Uber Boston Has Been Served • Hacker News Board

Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served

#91

Post by twoodfin » Wed, Aug 15, 2012, 12:54 AM UTC

lectrick wrote: post #83

bri3d wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Exactly. And as the trusted middleman, Uber has every commercial incentive to spot check its drivers.

Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served

#92

Post by drstewart » Wed, Aug 15, 2012, 12:55 AM UTC

emmett wrote: post #68

mindslight wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Phone-based GPS, really?! They probably should be taken to task by weights and measures. But why is Uber even metering the trip distance? If they incorporated the destination address to the booking, they could calculate an exact price based on time of day/projected congestion/etc. Then they'd have even better consumer protection than a taxi cab (where the driver still has an incentive to go a more expensive route).

They know your start location because you call them there. They use GPS to determine your end location, to save time. Uber doesn't really even publish a rate schedule for how much you pay, and it doesn't have stable prices. They go up during periods of high demand, for example. So it's unclear why you'd object to the GPS, except to mess with them; you don't know what you're going to pay in any case.

There is very clear pricing posted on their site: https://www.uber.com/cities/san-francisco

Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served

#93

Post by joehobby » Wed, Aug 15, 2012, 1:04 AM UTC

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,…

High end prostitutes seem to be able to get buy without the "benefit" of regulation.

boards exist specifically to ID bad actors and where good ones can build community reputation:

http://www.theeroticreview.com

http://p411.com

Or so I have heard

Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served

#94

Post by dreamdu5t » Wed, Aug 15, 2012, 1:30 AM UTC

jaylevitt wrote: post #85

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 rat…

Thanks for such an insightful post :)

Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served

#95

Post by uuilly » Wed, Aug 15, 2012, 2:14 AM UTC

drone wrote: post #88

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 o…

So on one hand, the world is rife with thieves and scoundrels and the state is the only thing standing between what we have now and Mad Max. On the other hand you're willing to entrust people working for the state with with powers undreamed of by the thieves and scoundrels.

But what happens if thieves and scoundrels hold positions within the state? Restaurant owners pay them to make laws against Food Trucks. Cab drivers pay them to make laws against Uber. Hotel owners pay them to make laws against AirBnB. In the wrong hands, the regulatory state becomes a weapon. That is what is happening now.

Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served

#96

Post by chaz » Wed, Aug 15, 2012, 2:18 AM UTC

lectrick wrote: post #83

bri3d wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It shouldn't be our burden to be verify the accuracy or integrity of cab meters, gas pumps, or deli scales. When's the last time you brought your own jug or scale? Common consumer protections like these are what the government should be doing on our behalf. I think there's a clear case for why cabs should be subject to such inspections, and gives us the confidence to jump into any cab. Given the nature of Uber, whether or not Uber needs to fall under the same rules is less clear.

Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served

#97

Post by DannoHung » Wed, Aug 15, 2012, 2:28 AM UTC

gojomo wrote: post #84

DannoHung wrote: post #66

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. 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 mech…

An untrackable actor can't pick someone up or be paid, but how hard is it for the actor to lie to the system? How hard is it for them to change their identity to the system? How hard is it for the counterparty to cause problems and how hard is it for him to change his identity?

And what if there are competitors to Uber? What if these competitors, as part of their attempt to get a wider car network refuse to rate those actors? Why would anyone want to be on the Uber network if they can get jobs on the other one? This isn't a static problem. There are a lot of dynamic variables in play and you're hoping that random action will lead to a steady state that is optimum for all the system participants.

But not all game systems work like that.

I'm not saying that Uber ought to be shut down outright. I just think it's ridiculous to assert that all regulation can be torn up just because certain metrics can be tracked.

Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served

#98

Post by tedunangst » Wed, Aug 15, 2012, 2:30 AM UTC

twoodfin wrote: post #91

lectrick wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Exactly. And as the trusted middleman, Uber has every commercial incentive to spot check its drivers.

As the company that gets paid more the farther you go, Uber also has a rather different commercial incentive...

Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served

#99

Post by neilk » Wed, Aug 15, 2012, 2:35 AM UTC

defen wrote: post #65

rhizome wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You might also be interested in the concept of regulatory capture, which is kind of rent-seeking's opposite (IANAE). Say you have a company that provides web-security audits and you help press for a law requiring websites to have current security audits. Boom, guaranteed business.

The most ridiculous example of this that I've seen is that some states require a license for the practice of interior design . Louisiana comes to mind but I believe there are others. It's really an example of the phenomenon that a small group of dedicated individuals with a vested interest in an outcome are often able to overcome a much larger group that has a small, diffuse, or unknown interest in the opposite outco…

This was in the NYTimes a few weeks ago: "So you think you can be a hair braider?" Not without two years of cosmetology school, which should set you back $16,000.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/17/magazine/so-you-think-you-...

Nobody's arguing that people who perform a service shouldn't have an awareness of basic hygiene, and that could definitely be regulated... but requiring $16K up front is just rent-seeking.

Not to mention, these sorts of jobs have often been the first step that young people and immigrants take in their careers, and the whole reason is that it doesn't take any capital investment, although it needs a lot of labor and a reputation for skill. When someone adds an arbitrary financial hurdle to clear, it feels particularly unfair to me.

Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served

#100

Post by tedunangst » Wed, Aug 15, 2012, 2:39 AM UTC

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…

The dice are possibly outside the purview of the MA Board of Commercial Tariffs and Sales, or whatever the heck it's called, which likely has a long list of all the products it cares about and the correct way for a merchant to measure them. If you were selling the dice by weight, you may in fact need to buy an approved scale and have it inspected periodically to comply with the law.