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

Uber Founder Travis Kalanick Resigns as C.E.O.

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

801–810 of 1001 posts

Re: Uber Founder Travis Kalanick Resigns as C.E.O.

#801

Post by neuromantik8086 »

davidf18 wrote: post #758
ajamesm wrote: post #724

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yeah, real shame that the unmitigated sexual harassment got in the way of their complete avoidance of regulations

The regulations by and large were simply there to protect incumbents that wanted to keep out competition which offered higher customer value (by offering lower cost, more responsive, less greenhouse gas) service. Unlike AirBnB which does break NY City and NY State laws, Uber has been following regulations that are imposed by the NYC Taxi & Limousine commission (e.g., screening drivers, etc.).

I see this "incumbents" narrative touted a lot, but it just ain't so. Non-medallion livery companies (black cabs) have been in NYC for a looooong time.

Re: Uber Founder Travis Kalanick Resigns as C.E.O.

#802

Post by davidf18 »

CPLX wrote: post #770
davidf18 wrote: post #701

Much of the resistance to Uber (such as laws that were broken, protests) were from entrenched interests. At least where I live in NYC, Uber was dramatically improving customer value while providing innovations that reduced greenhouse gas. It provided completion for the entrenched Yellow Cab monopoly with its very high rates. Sometimes Uber would have higher rates but then you could take a Yellow Cab instead. The Yell…

This is factually incorrect. You're drawing a direct parallel between medallion taxis and Uber/Lyft rides, when they are not in fact the same at all. The outer boroughs, and every neighborhood in the city, has had car service options for decades, where you call a phone number (or often walk to a local storefront stand) to get a ride. This is the exact market segment that Uber has entered. Literally. There wasn't and…

> This idea that there "were no taxis" in the boroughs and now there are is ridiculous.

The few times I tried to take those services the service was horrible, horrible.

Now, thankfully, Uber is available and they have much better service and they have a single identifiable reliable brand and they take credit cards.

Uber pool where unrelated riders ride in the same car are going to have less greenhouse gas than riders taking separate cars. This is logical.

Re: Uber Founder Travis Kalanick Resigns as C.E.O.

#803

Post by Analemma_ »

stale2002 wrote: post #772
discodave wrote: post #716

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When Uber and Lyft came, the rates were lower, one could use Uber Pool to have even lower rates > not forcing drivers to pay excessing leasing fees for vehicles. Err, the cheaper rates were due to uber subsidising rides with VC money, which was unsustainable. Uber also did start a leasing program for drivers.

People keep saying that, and yet prices still haven't risen. I feel like a decade from now people are going to still be repeating this same old line. It also seems awesome. Why wouldn't I want VCs to give away a bunch of money to its customers? No, it is not going to run taxis permanently out of business. All you need is a car to do that. If this is really true, as soon as prices rise, another taxi company can start…

> People keep saying that, and yet prices still haven't risen.

Uber is still losing money hand over fist. It has to come to an end at some point, either when they finally raise prices or they just go bankrupt.

> It also seems awesome. Why wouldn't I want VCs to give away a bunch of money to its customers?

A couple reasons:

1. VCs don't "give away money". They invest, with the expectation that their investment will be returned many times over. Given that it is explicitly Uber's goal to have a monopoly on transportation, you can extrapolate what that means for their intended pricing strategy if they ever manage to take over.

2. While taxis may or may not be an example of this, it's important to realize that VC-backed dumpi^H^H^H^H^Hpromotional pricing can destroy existing businesses even if those businesses were competitive and sustainable. For example: wash.io, which I commented about here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13608376#13608798. They shuttered a whole bunch of laundromats in SF, which was all for nothing since they went out of business anyway. That's not a healthy dynamic.

Re: Uber Founder Travis Kalanick Resigns as C.E.O.

#804

Post by [deleted] »

blackrose wrote: post #614
camelite wrote: post #83

Should we believe men too when they're victimised by women, or is this a one way deal? What if it's a man and a woman accusing each other, or two men or two women. What if the dude is a historically oppressed minority?

> or is this a one way deal? FFS, dude. Men hold the vast majority of power in our society. No cards are stacked against them. No old fashioned norms are still levied on them everytime a woman speaks to them. They aren't constantly reminded by our culture to be gentlemen or look handsome or bring home the bacon or do anything they don't want to. To say "think of the men!" here is either willfully ignorant or just bei…

[deleted]

Re: Uber Founder Travis Kalanick Resigns as C.E.O.

#805

Post by harmegido »

macspoofing wrote: post #735
post_break wrote: post #563

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He didn't say that women don't lie about harassment, just that they are taken more seriously. Similar to rape claims.

No. Nobody argues sexual harrassment claims shouldn't be taken seriously. Nobody argues rape claims shouldn't be taken seriously. Nobody. That's not what OP argued. It's a common meme to argue that claims of sexual harrassment and sexual assult should be assumed to be true. That's insane. It upends our entire notion of Justice.

Nobody says they don't take these things seriously, but an glance at the data will show you that many don't actually take them seriously.

Re: Uber Founder Travis Kalanick Resigns as C.E.O.

#806

Post by davidf18 »

driverdan wrote: post #786
davidf18 wrote: post #701

Much of the resistance to Uber (such as laws that were broken, protests) were from entrenched interests. At least where I live in NYC, Uber was dramatically improving customer value while providing innovations that reduced greenhouse gas. It provided completion for the entrenched Yellow Cab monopoly with its very high rates. Sometimes Uber would have higher rates but then you could take a Yellow Cab instead. The Yell…

I downvoted you because this has nothing to do with the article. Whether or not Uber is a good thing is not relevant to Kalanick stepping down or the rotten culture he cultivated.

Uber under TK was criticized for breaking laws, but those laws were in place to protect incumbents from market entry. In NYC, were AirBnB does break NYC and NY State laws, Uber does not. It follows the rules of the NYC Taxi & Limousine Commission. Except for the Mayor that tried to restrict Uber/Lyft for political reasons to help the incumbents, we New Yorkers welcome Uber/Lyft.

Re: Uber Founder Travis Kalanick Resigns as C.E.O.

#807

Post by erikpukinskis »

kevinburke wrote: post #671
efuquen wrote: post #606

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you go to a police station and report a murder do you think they'll a) investigate your claim or b) ignore you? That is the sort of belief we're talking about, a serious investigation with the assumption the person reporting it is not lying. The investigation itself could of course result in not sufficient evidence being found. It's really not that complicated.

Not sure who "we" is but far too frequently at tech companies, harassment allegations are ignored. For that matter prominent men sometimes admit to harassment and are acquitted anyway.

Also, people fired for making complaints.

That has the nice property that it's illegal, the whistleblower can get compensated, but only if they already have the means to wage a legal battle.

Re: Uber Founder Travis Kalanick Resigns as C.E.O.

#808

Post by blackrose »

hyperdunc wrote: post #429
kevinburke wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people that report harassment are taking a big career risk (and if they go public like Mrs. Fowler did, inviting abuse from Internet mobs) by doing so, so yes, I'm going to default to believing people that report harassment unless I can find credible evidence it didn't happen.

The trust of people like yourself is definitely going to be abused by people who want to smear others.

And trusting people to have free speech is definitely going to be abused by people who want to say controversial things. And trusting people to use encryption is definitely going to be abused by criminals who want to commit crimes. And trusting people to own kitchen knives is definitely going to be abused by people who want to stab others.

Yes, we can all make factually true, but totally irrelevant arguments that don't change anything.

Re: Uber Founder Travis Kalanick Resigns as C.E.O.

#809

Post by [deleted] »

blackrose wrote: post #614
camelite wrote: post #83

Should we believe men too when they're victimised by women, or is this a one way deal? What if it's a man and a woman accusing each other, or two men or two women. What if the dude is a historically oppressed minority?

> or is this a one way deal? FFS, dude. Men hold the vast majority of power in our society. No cards are stacked against them. No old fashioned norms are still levied on them everytime a woman speaks to them. They aren't constantly reminded by our culture to be gentlemen or look handsome or bring home the bacon or do anything they don't want to. To say "think of the men!" here is either willfully ignorant or just bei…

[deleted]

Re: Uber Founder Travis Kalanick Resigns as C.E.O.

#810

Post by [deleted] »

blackrose wrote: post #740
camelite wrote: post #653

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Men hold the vast majority of power in our society. No cards are stacked against them. If you "believe women who report sexual harassment", and more specifically, if you believe women who report sexual harassment in "less clear cut" scenarios than Susan Fowlers, then you are deliberately stacking the deck against the specific men who are accused of sexual harassment, some of whom will invariably be innocent. How mu…

> then you are deliberately stacking the deck against the specific men who are accused of sexual harassment, some of whom will invariably be innocent. This is really a stretch in logic, and the oxymoronic "some of whom will invariably be innocent" gives away your motives on this topic. Parent comment was saying we should give a little more credibility to reports that women make about sexual harassment in the workplac…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN