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.
Uber Boston Has Been Served
111–120 of 139 posts
Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served
#112TL;DR: Uber is innovative, but their approach (or lack thereof) to dealing with regulatory hurdles in each city disgusts me. It seems like HN has already picked up on the major issues Uber faces in Boston, as well as pretty much every city: a new style of relationships with drivers, and "metering" virtually-on-demand livery rides, which are intended to be both unmetered and pre-arranged. After seeing this same story…
Nice post, and you definitely bring a certain amount of insight with it. However, the current system is, in many cities, broken. Working to change laws to fix a broken system will produce a better outcome than trying to work within the broken system to bring about its maximum potential. I love and use Uber because it provides a different and better service than taxis do in San Francisco. I don't even own a car, and i…
I definitely agree with you that there is a service gap between Uber and standard taxis. Some of it comes from the app, some of it comes from their quality control.
(On that note: Uber does a really solid job with quality control, and I've personally recommended a stronger emphasis on quality control to fleets we work with. They all seem to want to take us up on it, so I look forward to reporting back on that one soon!)
That said, the points you bring up aren't actually broken by the current regulatory system (save one, sort of... see the asterisk), which is why I am disgusted by Uber's typical reaction to the C&Ds that come their way (and their preparation for them):
- Taxi companies today have a very limited, only-opt-in feedback mechanism: you call and complain if you have a particularly bad or particularly good ride. I've personally spoken with GMs for companies that do hundreds (sometimes thousands) of rides per day about this; they rarely break 20 customer service calls per day. Uber's feedback mechanism -- not a new concept by any means, but new to the industry -- of asking users to rate their ride, and send in some comments after every ride is relatively frictionless and undoubtedly leads to more data points, which can then be shared with drivers to encourage a healthy sense of service. This could and should be adopted by the rest of the industry.
- Again, this is a fantastic innovation, but doesn't need to lie outside the existing regulatory system to succeed; our old business model is proof that they can co-exist. Rarely do cities take issue with apps. Further, most fleets use dispatch systems that directly assign a driver, and all drivers know they will get docked if they take a street hail instead of the passenger they're assigned.*
- Yet again, no regulations prevent this... but I've been the recipient of many a complaining driver myself. While drivers have both legitimate and illegitimate reasons for trying to avoid credit cards (fleets often tax drivers an additional point or two above going credit card rates; credit card transactions must be declared when filing taxes), this again can be solved with an app that respects the current system. In fact, while running HireWinston, we showed our driver partners that the guaranteed 15% tip more than made up for the increased cost they incurred by taking credit cards.
- See first bullet above re: service again.
To sum up, I hear you on all fronts: riding with Uber offers a superior experience to virtually any other cab out there. My point above, however, still stands: all of the innovations and improvements you bring up (which are, from our customer research, consistently the most salient) come from areas that few, if any, regulators take issue with (I know from experience). Which is why, again, I am disgusted by how I've seen Uber deal with regulators.
*I feel for you, though; this situation is at its worst in SF. But on the flip-side, I've heard more "passengers aren't there anymore when our drivers show up" complaints from SF fleets than I have anywhere else in North America. Because of this, it's often more attractive for drivers in the Bay Area to get docked and grab the street hail's certain money than to risk the no-show. IMO, SF taxis and consumers are stuck in this perpetual loop until the supply of taxis increases dramatically.
Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served
#113TL;DR: Uber is innovative, but their approach (or lack thereof) to dealing with regulatory hurdles in each city disgusts me. It seems like HN has already picked up on the major issues Uber faces in Boston, as well as pretty much every city: a new style of relationships with drivers, and "metering" virtually-on-demand livery rides, which are intended to be both unmetered and pre-arranged. After seeing this same story…
Note: I'm not doing anything in that space presently (merely did a thorough exploration of it), all the human factor issues terrified me, I like my good ole hard core math & computer science & engineering challenges! :)
Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served
#114Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cabs are generally required to have fare schedules including fees clearly visible to the rider, to prevent just this sort of scam. Even if the user doesn't know the actual airport fare and the cabbie manages to scam a few riders unfamiliar with the true fare schedule, a tampered-with giant human-readable fare schedule is pretty easy for an inspector or frequent rider to detect and report. Plus, as the user pays the c…
> 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…
Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served
#115TL;DR: Uber is innovative, but their approach (or lack thereof) to dealing with regulatory hurdles in each city disgusts me. It seems like HN has already picked up on the major issues Uber faces in Boston, as well as pretty much every city: a new style of relationships with drivers, and "metering" virtually-on-demand livery rides, which are intended to be both unmetered and pre-arranged. After seeing this same story…
Super lucid break down of a lot of the issues. I have a bit of operation understanding because very early spring, a friend and I were exploring doing an fleet/taxi management application for the NYC FHV drivers and even were at the TLC taxi app rfp reading. All of these points are lucid and concord with my knowledge Note: I'm not doing anything in that space presently (merely did a thorough exploration of it), all th…
The human factor is definitely a huge challenge in this industry, and I can understand anyone's aversion to it. That said, if you ever want to chat taxi tech (or FP -- we're migrating more and more of our backend to Erlang every day, and I'd love to learn from your Haskell experience ;), drop me a line!
Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served
#116Earlier 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…
The fees look like they come out of nowhere because no cabbie ever explains them...but they don't explain them in large part because they're simply unavoidable. Making it more confusing is the fact that this fee (on the order of $8) is only levied on taxis going out of the airport, not into the airport. Finally, these fees are new, only from within the past few years - so if you've been traveling to Boston recently, you might have noticed a sudden fare increase without knowing why.
Why all of this nonsense with crazy high, one way airport fees? To pay for the Big Dig, of course. (Which, incidentally, made my taxi rides home shorter to the point that my fares dropped more than the price of the fee.)
Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served
#117Earlier 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.
There is zero guarantee that the route you took is the route Google Maps would give you, though. And the time estimates are way off in many major cities.
If the driver was cheating, then the email would show the wrong route and it would be obvious to me: "hey, I wasn't picked up there" or "that's an inefficient route". I suppose the driver could cheat by small amounts with the duration, but that would be a pretty dangerous game to play because it's so easy to be caught (the exact pickup and duration are also reported) and relatively hard to do (if you hack your phone, it's kind of hard to just say you made a mistake).
If uber was cheating, perhaps it would be more subtle, but it's still verifiable. They'd have to show you a 5 mile route and then say it was 7 miles or something. The danger of being caught for that is way too high to be worth it.
I am more concerned with taxis, honestly. They can take you for a long ride and it's hard for you to tell them otherwise. If you do they can claim "oh, there was construction over there" or "oh, I thought you said XYZ lane not XYZ street". Or, if you ask to be taken to a train station, they can pressure you to take the taxi to your final destination rather than the train (which can be quite intimidating in some circumstances).
Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served
#118Earlier 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…
If you take an uber ride, you receive an email receipt (which you can see on the website too). It shows you exact pickup time, exact duration, total charged, and the route superimposed on a map.
If you think something is awry, they offer a button to request a "fare review".
It's hard for me to imagine how either the driver or uber could cheat the system without a high risk of being caught (way too high to be worth it).
I am more concerned about various bad practices by taxis than uber.
Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served
#119I'm not impressed with Uber. I read the entire article twice and many of the comments, then went to their home page. I still have no idea what they do other than it somehow relates to taxicab service.
* Clean car with friendly and helpful driver (who you can rate). Seems minor, but it opens up possibilities. If you're on a date or business meeting, and for whatever reason need a ride somewhere (e.g. after drinking), uber will enhance the experience rather than cheapening it.
* No money changes hands (taken from your card on file at uber, including tip). Receipt with lots of details (including your route on a map) is emailed immediately.
* I'm pretty sure it's cheaper if you are above $15 fare, or about the same maybe.
I don't have any affiliation with uber, but I have had a great experience so far (only twice, once for me and once for someone else). I plan to use it a little more often.
I guess, in retrospect, I could probably have been happy using cabs more instead; but they just always seemed more awkward, unreliable, and just less pleasant. If I can get this for the same price, why not?
Cabs might still be better for areas where they are easy to get and you're going short distances, e.g. Manhattan or Las Vegas.
Re: Uber Boston Has Been Served
#120Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure this statement says anything; it's a rhetorical NOP. You'd want to accompany it with the reason why municipalities could be assured that visitors would have a reliable way to get a ride from point A to point B in the absence of regulation.
You'd want to accompany it with the reason why municipalities could be assured that visitors would have a reliable way to get a ride from point A to point B in the absence of regulation. How is it a proper role of municipal government to "(assure) that visitors would have a reliable way to get a ride from point A to point B"??? I reject the fundamental premise this is based on. I mean, you have to consider the uninte…
It's a natural monopoly and a utility; just like water or electricity, it is both proper and better for the end user for it to be run by the government.