Earlier quoted context omitted.
Uber is a low-wage job that is extremely easy to get (no interview required) and has very few skills as a prerequisite. McDonalds fits those criteria as well.
Not incredibly easy to get, you do need a pretty-nice car. I make okay money and my car would not suffice.
Uber CEO Plays with Fire
331–340 of 529 posts
Re: Uber CEO Plays with Fire
#332I really hope Lyft doesn't do anything to screw up, as I've uninstalled Uber and will probably never use the service again. However, I don't see myself going back to regular taxi system as that's even more corrupt and despicable. I just hope Lyft plays the game with a social conscious and makes positive decisions and continues to treat drivers well (most Lyft drivers I talk to say they like driving for Lyft way bette…
>regular taxi system as that's even more corrupt and despicable. The idea that the taxis are corrupt and despicable is 100% Uber/Lyft propaganda. The idea that a bunch of immigrants driving 12 hours a day to support a meager income for their families are a cabal of special interests is ridiculous. Uber and Lyft are better than taxis because of the on demand nature and they are cheaper because of better utilization. B…
I've been kicked out of cabs more than once when the driver learned I'm deaf and I would give them the address of my destination on paper. Got kicked out because I was signing with my friend in the back. Etc.
Re: Uber CEO Plays with Fire
#333From the article, explained: At the time, Uber was dealing with widespread account fraud in places like China, where tricksters bought stolen iPhones that were erased of their memory and resold. Some Uber drivers there would then create dozens of fake email addresses to sign up for new Uber rider accounts attached to each phone, and request rides from those phones, which they would then accept. Since Uber was handing…
Rider and drivers are randomly assigned. I am not sure if you can choose your driver. Not sure if all these drivers in China made a huge group to benefit each other
Re: Uber CEO Plays with Fire
#334Earlier quoted context omitted.
>regular taxi system as that's even more corrupt and despicable. The idea that the taxis are corrupt and despicable is 100% Uber/Lyft propaganda. The idea that a bunch of immigrants driving 12 hours a day to support a meager income for their families are a cabal of special interests is ridiculous. Uber and Lyft are better than taxis because of the on demand nature and they are cheaper because of better utilization. B…
Taxi's have regulations and laws they have to follow. It isn't a perfect system, but you know there are certain precautions Taxi drivers are taking. You have a different kind of safety with Uber. There are always tradeoffs.
Re: Uber CEO Plays with Fire
#335Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also, the thing is this is not really the loan shark situation. People who go to loan shark know exactly what they're getting into--borrowing money. People who signed up for unroll.me signed up because they got sick of all the the spammers and wanted to get away from all that easily. Most people including me, thought they would somehow monetize with ads or something like that, but never thought they would sell our in…
You have to be naive to give a service access to a trove of your private data and expect them to just leave it there...
Re: Uber CEO Plays with Fire
#336Earlier quoted context omitted.
> lede It may be of interest to you, but it isn't the lede of the story. The lede is a pattern of behavior by the CEO, of which that is one element.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bury_the_lede OP is implying the "real story" (i.e. the most important part of the article) is not what the article begins with
Re: Uber CEO Plays with Fire
#337I really hope Lyft doesn't do anything to screw up, as I've uninstalled Uber and will probably never use the service again. However, I don't see myself going back to regular taxi system as that's even more corrupt and despicable. I just hope Lyft plays the game with a social conscious and makes positive decisions and continues to treat drivers well (most Lyft drivers I talk to say they like driving for Lyft way bette…
I don't think you can support a ridesharing company that by design treats employees as contractors and also be socially conscious . If you really want to do this use public transportation .
Re: Uber CEO Plays with Fire
#338Earlier quoted context omitted.
I worked for a company that nearly acquired unroll.me. At the time, which was over three years ago, they had kept a copy of every single email of yours that you sent or received while a part of their service. Those emails were kept in a series of poorly secured S3 buckets. A large part of Slice buying unroll.me was for access to those email archives. Specifically, they wanted to look for keyword trends and for receip…
... This is why I treat equity and ipo as monopoly money. It's ok that we pay you sub market salary because you get great ipo and equity. Yeaaaah no.
When you bump into your colleagues in the morning you have an extra talking point.
Re: Uber CEO Plays with Fire
#339I don't know but Uber has proven to be a shinny example of a ponzy scheme within a larger ponzy scheme. They will never be profitable, Burning billions, so is the case with Careem whom I met, and their staff was at loss to tell how this is a viable business to run. They disrupted taxi drivers, making good earnings. They benefited a lot to consumers eliminating overcharging by common taxi drivers. But as an entreprene…
Re: Uber CEO Plays with Fire
#340Earlier quoted context omitted.
From their own site: "Unroll.Me is a free service ", emphasis added. If it's free for you, you're the product.
>If it's free for you, you're the product. So hypothetically, if you paid $5 a month for this service, you would be confident they were NOT selling your information? Since the answer is obviously no (and in fact, purchasing behavior is the juiciest stuff to sell, be it Comcast, Target, etc), then this tired trope is meaningless.
No. A statement's truth doesn't imply its inverse [1].
It simply means if a company has employees, and they're receiving paychecks, and the money is not coming from you, then it's definitely coming from someone else.
If you are giving them money, it doesn't mean they're not also getting money from somewhere else. But they're less likely to need to do that, especially if it would upset their paying customers.