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

Uber leaves Kansas after lawmakers demand background checks and more insurance

pando.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 143 posts

Re: Uber leaves Kansas after lawmakers demand background checks and more insurance

#31

Post by fernandotakai »

discardorama wrote: post #15

If my recent experience is anything, Uber needs some serious regulation. I live in SF, and was flying out of OAK. I had used Uber only once before, a long time ago; but this time, I suggested to the wife that we use Uber again. We had to leave SF at 7:15AM - 7:30AM or so. Around 7:15 I pulled up the app, and saw that there were several cars around (as they usually are). I requested an UberX; punched in the destinatio…

that's strange -- as far as i know, the uber driver will only know your destination after they pick you up (so they cannot do this kind of thing). uber's feature page also say that https://www.uber.com/features -- "After pickup, we show the driver where you’re going..."

I also spoke with the drivers I used here in são paulo and they said the same thing: they only get the destination after the pickup and they only get my first name -- uber now is using a 3rd party service that proxys my phone so the driver won't have my personal number.

Re: Uber leaves Kansas after lawmakers demand background checks and more insurance

#32

Post by fabian2k »

meritt wrote: post #3

Does anyone have details on the associated costs involved for Uber and/or the drivers? I can't imagine background checks being very excessive for the drivers, so maybe it's grossly expensive and miscategorized insurance? Uber + Lyft just relaunched here in Portland. Drivers are required to have valid business licenses and pass a background check too. Everyone is very happy with the changes. (except our local taxi com…

The required insurance in that bill seems to be 1 million dollars, which seems still very low to me. Mandatory insurance minimums for cars here in Germany are much higher than that.

Re: Uber leaves Kansas after lawmakers demand background checks and more insurance

#33

Post by gambiting »

"Kansas lawmakers want to make sure drivers have insurance that covers the times when a driver has no passengers — and is therefore not covered by business insurance — but is behind the wheel of their work vehicle — and is therefore not covered by personal insurance either."

It's outrageous that there could even be a situation where someone is driving on the road but not covered by insurance. Looking at comments under the article, it's like people don't understand the implications of this.

Re: Uber leaves Kansas after lawmakers demand background checks and more insurance

#34

Post by tjdetwiler »

ardit33 wrote: post #19
discardorama wrote: post #15

If my recent experience is anything, Uber needs some serious regulation. I live in SF, and was flying out of OAK. I had used Uber only once before, a long time ago; but this time, I suggested to the wife that we use Uber again. We had to leave SF at 7:15AM - 7:30AM or so. Around 7:15 I pulled up the app, and saw that there were several cars around (as they usually are). I requested an UberX; punched in the destinatio…

If you live in NYC, cabs always refuse people to go to Brooklyn/Queens/Unwanted destination, eve though it is illegal to do so. The usual excuse: I am going out of my shift, and can't go that way. (this can be legit, but often it is not). Next time don't enter your destination address, so the driver doesn't know where you go, and once you are in the car it is much harder for them to refuse you.

Lyft (as far as I know) won't show the driver your destination until the ride is started. It's intended to save time in allowing the driver to bring up directions and not as a decision point for them to decide if they want to take the ride or not.

Re: Uber leaves Kansas after lawmakers demand background checks and more insurance

#35

Post by chimeracoder »

bradleyland wrote: post #26
discardorama wrote: post #15

If my recent experience is anything, Uber needs some serious regulation. I live in SF, and was flying out of OAK. I had used Uber only once before, a long time ago; but this time, I suggested to the wife that we use Uber again. We had to leave SF at 7:15AM - 7:30AM or so. Around 7:15 I pulled up the app, and saw that there were several cars around (as they usually are). I requested an UberX; punched in the destinatio…

Or, you know, don't use Uber. I get that you had a bad experience, but the response to every bad experience should not be regulation. "Surge pricing" is no more a scam than any other market-based pricing mechanism. To be clear, I'm mixed on Uber overall, and I do think they need some regulation, but not with regard to pricing, coverage, or response time. Those are good fits for self-regulating markets. I'm more conce…

> "Surge pricing" is no more a scam than any other market-based pricing mechanism.

Surge pricing on an unknown fare (metered) is actually quite ridiculous.

For contrast, when I order a Lyft line in Manhattan, it gives me an exact price quote (not an estimate, but the exact quote) before I order the ride, taking all surges into account. This means I have perfect knowledge of what the price is going to be before I decide whether to take the ride[0].

Uber has consistently refused to implement price quotes, to the point where they have literally jeopardized their existence in at least one city because of it: all of the legal problems they have in London would be avoided if they provided price quotes in advance.

Uber has been really clever to frame the controversy as a debate about whether the cabbies should have to take an exam. But the fact that medallion cabs in London have to take the street exam is all moot, because if Uber provided price quotes in advance, they would be classified as a different kind of car service which doesn't have to take the street exam in the first place.

Instead, Uber would rather launch a coordinated PR and legal campaign against the entire medallion cab system in London, just to avoid implementing an incredibly user-friendly feature.

[0] This feature may not be in all locations yet (in fact, I don't know if it even works if the destination is in another borough), but it's clear to me that this is at least where Lyft is headed, whereas it's clear that Uber is committed to not providing price quotes.

Re: Uber leaves Kansas after lawmakers demand background checks and more insurance

#36

Post by joshu »

discardorama wrote: post #15

If my recent experience is anything, Uber needs some serious regulation. I live in SF, and was flying out of OAK. I had used Uber only once before, a long time ago; but this time, I suggested to the wife that we use Uber again. We had to leave SF at 7:15AM - 7:30AM or so. Around 7:15 I pulled up the app, and saw that there were several cars around (as they usually are). I requested an UberX; punched in the destinatio…

I don't think they get to see the destination till they pick you up.

I am of two minds on surge pricing. I certainly don't like it, but I don't think it is a scam so much as normal economics.

Re: Uber leaves Kansas after lawmakers demand background checks and more insurance

#37

Post by clarkmoody »

discardorama wrote: post #15

If my recent experience is anything, Uber needs some serious regulation. I live in SF, and was flying out of OAK. I had used Uber only once before, a long time ago; but this time, I suggested to the wife that we use Uber again. We had to leave SF at 7:15AM - 7:30AM or so. Around 7:15 I pulled up the app, and saw that there were several cars around (as they usually are). I requested an UberX; punched in the destinatio…

> Uber needs some serious regulation

Too often our knee-jerk reaction is to want the government to get involved.

But based on your experience, you are probably

a) not going to trust Uber again, at least for this sort of ride

b) choose a competitor / traditional cab to get you to OAK

c) tell all of your friends / HN about your crappy experience, leading to reduced reputation for Uber

The end result is that Uber will no longer get your business and perhaps others' business will go elsewhere too. Uber is being punished for its bad behavior by the market. Getting the government involved would likely put Uber out of business (hence the article) or make rates way higher and essentially no different than a traditional cab.

Re: Uber leaves Kansas after lawmakers demand background checks and more insurance

#38

Post by rgawdzik »

discardorama wrote: post #15

If my recent experience is anything, Uber needs some serious regulation. I live in SF, and was flying out of OAK. I had used Uber only once before, a long time ago; but this time, I suggested to the wife that we use Uber again. We had to leave SF at 7:15AM - 7:30AM or so. Around 7:15 I pulled up the app, and saw that there were several cars around (as they usually are). I requested an UberX; punched in the destinatio…

Uber drivers are required to accept at least 80% of their requests.

Re: Uber leaves Kansas after lawmakers demand background checks and more insurance

#39

Post by hn_user2 »

iamdave wrote: post #4
cantankerous wrote: post #2

Uber has been having similar regulatory fights in Kansas City, which recently passed ordinances that Uber claimed would make it prohibitive to do business there ( http://goo.gl/cXlhzb ). Uber made claims that "thousands of jobs" would be lost in the move, despite the fact that its competitors (Lyft, etc.) would abide by the new rules and continue to operate. It seems a little silly to talk about the jobs of your cont…

Uber made claims that "thousands of jobs" would be lost in the move I've got a lot of reservations about calling Uber/Lyft a "job" in the first place; in fact I have a lot of problems with these "sharing economy" apps-calling them jobs when really you're just subcontracting labor on the cheap while the business side collects massive investments and benefits for the full-time employees. It's like when you drive by a D…

Especially because they argue that they are not a taxi company because they are doing "ride sharing". Well are you ride sharing or are you a limousine service with jobs on the line?

Re: Uber leaves Kansas after lawmakers demand background checks and more insurance

#40

Post by kaolinite »

It really is incredible how the opinion of Uber has dropped. I used to love Uber - and still do love the Uber service - but now I can't stand the company. I used to buy in to the whole corrupt taxi industry narrative, but now I feel like a fool for believing it (even if it was true at the beginning). It's a shame that there's no alternative, at least that I'm aware of, to UberEXEC/UberLUX.

I feel like Uber could have been a great, albeit smaller, company had they concentrated on their upmarket service. Aiming to be cheaper than taxis is just a race to the bottom - but there are many people who are willing to pay more in exchange for a better experience.

Post reply on HN