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

London black taxis plan congestion chaos to block Uber

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–159 of 159 posts

Re: London black taxis plan congestion chaos to block Uber

#151

Post by ZenPro »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #53
tomp wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the purpose of my and other people's safety, I don't want my taxi driver to be constantly looking at the phone at the busiest junctions, neither do I want to explain to them how to spell a given street name so that they can type it in their phone in the middle of a busy street during the rush hour. Maybe in 2024.

It's not "constantly looking at the phone", it's the plain old "using navigation in your car" that many people already do. AFAIK, safe driving with navigation is a long-solved problem.

Source?

Simpy by sheer logic the very act of using a navigation aid (phone, Sat Nav, map) must result in decreased attention to the mechanical process of driving.

I would challenge that safe navigation is a long solved problem.

Who solved it? How? How was it measured? When was it solved - 2013? 2004?

Re: London black taxis plan congestion chaos to block Uber

#153

Post by ZenPro »

snitko wrote: post #130
claudius wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My argument is that market should decide. Or maybe, just maybe, the people should decide instead of random companies who don’t pay taxes. And ‘the people’ usually decide by voting for their favourite MP who can then implement their wishes. Laws regarding regulation of taxis did not fall down one day and then were accepted as the god-given rights of taxi drivers but were implemented because the general population th…

I just don't understand, how is it that in your mind voting is a better way to let consumers decide than actually giving them choice? Alright, let me stop right here. I know where this is going. You like state and regulations. I don't. I think each individual should decide on his own with his own money he spends or doesn't spend.

Feel free to hand back the medical care and schooling you received as a child before you had money to spend.

Oh wait, you needed the State then. Now it just seems inconvenient to you.

Re: London black taxis plan congestion chaos to block Uber

#154

Post by MRSallee »

iaskwhy wrote: post #144
JamisonM wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Check out the mean sunshine hours in those tables to figure out why Lisbon is perceived to always be sunny, it is because it is. Literally twice the sunny hours a year. There is a pretty big difference between 12 hours of cloud and drizzle and 2 hours of steady rain followed by 10 of sunshine in terms of the human misery factor. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunshine_duration

While I understand your point, my experience doesn't really follow that logic (I have lived in Lisbon for 25 years and I'm on my third year in London). In my experience, while it's usually sunshine, when it rains in Lisbon it does rain most of the day and it's usually not drizzle but heavy rain (which I believe is the reason why precipitation is so high in volume in Lisbon; Oporto is even worse) while in London it ca…

I used to live on the other side of the lake from Seattle, and there too the winters were worse for the "greyness and lack of sunlight for months and months" than for the rain.

Usually enough that I'd still rather cab a mile than walk it. (I couldn't afford cabs then.)

Re: London black taxis plan congestion chaos to block Uber

#155

Post by raldi »

stuaxo wrote: post #67
raldi wrote: post #10

Note that the rank-and-file taxi drivers aren't complaining; they'll all get a chance to become Uber drivers. It's the incumbent taxi organization that's upset, because it's about to become a lot less powerful.

And we can all get a chance to swap our jobs for zero hours contracts, what a wonderful world.

Taxi drivers' pre-Uber work arrangements are even worse; by and large they seem to love switching from working for a taxi company to working as an Uber driver. For example:

http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2014/01/15/with-ubers-comes-stru...

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2014/01/16/san-francisco-ca...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2013/12/12/how-lyft-...

In fact, for all the articles about taxi companies protesting before Uber comes to town, have you ever seen one about drivers complaining after?

Re: London black taxis plan congestion chaos to block Uber

#156

Post by snitko »

ZenPro wrote: post #153
snitko wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just don't understand, how is it that in your mind voting is a better way to let consumers decide than actually giving them choice? Alright, let me stop right here. I know where this is going. You like state and regulations. I don't. I think each individual should decide on his own with his own money he spends or doesn't spend.

Feel free to hand back the medical care and schooling you received as a child before you had money to spend. Oh wait, you needed the State then. Now it just seems inconvenient to you.

For those things you're talking about my parents paid their fair share of taxes, not me. You have to realize, it's parents who pay for their children's education and healthcare, not children themselves: this is true whether we're talking about public or private.

But even if you were right and indeed it is me who is supposed to be paying taxes now for my education in the past, then this sounds a lot like this:

- Here, have a free sandwich - Ok, thanks - You ate it? Now give me $10.

in other words, a scam.

Re: London black taxis plan congestion chaos to block Uber

#157

Post by prof_hobart »

barrkel wrote: post #115
prof_hobart wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if you don't want to pay for that specific service? I got a taxi home (not in London) last week and the taxi driver used his sat nav to route me home. It didn't bother me in the slightest. Pretty much all I ask for in a taxi is get me from where I am to where I want to go, as quickly, cheaply and safely as possible. I'm not against people being licenced (that comes into the "safely" bit of my requirements), but…

London doesn't have a grid structure. When there's a closure or delay on one route, it's not as simple as choosing the next road over. GPSes vary in their quality for routing diversions, but in a maze of one-way streets, turning restrictions and temporary / permanent rerouting in effect, a human is always going to be better. GPS maps are often out of date as London is constantly changing with rat-runs being closed do…

And "The Knowledge" doesn't provide the ability for taxi drivers to psychopathically become aware of delays in traffic on a given road. I've never noticed any particular difference in the amount of time I've been stuck in traffic when travelling in black cabs or in taxis with drivers using a GPS.

Re: London black taxis plan congestion chaos to block Uber

#158

Post by prof_hobart »

DanBC wrote: post #132
prof_hobart wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if you don't want to pay for that specific service? I got a taxi home (not in London) last week and the taxi driver used his sat nav to route me home. It didn't bother me in the slightest. Pretty much all I ask for in a taxi is get me from where I am to where I want to go, as quickly, cheaply and safely as possible. I'm not against people being licenced (that comes into the "safely" bit of my requirements), but…

> What if you don't want to pay for that specific service? Don't use it. Call a minicab instead.

Which usually involves several minutes of waiting, as opposed to simply flagging one down as it's passing, which you're allowed to do with a black cab.

Re: London black taxis plan congestion chaos to block Uber

#159

Post by ZenPro »

snitko wrote: post #156
ZenPro wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Feel free to hand back the medical care and schooling you received as a child before you had money to spend. Oh wait, you needed the State then. Now it just seems inconvenient to you.

For those things you're talking about my parents paid their fair share of taxes, not me. You have to realize, it's parents who pay for their children's education and healthcare, not children themselves: this is true whether we're talking about public or private. But even if you were right and indeed it is me who is supposed to be paying taxes now for my education in the past, then this sounds a lot like this: - Here,…

A scam that has halted rampant infant mortality rates.

I wish we had more scams like that.

Your naivete is breathtaking.

Post reply on HN