago
Not even that. It's core competence is to publicly break the law on an unprecedented scale for mainstream company and get away with it.
crusso 11y ago
1. Maybe Uber doesn't look like a technological advancement compared to Google, but Uber is an enormous technological advancement over the status quo in the industry. 2. Uber is breaking the very foundations of the monopolization of the taxi industry. The only monopoly they will maintain moving forward is through customer loyalty based upon perceived value. If Uber falters, there is very little protecting them from a competitor gobbling up their market share.
- crdoconnor 11y ago
  >If Uber falters, there is very little protecting them from a competitor gobbling up their market share. Which taxi company's app are you going to use as a passenger? The one with 5 drivers within a 5 minutes' drive, or the one with 1 driver, 25 minutes away? Which taxi company will you sign up with as a driver? The one which has customers everywhere or the one which doesn't? Why pretend that network effects do not exist in this industry? Sure would be nice if it were just about customer service and value, but it isn't. It's about network dominance.