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

111–120 of 139 posts

Re: Trends: Uber vs. Lyft

#111

Post by joshfraser »

My primary form of transportation is a bike, but my ride-sharing trends are pretty similar to David's. I've been using Lyft far more than Uber lately even though I view them as completely interchangeable services and I'm not known for having strong brand loyalty. In SF, Lyft and Uber are comparable on both price and speed, so it's an easy decision to use one service over the other, even if you only have a slight preference. For me the shift hasn't happened out of outrage at Uber, but because I like the Lyft experience so much more. Lyft drivers are overwhelmingly friendly and Lyft Line tends to attract similarly friendly people. I've had some great conversations while sharing rides on Lyft Line where I actually didn't want the ride to end so soon. I've swapped contact info with some cute girls, met a potential hire, and landed a couple new customers all while sharing rides on Lyft.

I like that Lyft has a reputation for taking care of their drivers. In the words of one driver I rode with, "there are no drivers protesting outside the Lyft office". Instead, their drivers speak highly of the company. As a company, they seem like they are starting to find their stride. Their mission from the beginning was to get people to shares rides and fill up all those single-passenger cars you see everywhere. They're making good progress on that mission today and cutting down on traffic is something I care about as well. Uber has a ride-sharing option too, but they don't seem to be nearly as motivated by that purpose. I'm not sure what Uber's mission is actually.

Re: Trends: Uber vs. Lyft

#112

Post by DanBC »

alexqgb wrote: post #86
yummyfajitas wrote: post #21

Why do we dislike Uber? Lets go through the links. 1) Stuff about the CEO's personal life. 2) CEO wants to automate business processes. Those of us in tech would never consider replacing humans with machines, right? 3) Trying to compete for workers. (Didn't we hate Apple/Google for agreeing not to do this?) 4) We love Peter Thiel and he hates it. 5-7) A few Uber drivers are crazy (Uber is helping the cops). Note that…

10) Exec discusses hiring journalists to do journalism to journalists. You know, digging up stuff about their personal life, kind of like (1) on this list. I'm sorry, but you're flat out wrong about this, You're also hilariously ignorant about the most basic aspects of journalistic ethics. The million dollar "opposition research" effort that BuzzFeedBen reported on is NOT journalism. Do journalists dig up dirt? Yes.…

If you hate yummyfajitas you should probably ignore his posts. Your answers deserve down votes and flags.

Especially calling someone a "blithering idiot" is clearly agInst guidelines.

If you think he's said something flag-worthy or downvote worty just flag it or downvote it and ignore it.

Re: Trends: Uber vs. Lyft

#113

Post by alexqgb »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #108
alexqgb wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There you go again, with the dishonesty. Seriously, what is wrong with you? Everyone on this thread can see that I did not say "anonymously publishing true information is unethical." That's your idea, not mine. Please don't put words I didn't say in my mouth. What I did say is that nothing the Uber exec was talking about could be construed as journalism - even if he hired journalists to do it - and that, accordingly,…

Have you considered the possibility that I merely didn't completely understand everything you said? You mentioned ethics repeatedly in your post, so I thought your "critical difference" referred to ethics rather than merely the definition of journalism. I thought the you said anonymity was the critical point making it unethical (given your reference to "journalistic ethics". Now it sounds like you merely meant that i…

No fajitas, it did not occur to me that you were incapable of interpreting a basic English sentence with a clearly defined subject and modifier, and that you'd resolve your confusion by fishing around for words scattered elsewhere in the post to fill in the blanks.

But the point, again, is that you described what the Uber exec proposed as "hiring journalists to do journalism to journalists." And the point you missed is that what he was describing was manifestly not journalism, for reasons I went on to describe.

There are several other reasons why his line of thought was hugely unethical, but those are separate issues, and given your tendency to put words in the mouths of others, that's not a conversation I'm willing to have with you.

Re: Trends: Uber vs. Lyft

#114

Post by dredmorbius »

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…

"Companies competing for workers drops wages? That's an interesting economic theory."

That's basic monopoly/monopsony pricing theory you'll find in an introductory microeconomics class. Nothing interesting about it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_profit

Your HN posts are hardly of outstanding quality at the best of times, but you're not even trying here.

Re: Trends: Uber vs. Lyft

#115

Post by dredmorbius »

codezero wrote: post #70
dredmorbius wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Bolt-tightening (especially on a recently-purchased bike) is hardly unexpected. On a new bike, there's a lot of general stretching and breaking-in of components over the first few days/weeks of use.

A used $400 bike _should_ last you a long time, if you've selected properly. Though replacing components is fairly typical -- chain and freewheel, cables, tires, wheels. I've gone through a number of other components as well over various bikes under heavy use, though I've still got two frames that I've had for decades.

Re: Trends: Uber vs. Lyft

#116

Post by dang »

alexqgb wrote: post #113
yummyfajitas wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you considered the possibility that I merely didn't completely understand everything you said? You mentioned ethics repeatedly in your post, so I thought your "critical difference" referred to ethics rather than merely the definition of journalism. I thought the you said anonymity was the critical point making it unethical (given your reference to "journalistic ethics". Now it sounds like you merely meant that i…

No fajitas, it did not occur to me that you were incapable of interpreting a basic English sentence with a clearly defined subject and modifier, and that you'd resolve your confusion by fishing around for words scattered elsewhere in the post to fill in the blanks. But the point, again, is that you described what the Uber exec proposed as "hiring journalists to do journalism to journalists." And the point you missed…

Please stop.

Re: Trends: Uber vs. Lyft

#117

Post by DanBC »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #108
alexqgb wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There you go again, with the dishonesty. Seriously, what is wrong with you? Everyone on this thread can see that I did not say "anonymously publishing true information is unethical." That's your idea, not mine. Please don't put words I didn't say in my mouth. What I did say is that nothing the Uber exec was talking about could be construed as journalism - even if he hired journalists to do it - and that, accordingly,…

Have you considered the possibility that I merely didn't completely understand everything you said? You mentioned ethics repeatedly in your post, so I thought your "critical difference" referred to ethics rather than merely the definition of journalism. I thought the you said anonymity was the critical point making it unethical (given your reference to "journalistic ethics". Now it sounds like you merely meant that i…

> Have you considered the possibility that I merely didn't completely understand everything you said?

You post history is anti-woman in any discussion about women. Thus your attempts to reframe a CEOs speculation about anonymously attacking a female journalist's (and her family's) privacy as "journalism" after she criticises her company is unlikely to be a misunderstanding about ethics.

When a journList talks about your company the correct responses are:

i) ignore it

ii) rebut it

iii) use the complaints process or law to correct defamation

The option

iv) secretly investigate the reporter and her family to discredit her

... is clearly, unambiguously, the action of a fucking asshole.

You should find it troubling that your hatred of women forces you into supporting possibly criminal behaviour of fucking assholes instead of just accepting that this one time this woman is right.

Re: Trends: Uber vs. Lyft

#118

Post by rhizome »

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…

which will only pay for itself after ~6 months

It can also replace a gym membership.

Re: Trends: Uber vs. Lyft

#119

Post by yummyfajitas »

DanBC wrote: post #117
yummyfajitas wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you considered the possibility that I merely didn't completely understand everything you said? You mentioned ethics repeatedly in your post, so I thought your "critical difference" referred to ethics rather than merely the definition of journalism. I thought the you said anonymity was the critical point making it unethical (given your reference to "journalistic ethics". Now it sounds like you merely meant that i…

> Have you considered the possibility that I merely didn't completely understand everything you said? You post history is anti-woman in any discussion about women. Thus your attempts to reframe a CEOs speculation about anonymously attacking a female journalist's (and her family's) privacy as "journalism" after she criticises her company is unlikely to be a misunderstanding about ethics. When a journList talks about y…

I have no idea why you think my post history is "anti-woman" or that I hold "hatred of women". I think many of the arguments pushed by people who self describe as "pro-woman" are nonsense, but that's not the same thing.

...the action of a fucking asshole...

Contrast with what I said: "are we simply engaging in internet mobbing because...the CEO is kind of a jerk?"

Unless the anonymous woman I described (and the anonymous writer at modelviewculture) is also a "fucking asshole", the "secret" part of investigating the reporter is not a problem. So investigating and reporting is "possibly criminal"? Assuming there is something more here than mobbing someone you dislike, I truly do not understand it.

Re: Trends: Uber vs. Lyft

#120

Post by commentzorro »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #21

Why do we dislike Uber? Lets go through the links. 1) Stuff about the CEO's personal life. 2) CEO wants to automate business processes. Those of us in tech would never consider replacing humans with machines, right? 3) Trying to compete for workers. (Didn't we hate Apple/Google for agreeing not to do this?) 4) We love Peter Thiel and he hates it. 5-7) A few Uber drivers are crazy (Uber is helping the cops). Note that…

> 1) Stuff about the CEO's personal life.

You need to get over this. It is absolutely ABSOLUTELY valid to boycott, speak negatively about, and/or hate a company for the personal life and actions of any CEO, board member, or public facing employee of any company!

Post reply on HN