As we all debate about this on Peter Thiel backed YC Hacker News.
Hacker News (February 19, 2007) predates Thiel's involvement in YC (Mar 10, 2015) by quite a few years, no?
Lyft surges to the top 10 on App Store following the “DeleteUber” campaign
211–220 of 573 posts
Re: Lyft surges to the top 10 on App Store following the “DeleteUber” campaign
#212Earlier quoted context omitted.
People keep saying that and it's just not a good point. I'm sure there's a lot of Republicans involved with every company. Peter Thiel is just yet another one of them. I wouldn't let him investing in Lyft turn you away- everyone including him is learning that Trump is bad for business. If you go off 1 guy's name to avoid a company rather than their actual business practices , no partisan from either side could buy an…
If the argument is delete Uber because the CEO supports Trump because he's a part of Trump's advisory board, then it is a good point. Thiel directly helped Trump win and was a part of the transition board. If you just want to delete Uber not because of Trump, then it's not a big deal then.
I don't really care who supports whom. If you vote Trump and use your company resources to feed the orphans then I'm going to patronize you anyway. Results, not intentions.
Re: Lyft surges to the top 10 on App Store following the “DeleteUber” campaign
#213Earlier quoted context omitted.
This sort of thinking is so tragically misguided. If the only sane people who might potentially have Trump's ear turn away from this role, then the only people advising Trump are the extremely dangerous group he currently has! This is the far bigger danger then appearing to "legitimize" him (as if someone who was elected president needs any more legitimacy). The good he could do as an adviser is orders of magnitude g…
Normally I would agree, because that's true in most cases. But we're past that here. The Germans went with it, and I'm sure some thought at the start that going along would let them do some good. Look how that turned out. No, it's not okay to just do business as usual here and try to nudge things a bit with policy suggestions. It's time for much more active responses.
Ah, Godwin's Law. I hope when you reflect back on these times in a year or so you realize how childish it was to compare stopping some Muslims from some unstable countries (not even the big Muslim countries) with literally exterminating Jewish people and blaming them for all of the country's problems.
Re: Lyft surges to the top 10 on App Store following the “DeleteUber” campaign
#214Earlier quoted context omitted.
Normally I would agree, because that's true in most cases. But we're past that here. The Germans went with it, and I'm sure some thought at the start that going along would let them do some good. Look how that turned out. No, it's not okay to just do business as usual here and try to nudge things a bit with policy suggestions. It's time for much more active responses.
Ah, Godwin's Law. I hope when you reflect back on these times in a year or so you realize how childish it was to compare stopping some Muslims from some unstable countries (not even the big Muslim countries) with literally exterminating Jewish people and blaming them for all of the country's problems.
> from some unstable countries
Like Mo Farrah, an olympic gold medal winning athlete and British citizen?
Re: Lyft surges to the top 10 on App Store following the “DeleteUber” campaign
#215Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the argument is delete Uber because the CEO supports Trump because he's a part of Trump's advisory board, then it is a good point. Thiel directly helped Trump win and was a part of the transition board. If you just want to delete Uber not because of Trump, then it's not a big deal then.
I don't really care who supports whom. If you vote Trump and use your company resources to feed the orphans then I'm going to patronize you anyway. Results, not intentions.
Assuming that you already know that Lyft also "broke the strike" in exactly the same way as Uber, Uber is paying for the earnings of Uber drivers trapped out of the US by the ban, and also set up a $3M legal fund to directly help any drivers that have troubles. How does that stack up vs the $250k/yr for 4 years that Lyft donated to ACLU?
Re: Lyft surges to the top 10 on App Store following the “DeleteUber” campaign
#216Earlier quoted context omitted.
> All I'm saying is that it would really suck to be someone caught at the airport in the mess... Then imagine how it must feel to be one of the people affected by the ban. That's the point of the strike: "Oh you think this is inconvenient?"
When has this strategy ever worked? This is not how you appease or bring about change.
When has appeasing ever worked as an instrument of social change?
Re: Lyft surges to the top 10 on App Store following the “DeleteUber” campaign
#217Dan Primack summarised this well; Uber failed on messaging: "Uber has done a lot of questionable things over the years, but its actions this past weekend vis-a-vis Trump's immigration ban weren't among them. An actual timeline from Saturday, which may differ from what you saw on social media: • 4:20pm ET: CEO Travis Kalanick sent email to employees. It stopped short of explicitly opposing the ban, but did say: (1) Th…
Uber broke the strike by breaking the strike. This absurd focus on whether surge pricing was a multiplier or disincentive is a complete distraction. The taxi drivers reached out and asked Uber for solidarity. They dispatched drivers to break the strike. They made their bed in the court of public opinion, now they can lie in it.
I honestly don't care about taxi drivers and reject the idea that they hold some moral ground. I'm glad they're all going out of business. And if they decide to hold a strike, there's zero reason for Uber or Lyft to want to be beholden to them.
Re: Lyft surges to the top 10 on App Store following the “DeleteUber” campaign
#218Earlier quoted context omitted.
Taxis, if regulated by the city, are effectively a utility provided partially by the city.
Regulation of a private service does not obligate the operators of that service to offer it, unless those regulations specifically require it.
Same with public services, right? Some states prohibit strikes, but as far as I know that just means fining the unions. I'm not aware of any US jurisdiction that compels individuals to perform labor (excepting things like military conscription and community service sentences for crimes).
Re: Lyft surges to the top 10 on App Store following the “DeleteUber” campaign
#219Why protest an issue that affects innocent people by creating another issue that affects innocent people? This is not persuasive and only leads to further disagreement against the actual movement. Creating more friction is not the way to motivate change.
Immigration/border officials going on strike and refusing to follow the ban order would be much more effective.
Re: Lyft surges to the top 10 on App Store following the “DeleteUber” campaign
#220Earlier quoted context omitted.
Collaborating with the administration legitimizes and normalizes their policies of hate. This does far more damage than any marginal benefit from "speaking into the president's ear". I'm sure it's good for Uber to be on Trump's team, but don't pretend you're "standing up for what's right".
This sort of thinking is so tragically misguided. If the only sane people who might potentially have Trump's ear turn away from this role, then the only people advising Trump are the extremely dangerous group he currently has! This is the far bigger danger then appearing to "legitimize" him (as if someone who was elected president needs any more legitimacy). The good he could do as an adviser is orders of magnitude g…
It seems highly unlikely to me that Kalanick has any ability to influence Trump/Bannon's policy in this area. But I'd like to address to aside you made about "legitimacy".
GP talked about legitimizing policies. That is quite different than questioning the legitimacy of the electoral vote.
Trump signed an order that was illegal, apparently, to lawyers and laymen alike, because it authorized revoking legal permanent residents of their right to entry into the US without due process. Federal judges have ruled this to be the case, and yet for unknown reasons certain Border Patrol/Homeland departments are defying that order (which is not in keeping with their legitimate authority).
It's substantially likely to be illegal even without that exclusion because it includes discrimination based on the Christian faith of residency applicants.
The Constitution is the source of the legitimacy of presidential orders, and this policy is in multiple ways incompatible with that.