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

Taxi industry lawsuit against Uber transferred from state to US court

universalhub.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 84 posts

Re: Taxi industry lawsuit against Uber transferred from state to US court

#71

Post by rdouble »

rada wrote: post #69
rdouble wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cabbies used to routinely discriminate against whomever they felt like, mostly black and brown people who needed to get uptown. That is why the laws prohibiting refusal to take you were you want to go were instated in the first place.

Your point that there is a historic basis for the law is well taken. However, history is not an excuse, especially when it comes to forced labor (cough, slavery, cough). Also, when you say "used to routinely", you are projecting. The press made it into a banner issue, but really, think about it. "Uptown" used to be very, very poor, and poor people don't take cabs.

I'm not sure what you are talking about at this point. You are mad because taxi drivers are supposed to follow the law, because of slavery? Seems a bit incoherent.

Re: Taxi industry lawsuit against Uber transferred from state to US court

#72

Post by lifeisstillgood »

patio11 wrote: post #51
lifeisstillgood wrote: post #46

Can someone explain uber to a UK reader who does not understand what the fuss is? I can see its some sort of aggregation service for taxi cabs, but I generally like using one particular firm, that I know vets its drivers well. Some (men & women) I know stick to women only driver firms and so forth. A nice UI is good but I dont get it?

The attactiveness of Uber varies with regards to locality in the United States. Many cities have taxi systems which are deeply non-functional: a) So few taxis on the roads (because the laws forbid anyone from adding more) that it is virtually impossible to hail one, like San Francisco. b) Drivers who habitually discriminate against customers by race, desired travel location, etc. c) Routine fraud conducted by drivers…

Hmmm, I am a big fan of Addison-Lee cabs, a firm that runs its own fleet, and well, just turns up. You can have an account or pay cash, they turn up, will drive my dad 30 miles into town or me 2 miles across.

They basically have been a severe competitive threat to local mini cab firms in London, and, well, no-one sued, they just upped the game or got out. I have not got into a cab recently that I did not book on the phone and where cabbies have a sat nav, a smartphone and never use the radio, just get jobs from their dashboard.

Is it just me being a bit astonished that it seems only one firm in the continental USA has thought "I know lets be better"

P.S.

An (ex-) Londoners perspective on your other points are amusing - every cabbie wants to be paid in cash, they are famous for racisim and and you will never get a taxi south of the river at this time on a Friday mate)

But the system works. As an infrequent New Yorker it seemed to work there.

Re: Taxi industry lawsuit against Uber transferred from state to US court

#73

Post by rada »

rdouble wrote: post #71
rada wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your point that there is a historic basis for the law is well taken. However, history is not an excuse, especially when it comes to forced labor (cough, slavery, cough). Also, when you say "used to routinely", you are projecting. The press made it into a banner issue, but really, think about it. "Uptown" used to be very, very poor, and poor people don't take cabs.

I'm not sure what you are talking about at this point. You are mad because taxi drivers are supposed to follow the law, because of slavery? Seems a bit incoherent.

Slavery bad. Law bad when law say slavery good. Rich man make slave work because bad law, very bad.

Is that better? I tried to use shorter sentences.

Re: Taxi industry lawsuit against Uber transferred from state to US court

#74

Post by [deleted] »

rada wrote: post #73
rdouble wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what you are talking about at this point. You are mad because taxi drivers are supposed to follow the law, because of slavery? Seems a bit incoherent.

Slavery bad. Law bad when law say slavery good. Rich man make slave work because bad law, very bad. Is that better? I tried to use shorter sentences.

[deleted]

Re: Taxi industry lawsuit against Uber transferred from state to US court

#75

Post by [deleted] »

rada wrote: post #73
rdouble wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what you are talking about at this point. You are mad because taxi drivers are supposed to follow the law, because of slavery? Seems a bit incoherent.

Slavery bad. Law bad when law say slavery good. Rich man make slave work because bad law, very bad. Is that better? I tried to use shorter sentences.

[deleted]

Re: Taxi industry lawsuit against Uber transferred from state to US court

#76

Post by rdouble »

rada wrote: post #73
rdouble wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what you are talking about at this point. You are mad because taxi drivers are supposed to follow the law, because of slavery? Seems a bit incoherent.

Slavery bad. Law bad when law say slavery good. Rich man make slave work because bad law, very bad. Is that better? I tried to use shorter sentences.

Yes, much clearer now.

Re: Taxi industry lawsuit against Uber transferred from state to US court

#77

Post by apaprocki »

joubert wrote: post #44
apaprocki wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except when they lock the doors and won't let you in. Want to report them? Go ahead.. the TLC requires you to take a day off work and appear in person in court. If you don't, complaint is thrown out. Taxi drivers know that it is too much work for most people.

Do they lock you out after you've said where you're going? Key: unlike tourists who I often see will peep in through the window meekly and respond to the request of "where are you going", when the car stops, just get in. You talk to the driver once inside. Not while you're on the curb.

Lots of times the cab will be locked and if you don't tell them where you're going through the window they will just take off.

Re: Taxi industry lawsuit against Uber transferred from state to US court

#78

Post by ShabbyDoo »

kyro wrote: post #19

I felt I got burned by Uber the first time I used them during Hurricane Sandy when I was charged a hefty fee because of their dynamic pricing. I gave them another try a month back and now find myself using the service no fewer than 5 times a week. It literally eliminates every thing I hate about calling a cab. I love it now and almost rely on it at times. I make sure to ask every single new driver about their experie…

Your driver sounds quite clever and profit optimizing. I had thought a couple of weeks ago about whether Uber should somehow allow drivers to specify destinations for more efficient routing. As a customer, what do I care of the guy 1/4 mile away has to drop someone off before picking me up, especially if the next alternative is a mile away? This was not an original thought on my part as I once worked on scheduling software for a large truck fleet, and we had implemented a similar feature.

Re: Taxi industry lawsuit against Uber transferred from state to US court

#79

Post by ShabbyDoo »

pifflesnort wrote: post #57
lucasvo wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can agree with what you're saying though I want to share an anecdote from Moscow where there is pretty much no regulation and pricing varies by car company. Instead of having a meter you negotiate the price in the beginning. To help users out with ordering cabs Yandex released an app that actually let's you order cabs and shows you pre-negotiated prices, you can pick whichever one you like (economy, premium, luxury…

I can share an anecdote from the reverse perspective. When traveling in Morocco, I didn't speak any local languages (eg, French or Arabic). I also was entirely unfamiliar with the city, the distances between points, or even how much something should cost. If there was a Yandex app, I wouldn't have known about it (... although the last time I was in Morocco predated smart phones by about 10 years). This meant that neg…

"This is why we have regulations that attempt to provide some of the symmetry required for fair exchange."

In the case of Ebay, Uber, Airbnb, etc., technology can replace regulation as a means of providing power to the previously disadvantaged party. And, technological solutions almost always are more efficient than the regulation they replace.

Re: Taxi industry lawsuit against Uber transferred from state to US court

#80

Post by ShabbyDoo »

jbooth wrote: post #45
newbie12 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope, the medallion systems exist to block new competition. Sure there are some regulations that seem to favor consumers-- such as price controls-- but these are a short-term benefit, and at the cost of reduced innovation. Far better to allow competition, and customer service will improve through market action rather than government rule-making.

Any law or regulation exists because of a variety of interests trying to make it happen for their own reasons. Certainly, the initial reasoning for medallion systems was quality of service and safety. As time goes by and taxi lobbyists become more powerful, they find ways to subvert this into limiting competition. Maybe some city councillor traded his vote on this issue to get a park built in his district, or for sup…

You probably are correct. Initial regulations likely were earnestly enacted for the public good. I believe NYC implemented the medallion system (the first in the US?) because it was concerned that taxis would become so numerous that they would clog-up the streets. Over time, politicians figured out how to exploit their increasing power for personal gain. There's nothing unique to taxi service in this pattern.
Post reply on HN