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

Trends: Uber vs. Lyft

diklein.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 139 posts

Re: Trends: Uber vs. Lyft

#61

Post by mrow84 »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #42
moab wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like you're playing the devil's advocate here. Despite the recent witch-hunt surrounded the company lately (which I won't try to defend), you can't deny the fact that they've engaged in some fairly unscrupulous business tactics in order to 1) acquire drivers from competing ride-sharing services, and 2) significantly drop wages (primarily due to competition in cities with multiple ride-sharing services) at the…

I'm simply pointing out more or less nonsensical arguments and mob behavior. The Uber CEO may be an objectivist jerk, but that doesn't mean everything he does is evil. 2) significantly drop wages (primarily due to competition in cities with multiple ride-sharing services)... Companies competing for workers drops wages? That's an interesting economic theory. I guess the Uber people who were hiring lyft cars in order t…

>> significantly drop wages (primarily due to competition in cities with multiple ride-sharing services) > Companies competing for workers drops wages?

I think that moab's point was that competition between ride-sharing companies lowers prices, and one of the places those price reductions come from is a reduction in worker's wages.

Re: Trends: Uber vs. Lyft

#62

Post by birken »

sinak wrote: post #29
birken wrote: post #23

If you live in San Francisco, you might consider getting a bike and/or using public transportation instead of ride-sharing services. Either of them are better for the city by reducing congestion and pollution, and biking in particular is surprisingly fast and convenient. If you are interested in getting introduced to biking, there are a bunch of free classes by the SF Bicycle Coalition that I highly recommend you loo…

So I cycle around SF, but am considering stopping. The data varies depending on which source you use, but it seems like cycling is about 3 times less dangerous than motorbiking, and considerably (at least ~5-10x) more dangerous than driving. Most people who've lived in SF have plenty of anecdotal evidence of friends who've been hurt, often seriously, by bike accidents. I'd love to be proven wrong about this: I love c…

There is no doubt that biking is more dangerous than driving. However, biking is still extremely safe.

And for the safety conscious person, especially for a beginner, I'd suggest only biking routes that you are familiar with and that include safe bike lines. For many people, especially people working in SOMA, this could probably include your daily commute. If you don't believe there are safe options, or you are unfamiliar with the route, then don't bike it and use another transportation option.

I don't want to pretend that biking is safer than it is, but there is a big difference in difficulty between biking on market st at 4:30pm on a weekday vs biking through GGP on a sunday. So I'd say instead of giving up biking entirely, just perhaps phase out a the trips that you are uncomfortable with, or try to find a different route for those.

Re: Trends: Uber vs. Lyft

#64

Post by dredmorbius »

codezero wrote: post #50
birken wrote: post #23

If you live in San Francisco, you might consider getting a bike and/or using public transportation instead of ride-sharing services. Either of them are better for the city by reducing congestion and pollution, and biking in particular is surprisingly fast and convenient. If you are interested in getting introduced to biking, there are a bunch of free classes by the SF Bicycle Coalition that I highly recommend you loo…

I just started biking to/from caltrain and in the first week, I've already had someone try to steal my bike off the train and have nearly been hit by several cars in completely un-extraordinary circumstances. I'm sticking with it, but it doesn't paint a great picture for biking over other forms of convenient, readily available transport. Also the initial cost of biking, even when going for a super cheap bike and gear…

I was going to say that $400 is going to pay for itself in dramatically less than six months if you're paying City prices for parking. $50/mo for CalTrain is a steal -- if you're parking _in_ SF anywhere near downtown or SOMA / South Park, that's a couple of day's charges, possibly a week's worth if you're walking a few blocks.

I'd factor in a few other points on cycling in that you're getting exercise, replacing at least some of a gym or other cost. And your bike will almost certainly last more than six months. A decent bike will last a lifetime, or at least a good ten years. You'll want to factor in service and parts but if you're spending more than $100-$200/year, you're likely using it for more than just casual commuting. That's a few tanks of gasoline for a car.

Re: Trends: Uber vs. Lyft

#65

Post by moab »

prawn wrote: post #54
moab wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think what'll come out of this entire experiment is something very, very similar to the current taxi industry - simply with better apps and dependability, and I will not complain at all. A little part of me suspects that this will not be Uber (at least in America, where the regulatory blockade feels really impenetrable as an engineer), although at this point it's anyones game.

Why haven't taxi companies done this themselves to see off the upstart competitors?

Probably because taxi companies are a dime-a-dozen across various cities and states, and the capital required for an engineering investment to pull something like this off just isn't there at any given shop. It's a technology problem that the existing industry faces, and because the existing competition is essentially a coalition of independent companies, they can't band together to build something like this without a joined effort (nigh impossible).

I was recently in Pittsburgh and saw a clunky touch-screen app stuck to the back of the passenger seat that sounded just like Uber, so it's clear that someone out there is working on building Uber-like dependability for your taxi. But I also remember talking to the cab-driver on that trip, and having him tell me that their 'dispatch' is still one person sitting in an office somewhere manually dialing and dispatching cabs to received calls. The status quo in the industry is just so ancient in so many ways. Here's to hoping they can start moving and respond though.

Re: Trends: Uber vs. Lyft

#66

Post by ultrasaurus »

birken wrote: post #62
sinak wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I cycle around SF, but am considering stopping. The data varies depending on which source you use, but it seems like cycling is about 3 times less dangerous than motorbiking, and considerably (at least ~5-10x) more dangerous than driving. Most people who've lived in SF have plenty of anecdotal evidence of friends who've been hurt, often seriously, by bike accidents. I'd love to be proven wrong about this: I love c…

There is no doubt that biking is more dangerous than driving. However, biking is still extremely safe. And for the safety conscious person, especially for a beginner, I'd suggest only biking routes that you are familiar with and that include safe bike lines. For many people, especially people working in SOMA, this could probably include your daily commute. If you don't believe there are safe options, or you are unfam…

Also Google's biking directions deserve a shout-out for generally giving directions that are 90% covered in bike lanes. It's rare that I'm able to find a better route than it suggests in SF.

Re: Trends: Uber vs. Lyft

#67

Post by sinak »

ihaveajob wrote: post #32
sinak wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I cycle around SF, but am considering stopping. The data varies depending on which source you use, but it seems like cycling is about 3 times less dangerous than motorbiking, and considerably (at least ~5-10x) more dangerous than driving. Most people who've lived in SF have plenty of anecdotal evidence of friends who've been hurt, often seriously, by bike accidents. I'd love to be proven wrong about this: I love c…

It has been shown that the biggest factor in bike safety is the number of cyclists on the road. The more bikes, the more aware drivers are of our presence. In SF, Critical Mass had (I've learned) a huge impact in breaking ground for bike infrastructure. Currently, the Bay Area Bike Share has become a strong factor. If we stop biking now until it's safer, it might never be so.

I agree: more cyclists is good. But risking my own health and safety to make SF drivers more aware of cyclists just doesn't work for me.

I think this is called a "social trap" by sociologists. I'm not sure there's an easy solution. But for my part if I stop cycling, I'll make sure to up my donations to the bicycle coalition.

Re: Trends: Uber vs. Lyft

#68

Post by gst »

codezero wrote: post #52
fixedd wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's also been shown to be an inverse correlation between wearing a helmet and safety. It seems that motorists correlate "having a helmet on" with being safe, and so are more aggressive around those who are wearing.

Where has this been shown? Since I bike daily, I'm really curious about studies about helmet safety.

This sounds related: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/somerset/5334208....

Re: Trends: Uber vs. Lyft

#70

Post by codezero »

dredmorbius wrote: post #64
codezero wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just started biking to/from caltrain and in the first week, I've already had someone try to steal my bike off the train and have nearly been hit by several cars in completely un-extraordinary circumstances. I'm sticking with it, but it doesn't paint a great picture for biking over other forms of convenient, readily available transport. Also the initial cost of biking, even when going for a super cheap bike and gear…

I was going to say that $400 is going to pay for itself in dramatically less than six months if you're paying City prices for parking. $50/mo for CalTrain is a steal -- if you're parking _in_ SF anywhere near downtown or SOMA / South Park, that's a couple of day's charges, possibly a week's worth if you're walking a few blocks. I'd factor in a few other points on cycling in that you're getting exercise, replacing at…

You're right. I definitely would have done this even if the cost didn't make too much sense. The exercise is one reason, another is that the caltrain lot fills up before about 7:45 am, so even if I'm catching an 8:15 train, I need to be there early. With a bike, I can ride for 10-15 minutes and get there on time. My bike won't last a year, or a lifetime, it's not decent, I've had to do a bunch of bolt tightening even after a few weeks, but that's OK, I didn't pay a lot.
Post reply on HN