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

51–60 of 143 posts

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

#51

Post by prostoalex »

kaolinite wrote: post #40

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…

> It's a shame that there's no alternative, at least that I'm aware of, to UberEXEC/UberLUX.

How about blacklane.com or limos.com? Both are aggregators for existing car services and allow you to specify a general class of cars.

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

#52

Post by cozzyd »

istvan__ wrote: post #25
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…

This is an edge case, and you can think of it as a side effect coming from living in SF, where everybody has to deal with bay bridge problems. I understand your frustration but I would split the blame 50-50 between the city for not providing transportation, and Uber to not red flagging this problem and offer a special solution for this.

SF provides great transportation (via BART) to its own airport and decent transportation (also via BART) to OAK.

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

#53

Post by gecko »

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.

I have been living in NYC for ten years. I use cabs constantly. This has happened to be exactly one time. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but I think the idea that this is common for NYC cabbies to do is really outdated.

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

#54

Post by fernandotakai »

smackfu wrote: post #50
fernandotakai wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

How does Uber determine when you are picked up? That's the bit that could be gamed.

from my experience, it uses the driver's phone gps + the place you asked to be picked + your phone's gps. and yeah, it could totally be gamed, but i think people should email uber whenever this happens since those drivers are scumbags.

i emailed them before regarding problems with drivers and the customer support team is always good (twice i had problems with drivers doing longer routes when smaller ones were better and once i had a problem with a driver that accepted my request but never showed up).

(btw, i'm not an uber employee, i just like the service and use at least twice a month)

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

#55

Post by memset »

gecko wrote: post #53
ardit33 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I have been living in NYC for ten years. I use cabs constantly. This has happened to be exactly one time. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but I think the idea that this is common for NYC cabbies to do is really outdated.

More anecdata: this happens to me continually. I have successfully reported at least half a dozen drivers in as many months for refusing to go to bushwick.

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

#56

Post by tigeba »

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…

Kansas City, MO and Uber have worked out their differences. I believe Uber will provide background check info to the city about their drivers, and pay a flat fee to cover all their drivers in the city.

http://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/news/2015/04/23/kansas...

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

#57

Post by smokeyj »

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…

One time I went to McDonalds and the pickles were all mixed up with the mustard. This industry really needs a regulatory overhaul.

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

#58

Post by anu7df »

stegosaurus wrote: post #8

All of this nonsense about insurance and checks and blah makes me weep for humanity. If I can hitch hike legally, why can't I pay for the same service? Basically it seems to me that regulation has the effect of forcing lifestyles upon people. You can't just sell people things, you have to be a Thing Seller and devote yourself to that regulatory environment and then you can sell some of the people some of the things.…

I think I would be weeping for humanity if these checks and balances vanished. Yes it is onerous, but sometimes they serve a purpose. If it stops one unfortunate event it is worth it in my books. Also, I am tired of this disrupt everything meme.

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

#59

Post by dylz »

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'm more concerned with why uber/lyft/etc are so popular.

They wouldn't be as big as it was if the existing system wasn't literally awful, as someone in SF -- if I wanted a '''real''' taxi, it has a chance to not bother coming several hours later more than anything. And then intentionally taking roundabout routes just to fuck me out of even more fare.

And at Santa Ana Metrolink, I had 'taxi' drivers effectively try stealing my bags, throwing them into their vehicles, and trying to drag me along while I was waiting for uber/lyft. Maybe in cities where there is significantly more regulation, enough licences, and no corruption Uber would not be nearly as popular.

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

#60

Post by discardorama »

fernandotakai wrote: post #31
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…

I spoke to the driver, as he was loading the suitcase. He clearly knew the destination, even before the ride had started.
Post reply on HN