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

Uber revolution will not last

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 123 posts

Re: Uber revolution will not last

#91

Post by dx034 »

bambax wrote: post #84
WalterBright wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I won't believe cities are serious about reducing congestion until they fix the traffic lights to dynamically maximize flow. No, it isn't done already. Too often, I am in a platoon of 20 cars that has to slam to a stop so one car can cross the intersection on the cross street, and then there's yet another minute of red with nobody in the intersection. You'd think with cameras already installed on the lights that this…

In Paris the idea is to make the city more hostile to cars (any car, your private car, taxis, ubers) by reducing the number of roads they are allowed onto. The city voted yesterday to close the main road through the city ("quais rive droite") after the equivalent road in the other way ("quais rive gauche") had been closed 3 years ago. I think London is thinking of doing the same (plans to close Oxford Street?) How it…

Yes, London is planning to close Oxford street, it just has to figure out how buses can be redirected in a smart way to allow shoppers to get there easily. Furthermore, one of the busiest intersections (bank) will be closed to all vehicles but buses from next year on. The fact that it will even be closed to black cabs is a strong signal.

In addition to that there are also plans to revert some of the 70's car-friendly areas in the city. Mainly roads that were designed to be one-way to ease traffic flow will be made less car-friendly. This is supposed to slow down traffic which should make it safer for cyclists and pedestrians. ("The one-way system encourages high traffic speeds, which is at odds with the City's aspiration for safer streets within the Square Mile.") [0]

I'm not aware that there is any project in London at the moment that will ease congestion, it's all about making life for pedestrians and cyclists easier. As a cyclist, I really welcome that trend. The new cycle-superhighways [1] are a great thing, IMO.

[0] Project 48: https://tfl.gov.uk/travel-information/improvements-and-proje...

[1] https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/cycling/routes-and-maps/cycle-super...

Re: Uber revolution will not last

#92

Post by jventura »

tjbiddle wrote: post #81

People can say all they want: That self-driving cars will take over, that Uber is over-valued, that Uber shouldn't have bet on China, that the industry won't last, that people don't want xyz. Things aren't so black and white - and the market is different in different parts of the world, for better or worse. I've been living in Indonesia (I'm an American citizen) for the past year and GO-Jek is the big runner here. It…

It's called race to the bottom..

Re: Uber revolution will not last

#93

Post by PakG1 »

pfarnsworth wrote: post #50
PakG1 wrote: post #44

The quality of the article isn't that great. But it made me think about this anyway. If Uber can achieve Kalanick's stated end game goal of driverless cars, it will absolutely last. A lot of Uber's pressures come with having to deal with drivers. I don't know what percentage, but it's significant. Variable costs, legal issues, ride quality, and so on. If all of that disappears, Uber is playing an entirely different g…

It's the opposite. Once fully self-driving cars are completely actualized, then ridesharing companies like Uber will collapse, because the entire thing becomes a commodity. Right now, there's a lot more to Uber and ride-sharing than just matching cars and riders. There are layers of complexities that are created because you need to deal with real humans on both ends. Once you get rid of human drivers, anyone can buil…

Yeah, but the self-driving tech is a proprietary trade secret. Tesla's not sharing their self-driving tech. GM is not sharing their self-driving tech. Uber is not sharing their self-driving tech. If that moat is not easily surmountable, Uber has a long-term fighting chance. Uber does not have a long-term fighting chance if they stick with traditional drivers.

It's like ISPs, no? Back in the day, anyone could become an ISP, just lease various telephone lines for running 33.6kbps to customers, and if you wanted to go fancy, T1. At the end of the day, telecom providers found it much nicer to keep their lines and become the ISPs themselves. It wasn't profitable for 3rd parties to lease those lines and try to be an ISP. Ridesharing companies similarly don't have their own cars and tech, they need to use someone else's cars and tech. Car manufacturers are making a similar switch as what ISPs did; they see a logical road that leads to becoming ridesharing companies. Uber is trying to flip the game and develop their own technology to become an ISP that owns its own lines. They're not trying to manufacture the cars though. They're just trying to manufacture the tech that goes on top of the cars, since they don't have manufacturing expertise. It'll be enough to just buy the cars from someone else and put their tech on top.

Re: Uber revolution will not last

#94

Post by tonylemesmer »

necessity wrote: post #39
barney54 wrote: post #25

From the title I hoped it the article would make an interesting argument, but most of it was the same complaints about Uber that we have heard for years including that Uber evades livery laws. Well, livery laws are terrible and unjust, as are taxi medallions. Complaining about Iner drivers not being professional also misses the mark because they are much better than regular taxi drivers in my experience. Has this guy…

The whole article sounds like a PR piece, I'm surprised it was so well received here.

I agree. Found myself liking Uber more after the first couple of questions.

Re: Uber revolution will not last

#95

Post by taxicabjesus »

pfarnsworth wrote: post #50
PakG1 wrote: post #44

The quality of the article isn't that great. But it made me think about this anyway. If Uber can achieve Kalanick's stated end game goal of driverless cars, it will absolutely last. A lot of Uber's pressures come with having to deal with drivers. I don't know what percentage, but it's significant. Variable costs, legal issues, ride quality, and so on. If all of that disappears, Uber is playing an entirely different g…

It's the opposite. Once fully self-driving cars are completely actualized, then ridesharing companies like Uber will collapse, because the entire thing becomes a commodity. Right now, there's a lot more to Uber and ride-sharing than just matching cars and riders. There are layers of complexities that are created because you need to deal with real humans on both ends. Once you get rid of human drivers, anyone can buil…

> Once you get rid of human drivers, anyone can build a ride-sharing system. It just takes enough money to buy enough cars, and the ride sharing app, and that's it.

Cars have to be cleaned. A small percentage of people leave trash behind. A driverless car won't know or care that the last passenger left their odor in the back seat...

Re: Uber revolution will not last

#96

Post by WalterBright »

Monory wrote: post #80
WalterBright wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I won't believe cities are serious about reducing congestion until they fix the traffic lights to dynamically maximize flow. No, it isn't done already. Too often, I am in a platoon of 20 cars that has to slam to a stop so one car can cross the intersection on the cross street, and then there's yet another minute of red with nobody in the intersection. You'd think with cameras already installed on the lights that this…

There are also more static variants. I know that Yandex collaborated with Zelenograd [0] (city to the north of Moscow) to optimize timings of city traffic lights. Yandex has similar data to what Google does in other places, due to Yandex.Maps app, and they reported to increase average car speed at many intersections without dropping average at any other one. On the example shown, average car speed at one particular i…

Using statistics is one way, but is suboptimal. An optimal system would use the cameras to adjust to each situation like a traffic cop would. Though I bet even a modest adaptive light system could do better than a cop, for the simple reason that lights could coordinate with their neighbors.

Re: Uber revolution will not last

#97

Post by WalterBright »

bambax wrote: post #84
WalterBright wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I won't believe cities are serious about reducing congestion until they fix the traffic lights to dynamically maximize flow. No, it isn't done already. Too often, I am in a platoon of 20 cars that has to slam to a stop so one car can cross the intersection on the cross street, and then there's yet another minute of red with nobody in the intersection. You'd think with cameras already installed on the lights that this…

In Paris the idea is to make the city more hostile to cars (any car, your private car, taxis, ubers) by reducing the number of roads they are allowed onto. The city voted yesterday to close the main road through the city ("quais rive droite") after the equivalent road in the other way ("quais rive gauche") had been closed 3 years ago. I think London is thinking of doing the same (plans to close Oxford Street?) How it…

Congestion in an inner city can reach a point where fiddling with the lights won't accomplish anything. But in moderate traffic areas, big improvements should be possible and practical.

After all, once an adaptive system is created, it could be installed on most intersections.

I keep thinking of adaptive car fuel injection systems that Ford uses. It's so adaptable that they're pulled off of 90's Mustangs and installed on Mopar V8's from the early 70's, despite being a completely different engine with different firing order, etc., and people have reported great results.

Re: Uber revolution will not last

#98

Post by webjunkie »

bambax wrote: post #84
WalterBright wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I won't believe cities are serious about reducing congestion until they fix the traffic lights to dynamically maximize flow. No, it isn't done already. Too often, I am in a platoon of 20 cars that has to slam to a stop so one car can cross the intersection on the cross street, and then there's yet another minute of red with nobody in the intersection. You'd think with cameras already installed on the lights that this…

In Paris the idea is to make the city more hostile to cars (any car, your private car, taxis, ubers) by reducing the number of roads they are allowed onto. The city voted yesterday to close the main road through the city ("quais rive droite") after the equivalent road in the other way ("quais rive gauche") had been closed 3 years ago. I think London is thinking of doing the same (plans to close Oxford Street?) How it…

I never understood the interior layout of subways in Paris... they have seats positioned right at the door, where people would stand normally. It seemed to me like everyone was always stepping on each others toes, and on each stop the whole train was shuffeling around for people to get in and out.

Re: Uber revolution will not last

#99

Post by tluyben2 »

ezzaf wrote: post #38
quanticle wrote: post #15

I don't understand the point he's making about traffic congestion. He's claiming that "Uber is putting more cars on the street". More compared to what? Compared to everyone driving themselves? If Uber wasn't around, the alternative would not be people taking public transport. The alternative wouldn't be people waiting 35 minutes for taxis. The alternative would be people driving in themselves, causing greater congest…

That's an interesting question. I know I've tried to get a cab during a busy time and just given up and caught public transit home. Generally this is Friday and Saturday nights, when most people are in no condition to be driving themselves. I also find Uber fares are about price comparable to public transit when travelling with multiple people, and so for that reason I could see it displacing trips previously taken w…

Besides that I would rather walk than ever take public transit, I agree; Uber is comparable in price and definitely (much, sometimes 5-8x, but mostly 3x) cheaper than regular taxis. Public transit, in my mind, should be gov owned and be free, but I know a know that won't happen any time soon. So then I would always prefer Uber. Yesterday I had some snafu with my Uber registered phone number and had to take a normal cab in Hongkong; crap old car, pissed off driver, tried to take another route and more expensive than an Uber Black. Sorry, but how does that work? I sit in a dangerous vehicle that in my country probably would not pass ITV vs a monster of a new Toyota Vellfire or Audi A8 for more money???

In the UK when I travel with my colleagues an Uber is frequently not much more expensive and sometimes cheaper than public transit; I really don't get why people pay for that stuff if you can get door to door while being able to work in quiet and comfort. It's basically like a private driver for the price of a few train tickets...

The most heard complaint is that public transit is more reliable and no traffic jams... But a warm/or AC car, quiet and comfortable is a work place you can trust; I don't mind jams in those. I do mind standing in a station for a cancelled train with 2000 of my best friends in the rain and then not even getting to the door of my destination for (almost) the same price...

So I do think Uber does entice more cars on the streets; I am not sure if that's the case right now, but I definitely see that it is possible.

Edit: on the other hand, if I would live close to / in a city with Uber, I would not buy a car... I use it way too little to warrent the hassle. I have no idea if there are more people who have that though; seems people still have this thing about owning a car even if it makes no sense. That's not some judgement; it makes sense in very many cases but it doesn't for me and it doesn't for many others but still they have one or two :)

Re: Uber revolution will not last

#100

Post by pas »

kayoone wrote: post #58
quanticle wrote: post #15

I don't understand the point he's making about traffic congestion. He's claiming that "Uber is putting more cars on the street". More compared to what? Compared to everyone driving themselves? If Uber wasn't around, the alternative would not be people taking public transport. The alternative wouldn't be people waiting 35 minutes for taxis. The alternative would be people driving in themselves, causing greater congest…

Uber is not available in Germany but when i can't get a cab i will usually resort to public transport because i mostly use a cab when i am not allowed to drive anymore or parking in that area is impossible. Also a 20 minute Taxi ride alone can easily be 15-17EUR in Berlin, so it's kind of a pricy alternative when public transport would be 2,70 EUR for the same distance.

It was available in Berlin last year. Did they get "banned"?
Post reply on HN