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

Google Takes on Uber with New Ride-Share Service

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 486 posts

Re: Google Takes on Uber with New Ride-Share Service

#191

Post by jonknee »

amyjess wrote: post #184
dragonwriter wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Waze has been owned by Google and shared data -- both mapping and traffic, etc. -- with Google Maps for years. Using Waze, in a very real sense, is using Google Maps, and vice versa. Heck, the new Google service at issue in this thread is Waze Carpool .

Waze does not use the same data as Google Maps. Google Maps always gives perfectly-accurate directions to where I live. Waze does not give accurate directions to where I live. It goes out of its way to force drivers to enter a gated community that's adjacent to my complex. What's even worse is that the entrance to my complex and the entrance to that gated community are on separate arterials [0], and if you try to ent…

Google Maps at least uses Waze data for traffic, perhaps it doesn't go both directions.

Re: Google Takes on Uber with New Ride-Share Service

#192

Post by hibikir »

gingerrr wrote: post #125
riboflava wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Living wage destroys the ability for people to make a little extra on the side with part-time gigs.

You realize that "living wage" is only a price floor for labor, not a price ceiling , right? It is a guarantee that people are paid at a minimum the amount necessary to support themselves, with various definitions excluding or including that person's family situation from consideration. Instituting a living wage would in no way prevent you from working extra and being paid extra for that work. I'm inclined to believe…

There are part time tasks that we might want to pay someone to do, but are not worth paying anyone for at living wage costs: The value and the minimum wage don't line up. Those are often the kinds of jobs untrained teenagers did back in the day. If it's illegal to pay someone to do it for a wage I am willing to pay, then it doesn't get done.

It would be nice if it was possible to have a sensible minimum wage for, say, employing someone over 5 hours a week, but have mechanisms that make it legal for someone to do very short term work at wages nobody should ever live on. There's plenty of people underemployed at 15, 20 hours a week, that would love to supplement that with a bit of extra work, even if it was under minimum wage. In fact, in some cultures this happens all the time.

That work would also get done if we had a citizen income that matches that living wage, and we got rid of the minimum wage altogether.

Now, whether the world would be in a better state by leaving work not done but guaranteeing a living wage or by maximizing work done is a matter for debate: Looking at minimum wage laws alone is not enough to compare policy outcomes. Still, the grandparent was making a defensible argument, whether you think he is wrong (and he might be) or not.

Re: Google Takes on Uber with New Ride-Share Service

#193

Post by kentosi »

et-al wrote: post #99
runako wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If only that were remotely true. In many/most states, the minimum wage for a variety of jobs is not in the range of "livable". For example, minimum wage for restaurant jobs in Georgia is $2.13/hour [1]. They actually don't "get paid enough for this shit," so their attitude actually matches reality. Tipping is a necessary component of the compensation if we want to continue our practice of letting certain employers ha…

I waited tables a decade ago. If I recall correctly, it was $2.95 + tips and I believe with a 4% tip-out. So your 15% tip became 11% real quick. So I hustled. I'm not saying that we should continue to screw over people who rely on tips as living wage. What I'm saying is that if one wants to have the overwhelmingly warm service Americans expect in restaurants, we need to keep tipping. After all, we've heard anecdotes…

Aussie currently living in NYC: Rarely tipped back home and the service is on par.

Re: Google Takes on Uber with New Ride-Share Service

#194

Post by dgacmu »

bduerst wrote: post #179
vthallam wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This happens in many places i guess. But when a company gets into picture to facilitate this, things like safety/insurance comes into picture. I am sure Google might have already figured that out, if not any small crime incident by a driver would cause huge reputational damage.

It's different because it's carpooling, which is typically covered by most insurance policies. https://www.waze.com/carpool >Auto insurance policies in many states including California typically allow not for profit, share-the-expense carpooling. Waze Carpool is designed to help riders and drivers share the cost of carpooling on a given ride. It is not designed to allow a driver to make a profit or to earn a salary.…

Underscoring that, the WSJ article notes that "Waze’s current pilot charges riders at most 54 cents a mile". This is equal to the federal standard mileage reimbursement rate for 2016 (https://www.irs.gov/uac/newsroom/2016-standard-mileage-rates...). Which suggests they're trying to aim for exactly that, using an established standard for the per-mile cost.

Re: Google Takes on Uber with New Ride-Share Service

#196

Post by ChuckMcM »

euyyn wrote: post #183
ChuckMcM wrote: post #144

Ok, not unexpected given that Drummond stepped back from being a board member, of course they got that seat by buying nearly 7% of the company[1]. Which if they had sold it to the other investors who came in on $62.5B round[2] they could have taken about $900M out which they could use to start their own ride sharing service. Sort of like drinking the Unicorn's blood to create a spell that will kill the Unicorn. The i…

You're saying all that as if, right before Drummond stepping back, Uber hadn't announced that they'd start doing self-driving cars, pretty much forcing him to step down out of conflict of interest.

I'm not sure I understand, are you saying this is some tit-for-tat move after Uber acquired Otto? Sounds a bit Machiavellian even for Uber and Google. Would love to hear the actual back story if that is the case.

Re: Google Takes on Uber with New Ride-Share Service

#197

Post by dragonwriter »

amyjess wrote: post #184
dragonwriter wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Waze has been owned by Google and shared data -- both mapping and traffic, etc. -- with Google Maps for years. Using Waze, in a very real sense, is using Google Maps, and vice versa. Heck, the new Google service at issue in this thread is Waze Carpool .

Waze does not use the same data as Google Maps. Google Maps always gives perfectly-accurate directions to where I live. Waze does not give accurate directions to where I live. It goes out of its way to force drivers to enter a gated community that's adjacent to my complex. What's even worse is that the entrance to my complex and the entrance to that gated community are on separate arterials [0], and if you try to ent…

> Waze does not use the same data as Google Maps.

They share (some) data, they may not use entirely the same data. Though your problem seems quite possibly something else:

> Google Maps always gives perfectly-accurate directions to where I live. Waze does not give accurate directions to where I live.

That could be "not using the same routing algorithm" rather than "not using the same data".

Re: Google Takes on Uber with New Ride-Share Service

#199

Post by jjawssd »

gambiting wrote: post #147
res0nat0r wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it is because they aren't getting paid $2.13/hr like servers in the USA are.

In Poland a common wage per hour for a server is 5 pln(low end) - 10 pln(high end)/hour = 1.28/2.56 USD. Tipping is just weird, full stop.

> Tipping is just weird, full stop.

How does this conclusion follow from your previous statement?

Re: Google Takes on Uber with New Ride-Share Service

#200

Post by budde »

youarewhite wrote: post #175

Lets talk for a moment about this plague on society. This social justice warrior bullshit is getting really old really quick. Human beings are becoming unbelievably weak

I will never for the life of me understand why pointing out that some people have been fortunate to have an easier path in life than others is so offensive to some folks. I think people see it as a way to try to diminish what some have accomplished rather than trying to shine light on the inequality that exists in society.

Additionally, "social justice warrior" is truly a pejorative that says more about the person using it than its target.

Post reply on HN