Live data from Hacker News

Uber’s transit offering just went live in Denver

techcrunch.com

71–80 of 106 posts

Re: Uber’s transit offering just went live in Denver

#71
post #68

I'm worried about tying public transpiration to companies that aren't / don't know if they're at all profitable.

You should be much more concerned about tying transportation to a company that _is_ profitable. The point of public transportation is to provide an external benefit. Uber will just interpose itself and extract rents.

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying / the benefit of using a company that is not profitable...

Re: Uber’s transit offering just went live in Denver

#72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use Citymapper for this; have for years ( https://citymapper.com/ ). It does exactly what you're asking for. I too am surprised that Google hasn't eaten their lunch by baking this into Google Maps.

Oh, I hadn’t seen that! But hmm, it doesn’t seem to have jump bikes/scooters, Lyft scooters, bird, or lime in the scooters section, and again there’s no multi-mode.. it just shows walking/biking/Uber/public transit but not a combination of them. It does have a jet pack option which is nice and forward thinking! :)

citymapper has scooters/bikes and multi-mode

actually it's famous for the second one

Re: Uber’s transit offering just went live in Denver

#73
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google Maps announced this back in October: > Drive , walk and ride : support for mixed-mode commutes > There’s a new feature for people whose commutes involve both driving and public transit. You can see helpful information about when to leave, and for each leg of your trip: you’ll know if there’s traffic on your drive, when the next train departs, and how long it’ll take to walk from the train station to the office…

Caveat: That feature only works if you pay with enhanced access to your (unrelated) data, by enabling Web and App Activity tracking/logging.

This is completely absurd and should be grounds for a GDPR complaint for any EU friends.

Wonder if that’s why this is US only.

Re: Uber’s transit offering just went live in Denver

#74
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should be much more concerned about tying transportation to a company that _is_ profitable. The point of public transportation is to provide an external benefit. Uber will just interpose itself and extract rents.

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying / the benefit of using a company that is not profitable...

There is no mention of such a benefit in the comment you are replying to. The point is that the qualifiers you applied in your original comment should be less worrisome than their opposites, which is not to say that they shouldn't be worrisome.

Re: Uber’s transit offering just went live in Denver

#75
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google Maps announced this back in October: > Drive , walk and ride : support for mixed-mode commutes > There’s a new feature for people whose commutes involve both driving and public transit. You can see helpful information about when to leave, and for each leg of your trip: you’ll know if there’s traffic on your drive, when the next train departs, and how long it’ll take to walk from the train station to the office…

Caveat: That feature only works if you pay with enhanced access to your (unrelated) data, by enabling Web and App Activity tracking/logging.

I recently flushed years of Google history but I kept the tracking enabled. I’ll keep flushing it regularly and you could do the same.

I don’t really care that they track me for a short time, it’s not like they don’t keep logs anyway.

Re: Uber’s transit offering just went live in Denver

#76
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use Citymapper for this; have for years ( https://citymapper.com/ ). It does exactly what you're asking for. I too am surprised that Google hasn't eaten their lunch by baking this into Google Maps.

I suspect that curating accurate transit data is a lot of boring, never ending work, and on the other hand, Google don't think they will have big enough money there(without building something like UBER, not their style), so they don't bother.

Google built an API/data standard to standardise this type of data, exactly to solve this problem.

Re: Uber’s transit offering just went live in Denver

#77

Seems like a data play. You’ll likely enable location in the Uber app, so now they’ll get your location passively when you’re just searching public transit routes. Turn that around and resell the location data to other data aggregating businesses. Or use it in-house to augment forecasting or pricing models. Seems slimey to me. Public funds should be providing app access for this sort of thing, with audits to demonstr…

I look at it more in the sense of Uber's product not being a rideshare app, but being a "move you from point A to B in the best way possible app" (best = meets your cost/time/comfort needs).

Here's a good writeup on the "jobs to be done": https://stratechery.com/2018/aggregators-and-jobs-to-be-done...

Re: Uber’s transit offering just went live in Denver

#79
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The goal is to let the Uber app do (or at least suggest) the mode choice for you. So instead of thinking 'hmm, I'll use PT, now I need to open app XYZ', you could be 'I want to go from point A to point B. Let me open the Uber app to check my options.' And those options would include the travel times and costs of all available modes. Basically, the goal is to have one 'transport' app, and that would be the Uber app. R…

I was in Costa Rica and I used Google Maps to navigate my way around some beaches and stuff. And to look at the satellite imagery. Nothing to do with directions or even roads. No way Uber is competing with that.

Just serving up a bunch of maps and satellite imagery is probably one of the easier things to replicate though.

Re: Uber’s transit offering just went live in Denver

#80
post #74
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying / the benefit of using a company that is not profitable...

There is no mention of such a benefit in the comment you are replying to. The point is that the qualifiers you applied in your original comment should be less worrisome than their opposites, which is not to say that they shouldn't be worrisome.

Why would they be less worrisome?
Post reply on HN