In Video, Uber CEO Argues with Driver Over Falling Fares • Hacker News Board

Re: In Video, Uber CEO Argues with Driver Over Falling Fares

#71

Post by moogly » Tue, Feb 28, 2017, 9:47 PM UTC

pjwal wrote: post #47

noobermin wrote: post #40

Watching as someone who already doesn't like Kalanick due to recent news, but at first, I didn't really take sides. The driver engaged first, and his tone was a little more tensive than Kalanick's. Moreover, Kalanick's argument seems sensible[0] regarding why he might have had to lower rates. However, once Kalanick's retort essentially becomes "you're not taking personal responsibility and blaming others (ie., me)" h…

I don't consider it a fair discussion when the driver falsely insists the fair is $2.75/mile, when it is $3.75/mile and continues to pound the theme when Kalanick had already given his explanation. What is the driver expecting? For Uber to go back and raise fairs on Uber Black?

1) He didn't "insist" it was $2.75. He mentioned the figure once. 2) When he quoted the figure, he said "and it's now what, $2.75?" clearly implying that he's not entirely sure about the current rate.

Re: In Video, Uber CEO Argues with Driver Over Falling Fares

#72

Post by dtparr » Tue, Feb 28, 2017, 9:47 PM UTC

stagbeetle wrote: post #61

placeybordeaux wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Travis is the CEO that is responsible for the flow of money into the driver's paycheck.

So is Jamie Dimon if I'm a janitor at JPMorgan Chase. But he isn't my boss.

Interesting. I would say he's not be your immediate supervisor, but he's definitely your boss.

Re: In Video, Uber CEO Argues with Driver Over Falling Fares

#73

Post by AlexandrB » Tue, Feb 28, 2017, 9:47 PM UTC

harryh wrote: post #64

ProfessorLayton wrote: post #36

I hope that at the end of all this, we as a society realize that we need to actually enforce, as well as update the rules we set regarding employment. We're effectively subsidizing companies that find loopholes, or simply ignore laws. - Contractor-not-a-contractor employment merely pushes costs and risks on to the worker. We all end up paying for the worker's social safety net, and costs of doing business (Such as in…

> Why shouldn't it be the companies doing business? Why should it be the companies doing business? Just because someone happens to work for Walmart/Uber/whoever, I don't see why it means that employer suddenly becomes responsible for meeting any particular set of needs that person might have. If we, as a society, decide that there should be minimum standard of living for citizens than we should fund that from taxes p…

> If we, as a society, decide that there should be minimum standard of living for citizens than we should fund that from taxes paid by all.

I agree, this is the other - perhaps bette - solution. But the corporations that reap huge benefits from public education, infrastructure, healthcare, etc. (and those who currently disproportionately profit from those corporations) need to start contributing their fair share.

Re: In Video, Uber CEO Argues with Driver Over Falling Fares

#74

Post by carniaclaly » Tue, Feb 28, 2017, 9:47 PM UTC

KirinDave wrote: post #65

jimrandomh wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are separate laws for video and for audio. Recording video is allowed in most places; audio recording is much more restricted, and as far as I know making this recording was not legal if it was in California. However, litigating it would cause so much more PR damage that it will almost certainly won't be.

You agree to surveillance when you use these cars.

No you don't. Show me where that's in the terms?

Re: In Video, Uber CEO Argues with Driver Over Falling Fares

#75

Post by timthelion » Tue, Feb 28, 2017, 9:47 PM UTC

seertaak wrote: post #46

This will probably be an unpopular opinion, but I actually thought the driver was exceedingly rude. He clearly took advantage of Kalanick being in the public eye, and thus a "target". Filming him without acknowledging it was totally immoral, it should reduce any fair person's bayesian priors as to the credibility of the driver. I'm no fan of Kalanick, but I thought he comported himself reasonably, taking the time to…

> Filming him without acknowledging it was totally immoral,

To me this is a very classist oppinion. Normal people are filmed as they take the bus, ride the subway, go on the elevator, walk through the graveyard (seriously), go shopping, so why should a rich person who can afford a cab be granted an exclusive right to privacy which the rest of us don't have? If we promote this case due to the expectation of privacy that only serves to create this devide between rich and poor in which only the rich can afford privacy rather than a precident in which everyone deserves it.

Re: In Video, Uber CEO Argues with Driver Over Falling Fares

#76

Post by simplehuman » Tue, Feb 28, 2017, 9:48 PM UTC

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #16

To me this illustrates one of the biggest problems we have in america which is the crazy firewall between rich and poor. Kamel wanted to have a serious discussion with Kalanick about how his decisions as CEO were affecting Kamel's life and Kalanick gets upset about this. That's your job! At least it should be. If you can't even handle light criticism from the people you employ, you shouldn't be at the top.

Have you worked at a big company? In none of the fortune 500 companies have I met the CEO who has taken a minute to explain like Travis tried. In fact in some of the companies I worked for the CEO won't even respond to email.

Re: In Video, Uber CEO Argues with Driver Over Falling Fares

#77

Post by harryh » Tue, Feb 28, 2017, 9:48 PM UTC

AlexandrB wrote: post #73

harryh wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why shouldn't it be the companies doing business? Why should it be the companies doing business? Just because someone happens to work for Walmart/Uber/whoever, I don't see why it means that employer suddenly becomes responsible for meeting any particular set of needs that person might have. If we, as a society, decide that there should be minimum standard of living for citizens than we should fund that from taxes p…

> If we, as a society, decide that there should be minimum standard of living for citizens than we should fund that from taxes paid by all. I agree, this is the other - perhaps bette - solution. But the corporations that reap huge benefits from public education, infrastructure, healthcare, etc. (and those who currently disproportionately profit from those corporations) need to start contributing their fair share.

As Mitt Romney famously said: corporations are people my friend. Which is to say, they are made up of people. Anything that is benefiting a corporation is benefiting those people. Those people pay taxes. That is how the fair share gets paid.

Re: In Video, Uber CEO Argues with Driver Over Falling Fares

#78

Post by simplehuman » Tue, Feb 28, 2017, 9:49 PM UTC

nilved wrote: post #21

dswiese wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is driven by the argument that drivers are not employees. He has no vested interest in the drivers circumstances.

As far as he is concerned drivers are not humans.

How did you reach this conclusion?

Re: In Video, Uber CEO Argues with Driver Over Falling Fares

#79

Post by unityByFreedom » Tue, Feb 28, 2017, 9:49 PM UTC

rockarage wrote: post #44

Travis is right on a technicality they did not lower Uber Black prices much if any. What they did instead was coerced Uber Black drivers to take Uber X request. Yes drivers can reject Uber X request, but if you reject a certain amount of Uber rides, they kick you off their system. Probably why the driver is complaining about going bankrupt, you need a luxury car to drive Uber Black, but if you're stuck picking Uber X…

Thanks for the explanation.

This sounds a lot like mortgage crisis. There, borrowers said they didn't understand the terms of loans that had changing rates (ARMs), and banks said they didn't mislead anyone because the terms were in the contract.

These fights explain why we have government regulation and education to sort things out. We can't have the rich constantly taking advantage of the poor, and we can't have the poor be so uneducated as to not understand the risk of a NINA loan. It isn't good for the growth of the country.

Re: In Video, Uber CEO Argues with Driver Over Falling Fares

#80

Post by chickenfries » Tue, Feb 28, 2017, 9:49 PM UTC

seertaak wrote: post #46

This will probably be an unpopular opinion, but I actually thought the driver was exceedingly rude. He clearly took advantage of Kalanick being in the public eye, and thus a "target". Filming him without acknowledging it was totally immoral, it should reduce any fair person's bayesian priors as to the credibility of the driver. I'm no fan of Kalanick, but I thought he comported himself reasonably, taking the time to…

> This will probably be an unpopular opinion

Well what do you know, at the time of writing this, it's the top comment!

> The fact that the footage of him with two women wasn't cut out is frankly disgusting and a total invasion of his privacy. He didn't do anything wrong except flirt a bit. How tawdry of Bloomberg to show that material.

It's relevant because he said things like this:

“That’s kind of how I roll. I make sure every year is a hard year. If it’s easy I’m not pushing hard enough.”

at a time when we're supposed to be trusting that Kalanick is fixing his company's culture...

> the most blatant character assassination

Where was the character assassination? They just reported on what happened in the video. The video is relevant to the public interest. Do you have a right to not be filmed in an Uber... maybe? I don't know. It's not my car, and the driver could need the film for their own protection. I think I would be okay with being filmed as long as it wasn't secret.