Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Uber Hasn't Had an Effect on Drunken-Driving Deaths, Study Finds

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 80 posts

Re: Uber Hasn't Had an Effect on Drunken-Driving Deaths, Study Finds

#61

Post by gojomo »

officemonkey wrote: post #16
gojomo wrote: post #10

I'm suspicious. It seems the study may only be regressing on 'availability' of Uber – the single bit flag of whether it has launched in a city. If adoption is gradual, as the habits of drinkers/drivers change over months (or years), beneficial effects might not be seen by such a study, or remain hidden by all the other controls applied. The best analysis would likely need to use ride volume data; there's no hint in t…

Uber doesn't launch in areas where there isn't a market. If there is no need for extensive taxi and mass transit services, Uber won't be there either. In places where Uber has launched, they're probably just picking up riders that would normally take a cab or a train if Uber wasn't there.

Of course they only enter markets where there's demand. But it takes a while for people to understand and adopt something new as their preferred transit. Some initially view Uber/etc as weird, before later becoming big fans.

In San Francisco, it appears Uber/Lyft have massively increased the total number of paid-rides taken. They're not just shifting trips from taxis or public transit, but also from private car usage – and creating new trips where people would've just stayed in or walked.

That points out another stat a 'gold standard' study should try to identify: fatalities per trips (or ride-miles) taken, rather than just absolute number of fatalities. If cities with Uber have the same number of fatalities, but spread over twice as much travel, that's giant safety and welfare win, too.

Re: Uber Hasn't Had an Effect on Drunken-Driving Deaths, Study Finds

#62

Post by marssaxman »

wildmusings wrote: post #41
kaishiro wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, this is why we have anecdotes I suppose. I lived in Boston and Brookline for twelve years as well and find your claims equally laughable. We quite frequently found ourselves in cabs with credit card readers, only to be told they didn't work when it came time to pay. I also simply gave up using cabs trying to get to Logan because while they would usually be on time, there were others when they simply wouldn't sh…

I'm a big fan of Uber, but the secret to dealing with cabbies is to be firm and obstinate. Like any street business, they're going to take advantage when they smell weakness and fold when they sense strength. Credit card machine doesn't work? Okay, here's the address where you can send me the bill. Don't try to stop me from leaving the cab, it'll be a big mistake involving police and you getting arrested for false im…

That all sounds very unpleasant. I'd rather work with professionals.

Re: Uber Hasn't Had an Effect on Drunken-Driving Deaths, Study Finds

#63

Post by p4wnc6 »

eropple wrote: post #59
p4wnc6 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No that's what knee-jerk Uber defenders are writing who refuse to grant taxis any credit for being good, useful services. These responses aren't reporting average case experiences with level headed analysis. They are just one-sidedly saying everything is bad about taxis, including "corruption" even, and how thankful they are Uber "disrupted" them, etc. It all reads very much like paid social engineering by Uber. I'm…

I'm not a fan--I use them because the alternatives are terrible. I use Uber, and I use Lyft, and I use Fasten the most (because they're still trying to establish market share and so the deals are great). But I use them primarily because Boston taxis are straight garbage that cannot be trusted to get you where you want to go on time and without hassles, and they want a price premium for the experience. This isn't the…

Boston taxis have always done a good job in getting my friends, family, coworkers, and myself where we needed to go, on time, and without issue or hassle.

> But we're the "social engineering commenters" because we're rolling eyes at the idea that dealing with cabs is pleasant.

Yes! Rolling one's eyes at a plain and simple fact, like the simple fact that most taxi experiences are just normal, uneventful rides inside of cars, is derivative from Uber's attempts to social engineer against the culture of using taxis. I don't see why that would merit such a sardonic and rude reply from you.

Re: Uber Hasn't Had an Effect on Drunken-Driving Deaths, Study Finds

#64

Post by p4wnc6 »

kaishiro wrote: post #60
p4wnc6 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not just me though. Dozens of friends, family members, classmates, and coworkers all described the same experiences I've had whenever the topic came up. The average-case taxi ride in Boston is quite good.

Dozens of friends, family members, classmates, and coworkers of mine (not to mention the majority of users in this thread) have described the same experiences I've had as well. Guess we'll call it a wash?

No, we won't call it a wash because it's only people like those in this thread, who gravitate towards contrarian arguments every single time something about Uber comes up, who are saying such egregious and hyperbolic false criticisms of taxis.

Dozens of your connections did not say that 80% of the time the card reader is broken, or that they have never traveled in a single clean taxi ever in their lives. These are patently ridiculous ideas being passed off as if they are in some way accurate portrayals of taxi services when they are just cartoonish fictions meant to inflame and cast Uber in an unrealistically positive light.

As I've said repeatedly, none of what I am saying is in any way a criticism of Uber, nor is it a suggestion that anyone should not use Uber if they want to.

All I am saying is that taxi rides are overwhelmingly normal and most everyone already knows this and accepts it and happily uses taxis plenty of the time, even if they also use Uber too.

The people here are trying to make it seem like I'm saying that taxis are made out of gold and you get a free Swedish massage while you ride. Hardly! I'm claiming that most credit card readers are functional and most taxis are fairly modern and clean -- these are not controversial, and to disagree with them is solely a symptom of unrealistic bias, and in this thread anyway seemingly also irrational hatred, towards the taxi business.

Re: Uber Hasn't Had an Effect on Drunken-Driving Deaths, Study Finds

#65

Post by eropple »

p4wnc6 wrote: post #63
eropple wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not a fan--I use them because the alternatives are terrible. I use Uber, and I use Lyft, and I use Fasten the most (because they're still trying to establish market share and so the deals are great). But I use them primarily because Boston taxis are straight garbage that cannot be trusted to get you where you want to go on time and without hassles, and they want a price premium for the experience. This isn't the…

Boston taxis have always done a good job in getting my friends, family, coworkers, and myself where we needed to go, on time, and without issue or hassle. > But we're the "social engineering commenters" because we're rolling eyes at the idea that dealing with cabs is pleasant. Yes ! Rolling one's eyes at a plain and simple fact, like the simple fact that most taxi experiences are just normal, uneventful rides inside…

I can't imagine why you're getting a sardonic and rude response. Maybe it's because insulting, silly, ad hominem nonsense that you're throwing at me?

Most taxi experiences I've had are strictly worse than the equivalent in any of the ride-sharing systems available in Boston. Strictly worse. They're more expensive, the supply is more variable, the drivers are at best a push, and events that cannot happen in Uber/Lyft/Fasten, the fucking around with credit cards and the end-around routes to pump the meter, can't happen. And you know what? I wish this weren't the case, because Uber is a bad company run by bad people. I'd rather use a cab because I don't want to give Uber money. But cabs are that much worse.

But that's "social engineering" commenting, sure, that's meriting backhanded accusations of shilling (and don't dissemble, that is exactly what you are doing even when you try to fig-leaf it). You want to talk shills while you're caping for the cab company? Look inward, brofessor, but it might hurt a little when you do.

Re: Uber Hasn't Had an Effect on Drunken-Driving Deaths, Study Finds

#66

Post by kaishiro »

p4wnc6 wrote: post #64
kaishiro wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dozens of friends, family members, classmates, and coworkers of mine (not to mention the majority of users in this thread) have described the same experiences I've had as well. Guess we'll call it a wash?

No, we won't call it a wash because it's only people like those in this thread, who gravitate towards contrarian arguments every single time something about Uber comes up, who are saying such egregious and hyperbolic false criticisms of taxis. Dozens of your connections did not say that 80% of the time the card reader is broken, or that they have never traveled in a single clean taxi ever in their lives. These are pa…

So, I was going to just let this one go, I really was. But, you should know that stating opinion as if it were fact with regard to one's truthfulness, a la "Dozens of your connections did not say that..." is an incredibly rude thing to say.

You have no earthly idea who I am, who my friends are, and most certainly are not privy to the conversations we've had. While this may be painful to hear, you are not the sole bastion of truth when it comes to taxi experiences. I can not say, for certain, whether you are telling the truth when you say you've had these conversations with your friends and family. To suggest that you're lying about this is absurd though - and I won't do it - because I don't know you, or your friends, and am certainly not privy to any conversations you've had on the matter either. I believe you when you say this.

Do not discount others viewpoints and pretend that you have a priori knowledge on a subject. It diminishes you.

Re: Uber Hasn't Had an Effect on Drunken-Driving Deaths, Study Finds

#67

Post by p4wnc6 »

kaishiro wrote: post #66
p4wnc6 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, we won't call it a wash because it's only people like those in this thread, who gravitate towards contrarian arguments every single time something about Uber comes up, who are saying such egregious and hyperbolic false criticisms of taxis. Dozens of your connections did not say that 80% of the time the card reader is broken, or that they have never traveled in a single clean taxi ever in their lives. These are pa…

So, I was going to just let this one go, I really was. But, you should know that stating opinion as if it were fact with regard to one's truthfulness, a la "Dozens of your connections did not say that..." is an incredibly rude thing to say. You have no earthly idea who I am, who my friends are, and most certainly are not privy to the conversations we've had. While this may be painful to hear, you are not the sole bas…

The experience of 80% of credit card readers being defective is so statistically anomalous that the only reasonable thing to do if someone claims it is to disbelieve them. Unless they have hard evidence, you are perfectly justified to say, you know what, that's just too absurdly far-fetched to give it credit. Same thing if someone says literally zero taxis they have ever used have been in clean condition. That's a many-standard-deviations-from-the-mean event and I don't believe it. The more likely hypothesis is that you're being hyperbolic out of frustration with my other points.

It may indeed be rude for me to directly point it out, but given the way others are treating me in the thread, I won't lose any sleep over it. I don't think I'm making cutting remarks, only remarks that are consistent with basic, universal experiences, not just of me, but everywhere.

Others seem to seek to take these basic, universal experiences and try to claim they aren't universal, and that instead their experiences of crazy statistical outlier events (e.g. zero clean taxis ever) somehow are the common and universal experiences, and that I am being presumptuous or rude for disbelieving that they actually experienced some exceedingly rare event that shouldn't be believed.

It's completely unreasonable to believe that saying 80% of card readers are broken and there are zero clean taxis deserves to be compared in the same breath as a claim like almost every time I rode in a taxi it was just a normal functioning car and nothing stood out as functionally broken or meaningfully substandard in quality.

The two things are not the same kind of claim, even categorically, no matter how much people in the thread don't like it.

Re: Uber Hasn't Had an Effect on Drunken-Driving Deaths, Study Finds

#68

Post by p4wnc6 »

eropple wrote: post #65
p4wnc6 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Boston taxis have always done a good job in getting my friends, family, coworkers, and myself where we needed to go, on time, and without issue or hassle. > But we're the "social engineering commenters" because we're rolling eyes at the idea that dealing with cabs is pleasant. Yes ! Rolling one's eyes at a plain and simple fact, like the simple fact that most taxi experiences are just normal, uneventful rides inside…

I can't imagine why you're getting a sardonic and rude response . Maybe it's because insulting, silly, ad hominem nonsense that you're throwing at me? Most taxi experiences I've had are strictly worse than the equivalent in any of the ride-sharing systems available in Boston. Strictly worse. They're more expensive, the supply is more variable, the drivers are at best a push, and events that cannot happen in Uber/Lyft…

I'm really at a loss as to seeing any reply to you that I've made that is insulting, silly, or ad hominem. In re-reading them all, I don't see that.

The claims made in the thread were that something like 80% of taxis in Boston have defective card readers, and that literally only a single taxi used was clean (the rest were not of acceptable cleanliness).

These are ridiculous, exceptional claims that should be completely disregarded without evidence. When I said so, adding that my experience has been that taxis are just perfectly normal cars with functional parts, everyone tries to take my head off for it.

I even freely admitted many of the benefits to Uber you already pointed out.

Nowhere did I ever claim that taxis are better than Uber, nor that anyone should avoid Uber, nor that they should use taxis. I even stopped to reiterate that several times.

I only said that the outrageous, over-the-top degree to which people were describing the poor condition and service of taxis, in Boston, was flat out wrong and hyperbolic. That's all! Even if taxis are clean and have functioning card readers (they are and they do), someone may still feel Uber, or whatever other service, is a better value. That's 100% consistent with everything I've said in this thread.

Yet your response is basically a straw man setting it up as if I claimed that taxis were superior to other ride sharing services, or that my claims about taxis just being pretty normal cars with working parts is somehow a claim of their superiority over Uber? I really don't know why you're inferring that into what I am saying, but it's not related.

Re: Uber Hasn't Had an Effect on Drunken-Driving Deaths, Study Finds

#69

Post by kaishiro »

p4wnc6 wrote: post #67
kaishiro wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, I was going to just let this one go, I really was. But, you should know that stating opinion as if it were fact with regard to one's truthfulness, a la "Dozens of your connections did not say that..." is an incredibly rude thing to say. You have no earthly idea who I am, who my friends are, and most certainly are not privy to the conversations we've had. While this may be painful to hear, you are not the sole bas…

The experience of 80% of credit card readers being defective is so statistically anomalous that the only reasonable thing to do if someone claims it is to disbelieve them. Unless they have hard evidence, you are perfectly justified to say, you know what, that's just too absurdly far-fetched to give it credit. Same thing if someone says literally zero taxis they have ever used have been in clean condition. That's a ma…

Can you please point out exactly where I said that 80% of card readers are broken? You keep stating this figure as coming from my mouth and are using it as an avenue to call me a liar.

Please, go ahead, show me.

Re: Uber Hasn't Had an Effect on Drunken-Driving Deaths, Study Finds

#70

Post by p4wnc6 »

kaishiro wrote: post #69
p4wnc6 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The experience of 80% of credit card readers being defective is so statistically anomalous that the only reasonable thing to do if someone claims it is to disbelieve them. Unless they have hard evidence, you are perfectly justified to say, you know what, that's just too absurdly far-fetched to give it credit. Same thing if someone says literally zero taxis they have ever used have been in clean condition. That's a ma…

Can you please point out exactly where I said that 80% of card readers are broken? You keep stating this figure as coming from my mouth and are using it as an avenue to call me a liar. Please, go ahead, show me.

I did not claim that you said it, not at all, and that's a definite misrepresentation of what I'm talking about.

The comment in which it was said is here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12191938 >.

I am comparing whatever anecdotes (yours and others) that are supposedly backed up by lots of people you know, with this.

While the people you know might have had some bad experiences sometimes, I wouldn't believe they were anywhere near the claims going on in this thread.

If your connections reported occasional bad experiences with taxis, who would care? It couldn't possibly be relevant to a thread where the entire context of the thread is that people are saying that all Boston taxis are almost always awful and almost always have broken card readers, etc.

I'm not sure how to explain it. I'm trying to say that the connections whose informal opinions you cite as backup couldn't possibly have said something as extreme as what the other people of this thread are saying -- in which case whatever minor and totally expected occasional complaints your sources have had, they aren't relevant.

Post reply on HN