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

In Video, Uber CEO Argues with Driver Over Falling Fares

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 348 posts

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

#131

Post by feelix »

wopwopwop wrote: post #54
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, 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. Why? If I were a driver, you can be sure I would be filming everyone. Does that mean I w…

> And the gig has gotten harder for longtime drivers. In 2012, Uber Black cost riders $4.90 per mile and $1.25 per minute in San Francisco, according to an old version of Uber's website. Today, Uber charges $3.75 per mile and $0.65 per minute. Black car drivers get paid less and their business faces far more competition from other Uber services.

Considering that he did change the price from under the driver, and that is very likely what did indeed bankrupt the guy, I don't blame him from acting out in any way he can.

The fact that the CEO just screams out "BULLSHIT" when he points out the price decrease which affected him and that his only response just makes me lose respect for him completely.

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

#132

Post by caffeinewriter »

iraphael wrote: post #130
oculusthrift wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

look up 2 party consent laws in California.

that's for use of a recording in court, not sure it applies to this situation

What? No.

> The statute applies to "confidential communications" -- i.e., conversations in which one of the parties has an objectively reasonable expectation that no one is listening in or overhearing the conversation. See Flanagan v. Flanagan, 41 P.3d 575, 576-77, 578-82 (Cal. 2002). A California appellate court has ruled that this statute applies to the use of hidden video cameras to record conversations as well. See California v. Gibbons, 215 Cal. App. 3d 1204 (Cal Ct. App. 1989).

If there's a reasonable expectation of privacy, all parties must consent to the recording.

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

#133

Post by beejiu »

chickenfries wrote: post #95
beejiu wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They would not be able to publish the video, however. That would be illegal.

Why?

In the UK specifically, it would fall under the Data Protection Act. You need to make sure that the data (video) is used fairly and lawfully and for a defined purpose. In this case, the purpose of collection is safety, not for publishing on Bloomberg.com.

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

#134

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

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

#135

Post by sedachv »

8ytecoder wrote: post #125
PeterisP wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the consumers are voting with their wallets that they want more Uber X rides and less Uber Black rides, well, that's what should happen. To bring supply back in line with demand, some drivers who used to drive Uber Black should either leave or downgrade, and if they won't do it willingly, then some drivers going bankrupt is a way how the market forces "driver supply" to go in the direction where it apparently need…

I'm not sure I follow as to why they have to accept Uber X requests. If there is less supply for Black cars, what's wrong with them sitting idle? What if they miss a request for a black car while they are driving their uber x customer around?

Forcing Black drivers to accept X requests invalidates any claims Uber has about their drivers being independent contractors instead of employees.

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

#136

Post by untog »

PeterisP wrote: post #120
unityByFreedom wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think releasing the video was right. Regarding Uber black, another HN user points out, > 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 ab…

If the consumers are voting with their wallets that they want more Uber X rides and less Uber Black rides, well, that's what should happen. To bring supply back in line with demand, some drivers who used to drive Uber Black should either leave or downgrade, and if they won't do it willingly, then some drivers going bankrupt is a way how the market forces "driver supply" to go in the direction where it apparently need…

Sure, but the way Uber is set up means the costs from that adjustment are bourne entirely by the driver, who was probably advised by Uber to take our a lease on an expensive luxury car in order to pick up expensive fares.

Bear in mind the start of this thread was discussing the driver being rude. You can call it "market forces" as much as you like, but if Uber is happy to sit back and let its drivers pay the price, its CEO can expect to be given a hell of a lot of abuse in return. And he'll deserve it. Don't expect to be treated well when you don't treat others well.

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

#137

Post by grandalf »

I always ask the drivers how they like Uber, whether they have considered Lyft (most use both), etc.

The only group of highly disgruntled drivers are the ones who lived in the overpriced period of black cars that existed before Uber came into the market.

The driver probably spent $97K on a luxury car expecting to be able to make the prevailing black car driver wage at the time.

Uber did a great service to consumers by democratizing driving services, and now money flows to so many other people and does tremendous benefit to society.

I'm glad Travis stood up for himself. Maybe if that driver had been more rational and less inclined to gripe about other people's successes causing his life to be miserable, he might have started Uber. He likely had a big advantage over Travis in terms of familiarity with the industry and would have made fewer mistakes early on.

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

#138

Post by dandelany »

wybiral wrote: post #114
hsod wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think I would be okay with being filmed as long as it wasn't secret. Would you be OK with the video being published on a major news site?

News and paparazzi are kind of an unfortunate consequence of being a public figure. You're not in a private place in someone else's car...

I'm not sure you're right, legally speaking. At the very least it's a grey area. I certainly have the "reasonable expectation of privacy" (the legal test) in a hotel room that I don't own - a hired car doesn't seem that different to me. When you see an actor get into a car to avoid the paparazzi - they rarely own the car, and reasonably expect the driver not to film them and upload to TMZ or something. (IANAL, TINLA)

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

#139

Post by neaden »

PeterisP wrote: post #120
unityByFreedom wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think releasing the video was right. Regarding Uber black, another HN user points out, > 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 ab…

If the consumers are voting with their wallets that they want more Uber X rides and less Uber Black rides, well, that's what should happen. To bring supply back in line with demand, some drivers who used to drive Uber Black should either leave or downgrade, and if they won't do it willingly, then some drivers going bankrupt is a way how the market forces "driver supply" to go in the direction where it apparently need…

IANAL but my understanding is that this sort of are claiming Uber drivers are employees vs. contractors. If they are contractors then they should be able to refuse rides from a different class freely and without any sort of punishment.

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

#140

Post by mikeash »

PeterisP wrote: post #120
unityByFreedom wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think releasing the video was right. Regarding Uber black, another HN user points out, > 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 ab…

If the consumers are voting with their wallets that they want more Uber X rides and less Uber Black rides, well, that's what should happen. To bring supply back in line with demand, some drivers who used to drive Uber Black should either leave or downgrade, and if they won't do it willingly, then some drivers going bankrupt is a way how the market forces "driver supply" to go in the direction where it apparently need…

In a properly functioning market, drivers would be going bankrupt due to not having enough fares, not by being forced to take unprofitable fares.

If customers are voting with their wallets that they want more UberX and less Uber Black, then Uber Black drivers should be faced with a choice of chasing volume or margins, not forced to subsidize customers.

Post reply on HN