Uber Has Been Using a Secretive Program To Identify Enforcement Officers And Prevent Them From Hailing Cars (nytimes.com) 218
Uber has been using a secretive program to evade authorities for years, particularly at times when city regulators were trying to block the ride-hailing service, according to a new report by the New York Times. From the report: Uber is using a tool called "Greyball" to work identify requests made by certain users and deny them service, according to the report. The application, later renamed the "violation of terms of service" or VTOS program, is said to employ data analysis on info collected by the Uber app to identify individuals violating Uber's terms of service, and blocks riders from being able to hail rides who fall into that category -- including, according to the report, members of code enforcement authorities or city officials who are attempting to gather data about Uber offering service where it's currently prohibited. The report claims that that Uber's "violation of terms of service" or VTOS program, briefly known as Greyball, began around 2014, and has sign-off from Uber's legal team.In a statement, Uber said, "This program denies ride requests to users who are violating our terms of service -- whether that's people aiming to physically harm drivers, competitors looking to disrupt our operations, or opponents who collude with officials on secret 'stings' meant to entrap drivers."
Journalists, putting things in context. Russell Brandom, a reporter at The Verge said, This is the kind of thing a DA would put in front of a judge if they wanted to subpoena Uber's business records for an entire city. Matt Rosoff, editorial director at CNBC Digital added, I've been a tech journalist on and off for 21 years and I can't remember any company having a worse month news cycle-wise than Uber is now.
Journalists, putting things in context. Russell Brandom, a reporter at The Verge said, This is the kind of thing a DA would put in front of a judge if they wanted to subpoena Uber's business records for an entire city. Matt Rosoff, editorial director at CNBC Digital added, I've been a tech journalist on and off for 21 years and I can't remember any company having a worse month news cycle-wise than Uber is now.
Of course they do (Score:5, Insightful)
Their entire business model is based on violating laws so it makes sense they would build tools to make that as easy possible.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
So one is engaging in blatant corruption while the other is fighting the rule of law.
FTFY
Both parties can be in the wrong, you know. The best outcome for the public would be that some regulatory framework would be put in place to protect Uber passengers:
sex offender drivers unable to pick up passengers of the violated sex for 5 years
no licenses for violent criminals for 5 years
passengers insured for liability like other taxi services are required to do
taxi service license costs to be in line with the c
Re: (Score:2)
So get government out of rationing, to the greatest greaser of palms, the legal right to create a monopoly to sell you taxi service.
All Americans are free, which is supposed to mean, among other things, the right to sell their services to you.
These licenses and safety are red herrings for a limited licensing scheme. That is what must be destroyed.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Again, Congestion (Score:4, Insightful)
We need a barrier to entry. We cannot afford to have unlimited competition in this market, because this market cannot price in congestion. Taxis are happy to bill you for their time even if you're sitting in gridlock. The system does not self-correct. Your further political arguments are uninteresting.
Re: (Score:2)
because this market cannot price in congestion
The market absolutely could price congestion if we had more private roads.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm trying not to view this as imbecilic. Perhaps you can convince me that there's some sense I'm not seeing. It's still Before Coffee here, after all.
Re: (Score:2)
because this market cannot price in congestion
The market absolutely could price congestion if we had more private roads.
You are free to build private roads in, say, Manhattan if you can convince the people who currently own the land to sell it to you.
Re: (Score:2)
Corp lobbies local govt to simply declare eminent domain. Then sell the roads to the highest bidder. Now we have private roads "to let the market work". Simple.
"Capitalism. It's what's for dinner."
Re: (Score:2)
We need a barrier to entry. We cannot afford to have unlimited competition in this market, because this market cannot price in congestion. Taxis are happy to bill you for their time even if you're sitting in gridlock. The system does not self-correct. Your further political arguments are uninteresting.
I know from experience that if I take a taxi in midtown Manhattan between about 5:30pm and 8:00pm, I will be stuck in traffic that moves so slowly that I could walk faster.
Adding more taxis will increase the traffic.
And adding more highways will increase the traffic (that's what happened on Long Island).
Re: (Score:2)
I was touristing in Seoul once. Every time I wanted to go somewhere else in the city, I'd look at the well-regulated taxi stands. With a well-regulated line of 20-40 people. All the time, it seemed.
We were young and healthy, so my friends and I ended up criss-crossing the city several times on foot instead.
I think I remember there wasn't much congestion, if any.
Re: (Score:2)
Whenever a politician tells you he's endorsing regulations or licensing requirements for the public good or safety, grab your wallet.
However, when a private entrepreneur like Travis Kalanick tells you that he will destroy the industry, and a new, efficient free market will arise from its ashes, and you will all be better off, and the greedier he is, the better off you will be -- you can believe him.
Or, as Donald Trump says, "Trust me."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's nothing to do with taxi fares, but limiting the total number of taxis on the road in Manhattan is a good way to accomplish that.
It's bullshit half-measures. What's wanted is the same thing that's wanted in every congested city, elevated PRT like Skytran. Maybe Skytran itself sucks, I don't know, I haven't inspected it that closely. The concept is sound. Cars make cities suck. The only people who should be driving around on a regular basis are people who don't even live there, and not commuters; they should be parking at some interim point and then getting into a PRT capsule that will deliver them if not directly to work, then even m
Re:Of course they do (Score:4, Insightful)
Oh, the horror of making drivers properly trained, licensed, compensated and insured. Instead we need a Ponzi scheme, except one doesn't make the first drivers rich, but merely dependent on a new crop of desperate suckers who will wear out their car for you before they figure out they'd make more money working the same number of hours as McDonalds.
dl;dr pound sand, corporatist apologist
Re: (Score:2)
You kind of missed the bid where Uber was targeting people for denial of service attacks. Basically you would book and no one would turn up, hah hah. Uber goes Republican, watch out Democrats and vice versa depending upon which politician accepts there bribes. A public service can not target individuals for exclusion based upon arbitrary reasons.
Re: (Score:2)
"make more money working the same number of hours as McDonalds." FWIW, it'd have to be a good bump in the ol' pay envelope for me, if I was doing it. Lessee...
Uber: more or less working for self
McD: Under the supervision of that pimply faced youth drunk with power.
Uber: Working in my very own customized "cubicle". Padded seats, stereo, air.
McD: Standing behind a counter for 8 hours.
Uber: Set my own hours.
McD: Slave to schedule devised by aforementioned pimply faced youth.
Yes, if I was in such a situation, I
Congestion (Score:2)
I keep having to repeat myself on this issue. We don't want unlimited competition in the transportation market because that market cannot price in congestion. The point at which sitting in traffic becomes unprofitable is far past the point of gridlock. If you would like to see the results of this, go down to Panama City. There are thousands of taxis, and you had better just hope you don't need to get across the city after midday. Good luck even getting a driver to pick you up. They can't collude to do surge
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The answer to your question is contained in the previous post.
Re: (Score:2)
So one is engaging in blatant corporatism while the other is fighting it.
No. They are both engaging in blatant corporatism. Uber is not doing this to benefit you. Now, I do think what Uber is doing can benefit you, but that is not why they are doing it. This is why I sometimes root for Uber. The entrenched taxi companies are shit, and taxi licensing in America accomplishes exactly zero of the things it claims to do. In other countries, I might feel differently. Literally the only other country I've taken a taxi in was Panama. The cars were dirtier and less safe than they are her
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, that's correct, and it's why Uber has to fight dirty, to put it a bit more diplomatically than the GP poster did.
The taxi monopolies are immoral in themselves, and they have no place in a democratic society. We vote with our phones every time we call Uber instead of a taxi.
When the law does not respect the people, the people will not respect the law.
piling it on backfires sometimes (Score:2)
Indeed, this is much ado about nothing, and only newsworthy in the way the Oscar's became after the mistake.
Re: (Score:2)
There have been some very public blemishes on Uber of late, but it seems unlikely evading authorities is going to generate much outrage on this site.
Outrage? Not really. But this is something that really could get them nailed to the wall for good. Pretending that they're serving those customers is a kind of fraud, and law enforcement has a reasonable right to use services available to the masses (does it take an account? sure. are they picky about who they give one to? not aside from things like this) to determine whether a service is operating legally. Their attempts to evade inspection are going to be a serious problem for them.
ToS (Score:2)
Re:ToS (Score:4, Interesting)
I am an Uber driver in the San Francisco bay area.
And I can't speak for other cities, but Uber is so cheap and ubiquitous in my area, Uber is cheaper than public transportation in many cases, it works even during rush hour when most people can't get a taxi, plus it works when Bart is shut down after midnight, that I am quite certain that we're keeping tens of thousands of drunk drivers from driving on the roads each year.
Re:ToS (Score:5, Insightful)
These subsidies create false perceptions about transportation costs such as the one you voiced. People think Uber is doing it right and the traditional taxi companies have been doing it wrong the whole time.
The national taxi business is only worth $11 billion a year. Why is Uber so highly valued? Why is so much venture capital funding injected into Uber?!? Those investors are expecting to own a monopoly position in the transportation service market. Obviously, the intent of such a monopoly would be to ruthlessly squeeze as much money as possible out of consumers.
Re: (Score:3)
Obviously, the intent of such a monopoly would be to ruthlessly squeeze as much money as possible out of consumers.
That is the intent of nearly every for-profit business. However, I don't think you've thought this "monopoly" thing through. If Uber achieves their goals, and actually invalidates existing licensing systems, then anyone else who can afford to deploy the same sort of service as Uber can simply waltz in and do that. This is what makes guessing the end game for Uber so confusing. Are the execs just planning to sell the name and run before the law closes its hand around their collective throats? Because if they
Re: (Score:2)
If Uber achieves their goals, and actually invalidates existing licensing systems, then anyone else who can afford to deploy the same sort of service as Uber can simply waltz in and do that.
I used to think the same thing about Amazon when it was bleeding money in order to become the number one online bookstore. Essentially, I thought that since it was on the web, any other online bookstore could easily replace it, but I was completely wrong about that.
Customers have come to trust Amazon (even its own employees/temps/affiliates have learned to distrust it). Customer reviews, usually low prices, quick refunds, a familiar interface. Those are some of the reasons many customers still use Amazon, w
Re: (Score:2)
Correction: I should have said "(even if its own employees/temps/affiliates have learned to distrust it)."
Re: (Score:2)
I used to think the same thing about Amazon when it was bleeding money in order to become the number one online bookstore. Essentially, I thought that since it was on the web, any other online bookstore could easily replace it, but I was completely wrong about that.
Books are not cars.
Customers have come to trust Amazon (even its own employees/temps/affiliates have learned to distrust it). Customer reviews, usually low prices, quick refunds, a familiar interface. Those are some of the reasons many customers still use Amazon, when they could simply be shopping on other websites.
Uber is going to have to raise their prices sooner or later, and if they succeed in their legal battles then there's nothing stopping the automakers themselves (who already have significant customer contact) or some other party with a reputable trademark from doing precisely what they are doing.
Re: (Score:2)
I didn't say that Uber was necessarily going to win (especially worldwide). Right now, Lyft is actually profitable (unlike Uber), although it's much less aggressive. Plus, Lyft has China backing them, so because of that, I think it is still in the game.
Whoever is going to win will need deep pockets backing them. For instance, in my area customers have come to expect rides to show up in less 5 minutes. To get that kind of response time, a competitor would need to completely saturate an area with cars. Also,
Re: (Score:2)
Also, Uber drivers are operating on razor thin margins. If an automaker gets into the fray, it will need to have the most reliable and the most fuel-efficient cars for city driving.
Which is why the premier candidate right now would be GM. They have an EV with good range, and they can produce a lot of them. Who knows who it will be by the time Level 5 vehicles become a reality.
Re: (Score:2)
These subsidies create false perceptions about transportation costs such as the one you voiced. People think Uber is doing it right and the traditional taxi companies have been doing it wrong the whole time.
This is very true, but in my opinion, even when that money runs out, I still think that Uber and Lyft will be running far more efficiently than Taxis.
Automated and reliable dispatching, LyftLine/UberPool (passengers sharing cars on the fly when they don't even know each other), crude but effective driver rating and customer reviewing system, destination filters for drivers when they want to go home (but not without passengers so they don't waste gas), elastic workforce for an elastic market,
Those are a few
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, those are good points as well.
This is actually one reason I don't want to remain an Uber driver for long. I know Uber is good for consumers, and that it is good for someone who needs to find a job very quickly, but it's not really a good long-term investment for its drivers. That, I completely agree with.
I also think of Lyft the same way. Ultimately, both companies are trying to commoditize the industry. This is the same strategy Amazon itself has taken. If you can commoditize the industry and develop
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
With the exception of their $2,000 insurance deductible (which is the double of Uber's), I agree completely. Lyft is much less scummier company. No doubt about that. Thought, they've also be caught in undercover stings and it wouldn't surprise me if they did the same thing as Uber in this particular case as well.
Re: (Score:2)
it works even during rush hour when most people can't get a taxi
I don't buy I was in SF Bay area just a couple weeks ago for a full week. I used cabs all week because Yellow cab made it so damned easy!
I called the first time talked to a person gave them address. Cab was there in less than 5 min. Called back their phone system remembered my previous pickup and destination address. Pressed a couple keys, cab was there in probably 5 min. Did this every day from the airport -> office -> hotel -> office -> hotel ..... -> airport. No probables fast reli
Re: (Score:2)
Did this every day from the airport -> office -> hotel -> office -> hotel ..... -> airport.
I am very glad to hear that their system has been upgraded. I must admit it's been a very long time since I've taken an actual taxi. But just like me, the locals in SF have been conditioned not to depend on taxis during those hours. Plus, the fact that some taxis are now more reliable could be credited to Uber and Lyft relieving the pressure on taxi companies during those same hours.
Traditionally, the best way to get a cab before Uber/Lyft during rush hour in SF was to walk to a nice hotel with a doorman. C
Re: (Score:2)
Their business is organizing crimes. They make it easy for illegal taxis to find customers.
No their business is aggregating, booking, and billing as a service to private taxis. There isn't anything inherently illegal about that business model. It may or may not even be a reasonable one for someone that wants to work as a livery driver. We shall see if the price supports and market are still there when the VC funny money runs out.
Now its true that Uber does not concern itself about the legality of private unlicensed taxis within the legal jurisdiction of various municipalities. Its not clear t
Re: (Score:2)
Their business is organizing crimes. They make it easy for illegal taxis to find customers.
No their business is aggregating, booking, and billing as a service to private taxis. There isn't anything inherently illegal about that business model.
Except if you do that as taxi company who charges illegal taxi fees, requires their drivers to break the law, and generally refuse to obey the laws for black cabs or taxis everywhere they operate. Uber breaks the law, their drivers breaks the law, and it is all deliberate and persisting even after being warned and fined for it multiple times.
Executive with ethics of a Mafia Don (Score:4, Insightful)
Uber Hit Squad (Score:5, Interesting)
cui bono? I don't know the answer to that, but it must be somebody.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Uber Hit Squad (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Uber Hit Squad (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm open to the idea that Uber is an evil company, but what's with all the Uber news lately? We've had story after story this week. It isn't normal, even for a company as bad as Oracle, to have news story after news story released like this. The whole thing looks like someone is leaking to the press at an opportune time, which raises the question,
cui bono? I don't know the answer to that, but it must be somebody.
It's a combination of coincidence and blood in the water.
Uber has been a consistent source of negative stories for a long time, that a few would hit the same news cycle is hardly unexpected.
But people are also paying attention to Uber right now. If you're Google now is a good time to take a shot at Uber, when they're too distracted to fight back. And if you're a reporter your Uber story is going to get a lot more traction, so it's time to start digging.
Re: (Score:3)
You're not wrong; there's definitely a bit of blood in the water.
However Uber is unique in that they're managing to find new and exciting ways to fuck up, from the way they treat their drivers to how they interact with governments.
To use the GP'
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps, I can answer that question.
Disclaimer: I'm currently an Uber driver and I do love driving for Uber (despite my pay being ridiculously low and which seems of getting cut every single week these past four weeks). But we're so cheap, ubiquitous, and we're run a thousand times more efficiently than taxis, that I am also quite certain that we're saving thousands of lives every day from drunk driving incidents.
I personally think there are several reasons for the bad press.
Reason #1: Our Uber CEO, Travis
Re:Uber Hit Squad (Score:4, Insightful)
True, not having to pay tax, insurance, decent wages and expecting drivers to pay for vehicles makes it more efficient than a law abiding taxi company.
Re: (Score:2)
No explanation, no recourse. Everything decided by some secret algorithm, which is probably biased, buggy and not available for review.
Just like our health insurance system! And I do mean just like it.
These are the times I believe that European laws explicitly forbidding discrimination against customers are a fairly good thing :)
We could use a lot more protection from corporations, but they own the government now.
Re:Uber Hit Squad (Score:5, Insightful)
"all the Uber news lately"
These stories were always there. What you are seeing is the collapse of the Uber hype bubble.
Re: (Score:2)
Uber have always been unethical pieces of shit. Remember when they had fake taxis on their maps? Prove that they don't still do that, even. What you're saying is that you ignored the previous indications that these were bad actors and got suckered by their propaganda stream. However, for those of us who have been paying attention, it's been pretty clear that the positive press has been bought and paid for, but now it seems that they can't keep a lid on things any more.
You were too eager to believe in this c
SJW Hate Target. (Score:2)
Social Justice Warriors have had it in for Uber for a while. The standard tactic is to find a few things wrong and flood the news cycle with hate and loathing for the target, which they are doing now with Uber. I've seen the secondary attacks mass on Twitter and Facebook from some liberal friends.
Re: (Score:2)
I will remember: Uber, the heroic company that stood up against SJW's and government entrapment, instead of cowering on behalf of the legal department.
Re: (Score:2)
The only way to deal with such firms (Score:2)
Is to arrest and jail their execs first.
Just like the mafia.
Going after the low level never works.
Arrest them, ship them to GITMO, and let them stand trial in a few decades.
Follow the money. (Score:2)
Not that Uber isn't evil, because they are. But it would be interesting to know who holds the most shorts [investopedia.com] on them.
And, pay a lawyer enough, and they'll "sign off" on anything. Doing it for obstruction of justice seems to be a risky proposition, though. I'd think that would (or should) put the lawyers into a disbarring type situation, if not criminal sanctions.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Before anyone jumps in, I know they're not publicly traded.
Did you know they're not publicly traded?
Re: (Score:2)
Funny how the tech journalist forgot about Enron and later a few dozen companies that some very bad press around 2008. Exxon, Union Carbide and so on had their bad press a bit more than 21 years back, I suppose, and TEPCO (Fukishima) are in Japan.
How is this not racketeering? (Score:2)
If I lived a little closer to their headquarters, I'd start a private RICO lawsuit. Even if the feds pick it up (and they should), I'd still get a cut of the billions in penalties. I wonder if I could crowd-source the legal fees to get that going?
Double standard much? (Score:3)
Post a story about how the FBI/CIA/NSA are sniffing around your phones or e-mail and watch the Slashdot community scream about jack-booted thugs. Uber manages to implement a system that warns of potential law enforcement encroachment into their affairs and everyone gets righteous.
If Uber could spin off Greyball as an independent service, I could think of a few people that would buy it.
Irrelevant comparison much? (Score:2)
Comparing government illegally spying on your every personal communication to government oversight of monied interests is so far off-base that you're off-planet.
Re: (Score:2)
government ... business
You really think there's a difference? How cute.
Greyball (Score:2)
What's Greyball and how does it work?
Since when does Uber care about drivers? (Score:2)
Since when does Uber give two shits about what happens to their drivers?
They act like they could not care less if the drivers are murdered by passengers, are hijacked, or caught up in a sting operation of some kind. Uber has made it clear the drivers are on their own in such cases and don't call them for bail money.
There is NO way they ran this filtering app to benefit drivers when they don't give a shit about the drivers. They've got so many new drivers begging to sign up, existing drivers are of no con
Uber is one step ahead of the article poster too (Score:2)
Uber seems to be one step ahead of that too. Uber's office in Australia was raided by tax officials but they came away without even a list of drivers because according to Uber that information is only available to the head office in the Netherlands.
Source? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
What gave that away? Stories of angry drivers or stories of angry sexually harassed engineers?
Re: (Score:2)
Now I'm kinda glad (Score:2)
After interviewing with them recently, now I'm kinda glad that Uber didn't extend an offer to me; the company seems to have been involved in a *lot* of tricky shit lately, not the least of which is that the CEO appears to be a gigantic flaming asshole.
Writing an app specifically designed to help them break or flout the local laws isn't anything to be proud of. I gotta wonder how many man-hours went into building that, and how many programmers ignored their conscience to make it happen. Didn't ANY of them st
What governments can do (Score:4, Interesting)
Walking into and staying in a gov building kind of shows that on average a person might work for a gov but its not 9 to 5 but way more than a normal private sector person needing something from their gov as a one time visit.
People who report back to a gov building for a few hours per week might be undercover. That sorts most of the private sector visits and normal gov workers.
Some low tech ways to counter such easy tracking.
Hire new staff and ensure they never enter a city, state gov building. A private sector front company to work from.
Use a trendy phone and app like as average person would. The brand of device matches the average call rate and cost of the service.
Using a service at 10am or 2pm more than average from a very cheap phone is not normal in a nation of workers at work.
South African law enforcement faced such issues in the 1990's. Its older generation of expert undercover officers faced public comment.
Its new officers lacked decades of undercover skills. So teams got created that never went near any gov/police buildings. Skill sets got protected, teams trained and tracking such people who never showed any connection to law enforcement was difficult.
The way the CIA gets its staff into the US state department and ready for missions under US diplomatic cover in Russia.
Russia is able to look back over the entire public and private digital life of all US embassy staff using US public and very expensive private sector methods.
How does the CIA get its best into Russia? The CIA creates the perfect US government worker that finds an embassy job. Their past does not link back to some fancy US college, mil or in any way with anything that could be CIA. Such generational CIA teams can then move around Russia with Russia thinking they might really just be normal embassy staff. Just a normal worker walking around Russia. No CIA skill sets on show.
Obstructing justice. (Score:2)
What does Uber have to hide by avoiding the law?
Re: (Score:2)
Noob. I remember when it was all Retard Niquepaille's technology trends.
Arabic numbers, the future or a fad? That was a classic.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
When we started using more DC electric motors.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Are there better ways of providing payment online, or easy ways of obtaining "burner" charge cards?
Citicards has 'virtual credit cards'. You can generate them for one time use or set a duration in months and/or dollar amount.
Re: (Score:2)
Being able to get "virtual honeypot" cards, that can be used once, and then all subsequent uses marked as fraudulent, could be interesting - help track down CC thieves.
Re:Excellent (Score:5, Insightful)
Uber just went up a couple notches in my book!
I completely agree. The whole Greyball program is a feature not a bug. Without an aggressive company the monopoly of taxis in so many cities would never have been broken. The law is on the side of lobbyists who are paid by incumbents to prevent competition. I can't tell you how many times I tried to hail a cab in NYC before Uber and simply could not get one. I have similarly been unable to get a cab without 24 hours notice sometimes in the suburbs. The artificial shortage of taxis in NYC is what economics textbooks use to explain economic rent! It's outrageous that people complain about Uber busting up a deeply unfair system full of unnecessary bureaucracy and regulations.
Re: Excellent (Score:5, Insightful)
It's outrageous that people complain about Uber busting up a deeply unfair system full of unnecessary bureaucracy and regulations.
Nobody's complaining about that. What makes Uber suck is that they're no better morally, ethically or economically than the scum in the taxi industry. They're just as predatory and evil.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Excellent (Score:5, Interesting)
That will not continue. They are attempting monopoly. When they achieve it they will exploit it.
For me being in a taxi means that if there is an accident I am covered every way from Sunday. Regardless of who is at fault, regardless of medical insurance status, irregardless I will be covered and compensated for losses. If I travel in a Uber car, a paying fare, I am not covered at all, not even by the local mandatory third party insurance. A potential disaster.
Calling and using a cab provides limited information to the cab company. Using Uber reports my location (and god knows what else) to Uber 24/7 and I am even paying for the electricity and hardware to do it. While the cops may get such records form the phone company, Uber just demanding, taking them is an insult. Why would anyone sane accept those terms of service?
The intent of Uber is a world wide (or as wide as they can get) monopoly. Its business model is a losing proposition at its current pricing rates. When other alternatives (some better, some worse) have been wiped out it will exploit that monopoly and not only price wise. It will have the capacity to make areas popular or unpopular and all the influence that comes with that.
They are not even subtle about it. You know what "uber" means don't you? Google übermensch and uber alles.
Re: (Score:2)
If I travel in a Uber car, a paying fare, I am not covered at all, not even by the local mandatory third party insurance. A potential disaster.
Uber does carry insurance for passengers covering them as you say every way from Sunday. It even goes further by offering unlimited coverage for injuries or death.
I'm no fan of Uber, I think their corporate culture sucks. But they have covered their asses very well as far as insurance for passengers is concerned. They don't give two shits about their drivers though.
Re: (Score:2)
Locally I had heard otherwise and it may differ here. A private vehicle and a car for hire are different registration requirements. One is private and one is commercial. And never the twain shall meet. The cost of registration and the cost (and terms) of the mandatory third party insurance differ. In law. I don't think Uber can change that.
They do not give two shits about their passengers either. I do not think their driver requirements are anything like stringent enough.
Re: (Score:2)
Those rides are subsidized by venture capital money [bloomberg.com]. They're not profitable in how they are operating. They've lost billions of dollars. Enjoy your half-price rides while you can. Once they succeed at starving off the taxi industry, they expect to hold a monopoly over the transportation service market, at which point you will pay way higher fees. Somebody will have to compensate these venture capitalists for all the billions they
Re: (Score:2)
. Without an aggressive company the monopoly of taxis in so many cities would never have been broken.
what monopoly? In most cities there are at least 4-5 taxi companies.
If Uber wins, however, then you will see what it is to have a monopoly.
Re: (Score:2)
. Without an aggressive company the monopoly of taxis in so many cities would never have been broken.
what monopoly? In most cities there are at least 4-5 taxi companies. If Uber wins, however, then you will see what it is to have a monopoly.
I am referring to the instances where Uber skirted regulations that made it impossible to legally offer it's service. Had it asked for permission initially it would have simply been refused. Once the drivers and general public got used to the servuce, municipalities were forced to compromise.
Second, it's simply untrue to say the before Uber there were lots of can companies offering sufficient services. I have tried in many instances to obtain a ride in the past from them and have been turned down. Some
Re: (Score:2)
Second, it's simply untrue to say the before Uber there were lots of can companies offering sufficient services. I have tried in many instances to obtain a ride in the past from them and have been turned down. Some of them are very rude and gruff. Some suburbs have only two functional services and you have to pay a significant surcharge to get a cab from somewhere else along with a significant delay. Sometimes they don't even answer their own phone
All that is much, much worse with Uber. They have a territory and won't pick you up if you are not in the territory, no matter how much you are willing to pay. In many cities the territory is not very large.
My experience with regular taxi companies is that while you may have to wait, you will always end up having a driver. With Uber, even if there are drivers available in my city, they might not be close enough to me so I just can't order service, again no matter how much I am willing to pay.
Re:Excellent (Score:4, Informative)
Uber just went up a couple notches in my book!
My sentiment also. In particular, the New York City Taxi & Limousine Commission operates its own police force to prevent entrepreneurs from competing with medallion cabs. It has been known to arrest people who drop off their spouses at JFK or LaGuardia, accusing them of operating a taxi service. Victims have to hire expensive legal help to prove their innocence.
I hope Uber mashes these bastards straight into the ground.
Re: (Score:2)
If users perceive Uber to be mistreating its drivers or in some other way being a bad actor, they can use Lyft instead. If users object to a city's single and protected medallion cab service, they can go to hell.
Re:Excellent (Score:5, Insightful)
Your fake bolded insertions would make my real story into a fake story.
The TLC police force is totally legal in NYC, and operates as a special-purpose police force for taxi regulations. It has a long history of thuggish abuse:
http://nypost.com/2014/11/27/d... [nypost.com]
https://www.dnainfo.com/new-yo... [dnainfo.com]
The second link contains additional citations of its own.
Re: (Score:3)
Lyft works better and treats its drivers FAR better..
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)