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

Uber Boston Has Been Served

blog.uber.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 139 posts

Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served

#81

Post by mikeryan »

andrewpi wrote: post #44
tptacek wrote: post #4

Two tickets were apparently issued: (i) For operating an unlicensed livery service (ii) For using a non-approved mechanism for metering the ride The C&D at issue here covers (ii). At its heart, the complaint is that Boston has standardized on a way of metering passengers, and Uber has replaced that standard with GPS. Presumably, cab drivers in Boston could not simply choose to replace their meters with GPS monitors,…

Except Uber isn't a cab, it's a private car service, which is generally less regulated. Rates for private car services are generally negotiated between the driver and passenger, and if both parties agree to use Uber's GPS-based software, I don't see what Massachusetts's problem is.

The argument they are making is that both parties are agreeing to traveling a certain distance for a certain price. But the tool which measures the distance must be an approved measurement device in order to prevent fraud.

I can agree to pay my super market a dollar for a pound of apples, but the dept. of weights and measures still validates the scale. That's the consumer protection that the state is arguing for.

Note the whole is it a cab or isn't it argument isn't actually germaine to this complaint (they actually dropped the unlicensed livery service complaint) its wholly based on the legitimacy of the measuring device

Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served

#82

Post by bonzoesc »

bri3d wrote: post #80
bonzoesc wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> With Uber, the payment takes place later and an e-mail receipt is sent, and the fares are seemingly intentionally obfuscated (see: the controversy about displaying peak v. off-peak pricing as a multiplier rather than a dollar amount). Hence, a driver using a malicious Uber Driver app to report a few more blocks travelled on each trip is much less likely to be detected than a cabbie physically and obviously entering…

I'm unlikely to be able to identify a discrepancy on a map in an unfamiliar place - but the map-in-email feature does bring Uber much closer to a regulated cab meter, especially since it can be reviewed by a more knowledgeable person later. It still doesn't match the "system audited by a supposedly independent government inspector" aspect of a regulated cab meter (i.e. to prevent Uber from using fake distance calcula…

> I'm unlikely to be able to identify a discrepancy on a map in an unfamiliar place - but the map-in-email feature does bring Uber much closer to a regulated cab meter, especially since it can be reviewed by a more knowledgeable person later.

I suspect that the routing features in "Google Maps" would be useful.

Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served

#83

Post by lectrick »

bri3d wrote: post #46
untog wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm torn too, but the meter thing is a very sensible point. Taxi meters in NYC (the only market I have experience with) are basically entirely locked boxes- the drivers can't do anything beyond poke the buttons on the front. This is, of course, very sensible- otherwise there's a danger of unscrupulous drivers modifying their meters to charge passengers more. This is only the case for yellow cabs in NYC, though- I'm s…

I agree that the metering complaint is valid - I suspect it may be possible to create a nefarious drop-in replacement Uber Driver app which reports longer rides. The only location / metering source Uber has the iOS app and there's no additional hardware or software protection on the driver's Uber iPhone beyond the standard OS protections, which are easily circumvented by a jailbreak. In contrast, real taxi meters pro…

> The only location / metering source Uber has the iOS app and there's no additional hardware or software protection on the driver's Uber iPhone beyond the standard OS protections, which are easily circumvented by a jailbreak.

It would be hardly difficult to verify metered distance via Google Maps or one of many other mapping type apps on the iPhone. There's about a million of them.

Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served

#84

Post by gojomo »

DannoHung wrote: post #66
gojomo wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The small parts of the regulation that weren't rent-seeking -- a legitimate interest insuring a certain level of safety and responsibility, back when it was hard to hold bad-actors accountable -- have been made obsolete by mobile/reputation/marketplace technology. Now, bad or inconsistent service can be made widely known almost instantly -- not just through Uber's own mechanisms, but also other review/complaint platf…

> The small parts of the regulation that weren't rent-seeking -- a legitimate interest insuring a certain level of safety and responsibility, back when it was hard to hold bad-actors accountable -- have been made obsolete by mobile/reputation/marketplace technology. What? No they haven't. And it's still hard to hold bad actors accountable. Especially if you don't have the foresight to identify them perfectly. > Now,…

And it's still hard to hold bad actors accountable. Especially if you don't have the foresight to identify them perfectly.

In any system like Uber where dispatching, metering, and payment are all handled by devices, no foresight is required, and it is trivial to hold bad actors accountable. An untrackable actor can't even pick someone up, much less be paid.

There were informational problems which hindered market mechanisms from working, but those problems are now solved. The musty regulations, and the fears that drove them, are anarchronistic curiosities of a bygone era.

Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served

#85

Post by jaylevitt »

tptacek wrote: post #4

Two tickets were apparently issued: (i) For operating an unlicensed livery service (ii) For using a non-approved mechanism for metering the ride The C&D at issue here covers (ii). At its heart, the complaint is that Boston has standardized on a way of metering passengers, and Uber has replaced that standard with GPS. Presumably, cab drivers in Boston could not simply choose to replace their meters with GPS monitors,…

Boston has standardized on a way of metering taxis.

Taxis get a government-sponsored monopoly - a limited-quantity medallion - which allows them the right to pick up a passenger anywhere in a given territory (e.g. Boston, but not Cambridge). In exchange, they are required to pick up ANY passenger when on duty (they cannot legally decline to drive you somewhere), and they are required to charge you pre-determined rates as measured by a pre-determined meter.

Livery, or "black sedan" services, are not permitted to pick up arbitrary passengers who are hailing a cab. However, they are also not required (or allowed) to have a medallion, and they are not bound by any metering or pricing regulations at all.

I believe the theoretical distinction is that when hailing a cab, you are in a position of no negotiating power - you are limited to whatever cabs happen to drive by. "Being able to hail a cab" is a public utility. So the city has pre-negotiated a generally acceptable contract.

In contrast, you (pre-2012) are negotiating a contract with a livery company. You can choose any livery service you want from a phone book or directory, you can ask about their rates, pick a specific time, perhaps choose the type of car, etc. There's no "certified" locked meter, because the price is something you negotiate, and you have a choice of vendors.

Here's where Uber flips the industry on its head. Medallion owners tolerated livery companies, because without the medallion, livery services were restricted to pre-arranged rides, and most livery services couldn't offer a large enough fleet to provide low dispatch times without advance notice.

Uber forms a communications network linking ANY interested livery driver with ANY interested passenger. You pre-arrange the ride, but you pre-arrange it minutes before pickup. And Uber provides an Internet-era dispatch system; they've replaced grumpy dispatchers, two-way radios, and kickback systems with two iPhones (yours and the driver's) with built-in GPS. They can route your "call" directly to the closest in-network driver. Uber isn't a florist; they're FTD.

As far as I can tell, Massachusetts doesn't have any statewide regulation of livery services; each town has its own rules. Worcester apparently had a "12-hour rule" that defined what qualifies as a "pre-arranged ride", but that's been suspended or something.

So IANAL, but here's the situation as I see it:

- Uber isn't operating a livery service, period. They provide a dispatching network that's used by licensed livery drivers. - Livery drivers don't have to use any kind of meter. They charge a negotiated price. With an Uber driver, you have negotiated a price based on "mileage as the iPhone GPS records it".

Which gets back to "which measurement devices used in trade are regulated in Massachusetts"? See my cup-of-dice comment elsewhere.

Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served

#86

Post by kd5bjo »

emmett wrote: post #69
tptacek wrote: post #4

Two tickets were apparently issued: (i) For operating an unlicensed livery service (ii) For using a non-approved mechanism for metering the ride The C&D at issue here covers (ii). At its heart, the complaint is that Boston has standardized on a way of metering passengers, and Uber has replaced that standard with GPS. Presumably, cab drivers in Boston could not simply choose to replace their meters with GPS monitors,…

So with #1, that's the Boston's right. But it's not what the C&D is about, so we should set that aside. This is about #2. With regards to #2, it's clearly reaching. You can make an argument that they're "measuring the distance with the iPhone", but clearly they're measuring it with GPS. The iPhone is not a measuring device. If they used the accelerometer in the iPhone to measure distance, it might be a fair point. If…

Yes and no; the location accuracy of a GPS receiver is strongly dependent on the accuracy of its timing source. The Dept of Weights & Measures generally certifies the accuracy of each physical device. In theory, the drivers could get their phones certified for measuring location and have one of those green stickers on the back that one of the other commenters mentioned.

In practice, any driver that tries will probably find it basically impossible to do, as I believe your analysis of the city's motive is correct.

Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served

#87

Post by anateus »

creativename wrote: post #41
untog wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm torn too, but the meter thing is a very sensible point. Taxi meters in NYC (the only market I have experience with) are basically entirely locked boxes- the drivers can't do anything beyond poke the buttons on the front. This is, of course, very sensible- otherwise there's a danger of unscrupulous drivers modifying their meters to charge passengers more. This is only the case for yellow cabs in NYC, though- I'm s…

About taxi meters: from my experience, the mileage may be fixed, but it always seems that the cab driver is able to press something/manipulate the box somehow when they need to add additional fees (in Boston, specifically, in fact). For instance, when I get picked up at many airports the cab driver adds some additional fee (usually between $3 and $8). For all I know, they're just making this number up - how would I k…

At least in Boston, there is a strict rule about having a fixed cost for rides from/to the airport. Cabs aren't allowed to deviate from the posted rates for those.

Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served

#88

Post by drone »

uuilly wrote: post #35

Uber, AirBNB and Food Trucks are interesting for two reasons: 1) They are on a collision course with the regulatory state. 2) Their employees are, by and large, young liberals. Cab medallions are not much different in concept than wind and solar subsidies. In both cases, the government is picking a winner. Our types of companies have been happily immune from the meddling of the regulatory state. As we crawl out into…

Interesting point. I looked back at the world where no such regulations existed, and I didn't see a perfect market which quickly and efficiently eradicated charlatans and thieves. No, instead I saw a world where people were constantly being preyed upon by the guiled class. I saw a world where the only people you could really trust were those in your close personal circle, and every transaction with a 3rd party, new or known, was rife with risk.

The "regulatory state" didn't come about as a predicted social experiment, it came about by constantly reacting to an endless stream of malfeasance that constantly stood to wreck any possibility of a functioning free market.

Cities and states regulating measurements and fare mechanisms are generally a -good- thing, even when it affects some darling company. For every darling company that wants us to "just trust them to do the right thing, they're good Silicon Valley-types," there are a dozen would-be scamsters plotting how they can take advantage of similar models to make free money. The constant "free market response" is "Oh, well, people will just shop somewhere else." Yes, after having lost their money (some times many, many people losing their money) AND their trust in any company like the same.

The world of figuring cab fares doesn't exactly need to be "turned on its head," it's a well-established practice of livery that's been going back for hundreds of years (perhaps more - I don't know the complete history). Yes, new technology can make it more efficient, but how inefficient is the current system exactly? Is it worth the risk? This is what local communities ask themselves. Why should one company be granted the permissions to step outside of the decision process and state they don't want to follow the community rules?

Every action by a government, and most especially inaction (failure to regulate) picks winners and losers. Failing to regulate pollution levels, cab fares, food safety, etc. make winners out of moderately unscrupulous types and moderately scrupulous types. Certain forms of regulations can make winners out of either the highly scrupulous, or the highly unscrupulous.

Nothing tastes bad to me about not letting cabs just use their iphones to automatically calculate fares from unmonitored and unvetted software. It makes it harder for Uber to make money? Well crap, cry me a river, it's better than making it easier on the thieves - society has chosen that path over millennia.

Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served

#89

Post by URSpider94 »

jaylevitt wrote: post #78
dsr_ wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Everything which is not forbidden is allowed". Sure. Massachusetts forbids you from operating a commercial service that charges based on the readings of measuring equipment that does not meet the standards of the Department of Weights and Measures. Taxi meters do. Standard car odometers don't. You can calculate with an abacus or an Apple, but your market fruit scale has a seal indicating that it was inspected and pa…

OK, but how does MA decide which equipment is considered a measuring device used for trade? Are grocer's scales and gas pump meters a special case that's explicitly regulated, or is anything that (a) takes a measurement while (b) in the path of a transaction regulated? My supermarket sells cheddar for $8/pound. When they take some cheese and price it, the scale that decides it's 8 oz of cheese is a regulated scale. B…

I think there's some interesting sociology / anthropology tied up in this.

Reading through the MA regs, it looks like they primarily regulate:

-- Scales of all kinds -- Volumetric measurements for petroleum products and dairy products -- Taxi meters -- other commerce tools (grocery store scanners, change machines, bottle/can refund machines, etc)

It's a truism that weight is a much more accurate way to specify products than volume, which is why even liquids like self-serve soup at the grocery store are sold by mass, not volume.

However, we are historically used to buying gasoline, milk and ice cream by the gallon or liter, not the pound or kilo. It's also interesting that milk and ice cream are the fluids mentioned besides petroleum products in the state code -- we give dairy products a very special place in our culture. In Massachusetts, a 1967 law actually makes it illegal for stores to give away free milk!

Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served

#90

Post by asmithmd1 »

jaylevitt wrote: post #78
dsr_ wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Everything which is not forbidden is allowed". Sure. Massachusetts forbids you from operating a commercial service that charges based on the readings of measuring equipment that does not meet the standards of the Department of Weights and Measures. Taxi meters do. Standard car odometers don't. You can calculate with an abacus or an Apple, but your market fruit scale has a seal indicating that it was inspected and pa…

OK, but how does MA decide which equipment is considered a measuring device used for trade? Are grocer's scales and gas pump meters a special case that's explicitly regulated, or is anything that (a) takes a measurement while (b) in the path of a transaction regulated? My supermarket sells cheddar for $8/pound. When they take some cheese and price it, the scale that decides it's 8 oz of cheese is a regulated scale. B…

Verizon sells me internet access with different prices for different speeds. I would like to know how those speeds are measured and with what kind of device: theoretical max? average for one minute? average for 5 minutes?
Post reply on HN