61–70 of 150 posts
> It requires passengers to run a nonfree program (an app). I'm not sure if I agree with this, unless you consider the web to be non-free. Uber also runs a really great mobile website[1], which is one of the few reasons I use Uber not owning an iPhone or Android device. [1] https://m.uber.com/
Can you book Uber cars using their website on your desktop?
Yet another reason why working with or talking to RMS is impossible. I think we can apply many of these arguments to Taxi cabs as well. Taxis run "non free" software to process credit cards. Taxi destinations can be subpoenaed by local LEO and the government, along with credit card receipts, just like Uber. Taxis are a regulated market, but the medallion market is largel unregulated and a near-monopoly. Taxi drivers…
Taxis run "non free" software to process credit cards.
And I think RMS cares less about that. No doubt he will be unhappy about the taxi driver's/company's choice to run non-free software; however, regular taxi companies are willing to do business with free software users - Uber refuses to do so. That's a pretty significant difference.
Taxi destinations can be subpoenaed by local LEO and the government, along with credit card receipts, just like Uber.
Taxis can be paid in cash, unlike Uber.
The medallion issues are oddities of a few (not even all!) cities particularly in the US. You are right to complain about them as that system is ridiculous; however, the comparison with Uber is unfair because Uber is trying to take over the world.
>Uber plans to do away with human cab drivers. >It would be easy for a non-plutocratic government to prohibit this, and that's what every country ought to do, unless/until every person gets an adequate basic income so people don't need to be employed. So what? This is the way of technology: obsolete work becomes automated. Extending RMS' argument to its logical conclusion means reinstating many forms of manual labor…
1. The benefits of scale -> lower cost insurance/gas/car/services for drivers.
2. The benefit of having more customers -> less time for driver to get to customer, i.e. more money.Also when shared rides become possible(2-3 or more passenger sharing a car) , more customers you can arrange them to shorter routes(which means more people willing to share) , which also means less cost.
3. Lyft is trying to make the trip a social experience by matching you with people you'd like. Data for better matching could be an advantage.
> It requires passengers to run a nonfree program (an app). https://m.uber.com/ doesn't require the app to be installed.
install != run. Using that mobile site still requires one to run non-free Javascript, which RMS also has a problem with.
Therefore it is free (as in speech) for you to inspect.
One of RMS's points is that Uber exploits its drivers by paying them low wages. I've taken several Ubers in the past month. The drivers tell me that they get 80% of the cost of the ride. One guy said that his previous company took 60%. I also met a student who said that he liked being able to work the part time hours.
There's a significant chance that they are telling you they love their jobs because if they told you they hate Uber and feel trapped by it, you would give them a bad rating and they would get fired.
I agree that the government shouldn't have pervasive access to the records, but I WANT Uber to track my rides. That's how I can have recourse if a driver takes me for a spin. I WANT my driver to be identified and for them to track who picks me up. He claims that it's troublesome for a female passenger to be identifiable to a driver. How about if you're a female (or male) driver driving in your spare time? Would she n…
Why would that require the passenger to identify themselves? You can have one without the other. Where I live, most taxis are organized in cooperatives. Drivers pay monthly for access to dispatch and are held to certain quality standards beyond the legal requirements.
Drivers are tracked by dispatch and expected to take optimal routes. If they deviate too far from that route on a fare, they have to explain themselves to dispatch. Simple as that, and it works extremely well.
Stallman isn't quite right on a few points. For example, you can summon an Uber via SMS or a mobile site. No app or smartphone required. But let's address the core of his argument instead of nitpicking. Yes, Uber's behavior has been pretty unethical. They track customers and drivers. They mine their data to figure out who had one-night stands. They shirk regulations so they can expand quickly. But all of those points…
"If you want to sink Big Tobacco, the activism route is not effective."
"If you want to sink child labor, the activism route is not effective."
"If you want to sink slavery, the activism route is not effective."
&etc.
Your fatalism is unwarranted. There's plenty of examples in history of people making real, substantial change in society via activism.
Moreover, some problems can only be solved via activism. If Uber's tracking yields an economic advantage, and you consider that tracking to be a moral/ethical problem, then it's a problem you can't fix with "a better product" because a company that doesn't follow Uber's lead won't be economically competitive. It will be leaving money on the table that Uber does not. The only way out of the trap is for the problematic behavior to be off limits to everybody.
> Uber plans to do away with human cab drivers. > It would be easy for a non-plutocratic government to prohibit this, and that's what every country ought to do, unless/until every person gets an adequate basic income so people don't need to be employed. Okay, so I am extremely liberal and everything, but "let's ban any new technologies that might make somebody lose their job to a robot" is seriously the most ridiculo…
I agree that the government shouldn't have pervasive access to the records, but I WANT Uber to track my rides. That's how I can have recourse if a driver takes me for a spin. I WANT my driver to be identified and for them to track who picks me up. He claims that it's troublesome for a female passenger to be identifiable to a driver. How about if you're a female (or male) driver driving in your spare time? Would she n…
Granted there are several items that ... detract from the point, but there are some real problems here and I don't think it does them justice to gloss over them because of some errant points at the beginning. We don't see eye to eye on the identification issue, but even if we put that one issue aside I can't agree that the list of complaints doesn't hold water for me personally. Executives stalking passengers and tro…
One of RMS's points is that Uber exploits its drivers by paying them low wages. I've taken several Ubers in the past month. The drivers tell me that they get 80% of the cost of the ride. One guy said that his previous company took 60%. I also met a student who said that he liked being able to work the part time hours.
You should be more skeptical when people tell you they love their jobs while you are paying them to perform their jobs, especially given the presence of numerous press articles quoting many dissatisfied Uber drivers. There's a significant chance that they are telling you they love their jobs because if they told you they hate Uber and feel trapped by it, you would give them a bad rating and they would get fired.
Parent comment doesn't say the drivers said "love" and the comments made don't appear to be over the top in any way. Also you are discounting the parent commenters ability to discern a BS answer from a real answer by interpreting emotion. (Not saying you aren't right to be skeptical as you raised a valid point).