Lyft Is Said to Seek New Funding as Its Rival Uber Stumbles • Hacker News Board

Re: Lyft Is Said to Seek New Funding as Its Rival Uber Stumbles

#481

Post by mi100hael » Thu, Mar 02, 2017, 7:34 PM UTC

xiangmin wrote: post #60

smileysteve wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The key points are - CEO never blackmailed journalists - No major revelations of sexual harassment - ~~No major revelations of political support~~ Related to core business - Surge Limit has prevented complaints about emergency pricing vs Uber. - Lyft takes a lower commission capped at 20%/25% - Lyft has in app digital tipping (drivers keep 100% of tips). Uber's tip policy encourages cash, which is an often cited comp…

> No major revelations of political support They took a kind of strong stance [1] in protesting the recent order that restricted travel from those seven countries, so that's a political statement (whether or not we agree with it.) Their announcement also included some strawman language, which turned off some people: "This weekend, Trump closed the country’s borders to refugees, immigrants, and even documented residen…

No you misunderstand. When they said "no major revelations of political support," they meant "no revelations of political support that I disagree with."

Re: Lyft Is Said to Seek New Funding as Its Rival Uber Stumbles

#482

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Mar 02, 2017, 7:49 PM UTC

dsr_ wrote: post #450

Karunamon wrote: post #435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your proof that the statement is some kind of coded language is what, exactly? Parent's assertion? Please don't assume racism where none has been proven to exist. I absolutely refuse to cease challenging unsubstantiated statements because of this conceptual boogeyman, and so should you.

You are arguing about whether a non-attributed quote which was explicitly intended to show racism via coded language actually shows racism via coded language. If this were an attributed quote, you could go look up the source and argue context. It isn't.

[deleted]

Re: Lyft Is Said to Seek New Funding as Its Rival Uber Stumbles

#483

Post by Karunamon » Thu, Mar 02, 2017, 7:49 PM UTC

subpixel wrote: post #471

Karunamon wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry but that official's statement does not even kinda imply race. Like it or not, bus stops and train stations accessible by everyone are hotbeds of panhandling, pickpockets, and sometimes worse. An area where people just pass through on their way to somewhere else far away, distracted and in a hurry, is a great place for criminal behavior.

To understand the context, this was a white suburb in a largely segregated city twenty years ago. And in that context, the racial implications were very clear. If you read up on the history of public transportation in the US, you will be gobsmacked by the racism at play. To wit: in NYC, the highway to the beach was explicitly designed with overpasses too low to accommodate buses, to keep blacks from the beaches and t…

This is information that was not in play in the original statement - without it, there is no context to make the proclamation in the first place.

Re: Lyft Is Said to Seek New Funding as Its Rival Uber Stumbles

#484

Post by surrealize » Thu, Mar 02, 2017, 7:51 PM UTC

naravara wrote: post #418

jhuckestein wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is, the user experience of Uber, Lyft et al is strictly better than public transport. Some would even say it is 10x better (in the From Zero to One sense). It picks you up whenever you want, wherever you want and drops you off exactly where you need to go. I agree that buses are more ecological, but doesn't this just mean that we should combine Uber and public transport? In the future I see a fleet of large…

>The thing is, the user experience of Uber, Lyft et al is strictly better than public transport. Some would even say it is 10x better (in the From Zero to One sense). A bus can transport about 60 people in footprint of 2-3 cars (which would transport about 15). There is no way a transportation system that revolves around everyone getting into cabs is going to match that sort of efficiency. The "user experience' of su…

> There is no way a transportation system that revolves around everyone getting into cabs is going to match that sort of efficiency.

If _everyone_ used lyft line/uber pool, the vehicles could be larger and more efficient. Uber/Lyft know where people are going; at scale ("everyone") they can aggregate rides more extensively.

Re: Lyft Is Said to Seek New Funding as Its Rival Uber Stumbles

#485

Post by naravara » Thu, Mar 02, 2017, 7:53 PM UTC

cmdrfred wrote: post #429

naravara wrote: post #416

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I agree but the issue becomes any sweeping legislation or tax increase to fund such a program will negatively many millions of people without any benefit to them. Except, you know. Less drunk driving, less traffic, less pollution, fewer road fatalities, and less tax money spent on road maintenance. Those little things. And what "many millions of people?" Public transit is mostly paid for by municipal taxes, not fede…

> Except, you know. Less drunk driving, less traffic, less pollution, fewer road fatalities, and less tax money spent on road maintenance. Those little things. How do people who are not served by public transit feel any of these effects? > And what "many millions of people?" Public transit is mostly paid for by municipal taxes, not federal. My point exactly, this is how it should be but municipalities are rather cash…

>How do people who are not served by public transit feel any of these effects?

What? You realize air tends to circulate right? And people tend to know other people in their lives who get hurt by accidents? And less traffic on roads is an externality that benefits people who drive. As does giving drunks a safe way to get home.

>My point exactly, this is how it should be but municipalities are rather cash strapped at the moment so you likely won't see increased spending on anything. Thus "more public transit" isn't really possible without federal intervention.

Road infrastructure and sprawling development are the reasons they're cash strapped. If they had adopted more transit-centric development patterns they would have raised their tax base to pay for it rather than exporting the people who use their infrastructure to unincorporated 'bedroom communities' where they don't pay into anything.

If we subsidized transit to the extent that we subsidize sprawl this wouldn't be a problem.

>This ignores the positive impacts. If only local roads existed very little trade would be able to take place vastly lowering GDP. Can the system be run in a more cost effective manner, certainly but that would require pushing out the public sector unions that demand unrealistic wages. Pick your poison.

Please review what I wrote. I didn't say not to have highways. I said we hit the point of diminishing returns long ago and additional spending in this direction is no longer beneficial.

Re: Lyft Is Said to Seek New Funding as Its Rival Uber Stumbles

#486

Post by kingnothing » Thu, Mar 02, 2017, 7:58 PM UTC

Gibbon1 wrote: post #183

cpprototypes wrote: post #83

I often wonder what is the natural market price of these services? Basically, without massive VC money distorting everything, how much would a Lyft or Uber ride really cost? I have a feeling it would be much higher than now. Despite all the hype, true level 5 self driving is decades away. When the VC money stops, what are these companies going to do? I think the only viable option for them is Lyft Line/Uber Pool. It…

I saw one economist trying to figure out what the appropriate fare for BART should be. Ans: Free. One place I worked in the early 2000's gave us checks were could redeem for transit. https://commuterbenefits.511.org/docs/faq.pdf One thought might be to have a subsidized ride share system where employers/transit authority pays people to ride share. Impression that based on transit authorities reaction to causal car po…

You can already pay for Uber rides with commuter benefit cards. https://newsroom.uber.com/poolcommutes/

Re: Lyft Is Said to Seek New Funding as Its Rival Uber Stumbles

#487

Post by smileysteve » Thu, Mar 02, 2017, 7:58 PM UTC

subpixel wrote: post #345

wcummings wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"Yes, but poor people use public transportation to come from bad neighborhoods to good neighborhoods to rob us! We must ban all expansion of public transportation!" This is why the (Boston) red line doesn't extend to Arlington.

Replace "poor" with "black" and you have the reason public transportation has been suppressed in large parts of the US. When I lived in Atlanta a suburban city official explained that "we all know the sort of people who hang around bus stops" while killing plans to expand bus service.

Also from Atlanta.

Here's a quote from 1971

Wilson gave to the media at the time, which said, “People fear that rapid transit would give Negroes greater mobility and consider the $0.15 fare as a gift to ‘a certain segment of the population.’”

Re: Lyft Is Said to Seek New Funding as Its Rival Uber Stumbles

#488

Post by smileysteve » Thu, Mar 02, 2017, 8:01 PM UTC

Karunamon wrote: post #435

tzakrajs wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a dog whistle for racists. Please don't apologize for racists.

Your proof that the statement is some kind of coded language is what, exactly? Parent's assertion? Please don't assume racism where none has been proven to exist. I absolutely refuse to cease challenging unsubstantiated statements because of this conceptual boogeyman, and so should you.

I added a quote from a Cobb County (Atlanta Suburb) in 1971 from a GA House Representative.

http://www.mdjonline.com/news/marta-s-expansion-remains-cont...

Re: Lyft Is Said to Seek New Funding as Its Rival Uber Stumbles

#489

Post by naravara » Thu, Mar 02, 2017, 8:08 PM UTC

surrealize wrote: post #484

naravara wrote: post #418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The thing is, the user experience of Uber, Lyft et al is strictly better than public transport. Some would even say it is 10x better (in the From Zero to One sense). A bus can transport about 60 people in footprint of 2-3 cars (which would transport about 15). There is no way a transportation system that revolves around everyone getting into cabs is going to match that sort of efficiency. The "user experience' of su…

> There is no way a transportation system that revolves around everyone getting into cabs is going to match that sort of efficiency. If _everyone_ used lyft line/uber pool, the vehicles could be larger and more efficient. Uber/Lyft know where people are going; at scale ("everyone") they can aggregate rides more extensively.

>If _everyone_ used lyft line/uber pool, the vehicles could be larger and more efficient.

That's called a bus. If I have to ride in an efficiently routed, high capacity vehicle I'm essentially just riding a bus service with an app that tells me when the next bus is coming. What you're describing is just an upgrade to a public transportation system. There is no reason a well administered city government couldn't do all of this.

Hell, a city could develop an app for getting around in it that serves multi-modal transit. You could have an app or a card that works as a single interface for riding buses and trains, renting out a car-share or bike-share, and hailing cabs. There is no concrete benefit to tying their city transit to the whims of a private corporation when they don’t have to.

>Uber/Lyft know where people are going; at scale ("everyone") they can aggregate rides more extensively.

Not "everyone." Just people with smartphones at the moments when they happen to have smartphones with them. It’s also dubious to claim we would realize that many benefits from eking out microefficiencies in aggregating rides. What's the real upside there? Well maintained bus lines in walkable city plans do just fine enough on their own.

Re: Lyft Is Said to Seek New Funding as Its Rival Uber Stumbles

#490

Post by surrealize » Thu, Mar 02, 2017, 8:30 PM UTC

naravara wrote: post #489

surrealize wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is no way a transportation system that revolves around everyone getting into cabs is going to match that sort of efficiency. If _everyone_ used lyft line/uber pool, the vehicles could be larger and more efficient. Uber/Lyft know where people are going; at scale ("everyone") they can aggregate rides more extensively.

>If _everyone_ used lyft line/uber pool, the vehicles could be larger and more efficient. That's called a bus. If I have to ride in an efficiently routed, high capacity vehicle I'm essentially just riding a bus service with an app that tells me when the next bus is coming. What you're describing is just an upgrade to a public transportation system. There is no reason a well administered city government couldn't do al…

The bus doesn't necessarily go where I want to go, when I want to go there. Uber/Lyft do. At scale, they can do both demand-dispatching and ride-aggregation.

> There is no reason a well administered city government couldn't do all of this.

It would be great if they did, but I'm surely not holding my breath for everyone to get a well administered city government. In the hypothetical that we're discussing (uber/lyft usage that's high enough for most rides to be aggregated) the cost of using uber/lyft would be much lower per-rider. In that world, cities would be better off giving residents subsidies for private ride-hailing use.

As long as there's a competitive market with multiple entrants, the cities wouldn't be at the mercy of the private corps. The concrete benefit of the private companies is much more competent technology development, and the option to switch if they're not giving you what you want.

> Not "everyone." Just people with smartphones at the moments when they happen to have smartphones with them.

"Everyone" was the premise of the comment I was replying to. But seriously, smartphone penetration is quite high. And how many smartphone users don't carry their phone with them when they go out?

Buses aren't a good choice for "everyone" either--they only help people whose trips align with bus lines and schedules.