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

I was an undercover Uber driver

citypaper.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 170 posts

Re: I was an undercover Uber driver

#141

Post by yesbabyyes »

Robin_Message wrote: post #139
yesbabyyes wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First off, I agree. It was rude and when I wrote it I was in a bad mood in general. I think the ensuing discussion is definitely worth my karma hit; I'm a little bit sorry that you had to receive that aggressiveness, but reading your response I have hope it's ok. What I felt when I read your post, and wrote my response, was not so much about you as about an attitude that I'm fed up with, which is basically "I can see…

I can heartily recommend a Fairphone to anyone bothered about the plight of workers in war-torn Congo. They have a new on coming out next year which I'm hoping will be Lollipop. (Current version is stuck on 4.2, which is a shame, but still totally workable.) Also I think Intel is getting is stuff conflict-free.

Thanks! I'm aware of the Fairphone, of course. I just prefer not to buy something new when I have something that's already working (kind of ;).

Thing is, I'm not all that keen of being part of The Almighty Google either... If Ubuntu would run on the Fairphone, that might be a great option.

Of course, the first thing is to practice restraint, and not buy lots of new stuff just because I can afford it.

Re: I was an undercover Uber driver

#142

Post by randomname2 »

rhino369 wrote: post #90
danieltillett wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the whole idea behind regulatory arbitrage. Find an industry that has built up "inefficiencies" due the law and then undercut by deliberately breaking the law. The only thing that amazes me about uber (apart from its current valuation) is that the taxi industry is powerful enough to prevent the issuing of more taxi medallions, but not powerful enough to get the current laws enforced against uber. Assuming ube…

"Taxi lobby" makes it sound like Uber is disrupting some megacorporate industry who control government in smokey back alleys. Taxi corps are small, many are essentially sole proprietorships. The drivers are essentially all running their own business, but the medallion owners tend not to be huge corporations. Medallions are required because cities regulate taxis prices and policies. Doing so distorts normal market for…

Some argue big business is big thanks to regulation/government protection keeping competitors out, by preventing them from becoming big or entering the market in the first place.

Isn't it very similar when Uber drivers aren't allowed to compete with the taxi industry, who enjoy a government-sanctioned monopoly?

Re: I was an undercover Uber driver

#143

Post by vacri »

BurningFrog wrote: post #104
DigitalSea wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just like workers in sweatshops and factories in countries like Indonesia and China have a choice to not work for a few dollars per day in dangerous conditions producing textiles for your $200 sneakers and smartphone components for your $1000 iPhone or Android device? The people working in those deplorable conditions are doing so voluntarily, right? Just like the homeless guy digging through the trash on Market St in…

> The people working in those deplorable conditions are doing so voluntarily, right? They actually are, and if you ask them then can explain why they chose it. These factory jobs are usually very sought after, and has lifted millions from extreme poverty. I suspect you have little idea how harsh third world poverty actually is. This is a good overview: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/15/opinion/15kristof.html?_r=... >…

Choosing the frying pan instead of the fire isn't much of an argument in favour of 'choosing voluntarily to work at X'.

Besides, having no better options absolutely does not mean that you're not getting shafted.

Re: I was an undercover Uber driver

#144

Post by rconti »

marincounty wrote: post #23
gcr wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "Sidecar" app may be more appropriate for drivers who want to take customers for a ride in their go karts/tractor trailers/dune buggies/mopeds/cat busses/... :)

Besides the Moped--they aren't quite street legal? What is the point of the App if you can't see the vechicle? Do you happen to work in a climate controlled Uber office--with stock shares? My point is don't claim Independent Contractor status when you're obviously not. This link makes fun reading. Maybe you can explain automotive aesthetics to me, Honda, Chevrolet, or Volkswagen? http://www.driveubernyc.com/vehicles/…

The list is amazingly odd. I get that a BMW 3 series is acceptable but an M3 is not -- perhaps they don't want customers being given rides by those who fancy themselves "performance drivers".

But the Subaru Impreza WRX but not the Subaru WRX? They're the same car! Impreza not acceptable, but WRX is? That turns the "performance vehicle" thing on it's head.

Many small luxury vehicles (Audi A3, etc) are not acceptable. Okay, fine. But the Prius is! But the Lexus Ct200h (which is a Prius with a fancier badge) is not acceptable.

The BMW 3 series is acceptable, as is the 4 series coupe, but the 4 series Gran Coupe (a Sedan version of the 4 series coupe, which is a coupe version of the 3 series sedan.. yeah, don't ask) is NOT acceptable?

Re: I was an undercover Uber driver

#145

Post by vacri »

branchless wrote: post #84
pmorici wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. Uber employs extremely deceptive advertising to recruit drivers and encourages them to do things like buy new cars then turns around and cuts the amount drivers get paid. This has the effect of totally screwing them over. It's a pretty exploitative situation for people who actually rely on it for income to pay their living expenses.

I think people need to ask themselves - if it's half the price of a regular cab how can this be? Either tax drivers are being exploited by their employers who are pocketing most of the wealth generated, or uber drivers are underpaid. Or taxi firms are insanely inefficient and uber has undercut them with their web 3.0 brilliance.

Most people have no business training, and don't know about how to look for hidden costs. It's easy enough to think that taxis are that expensive solely due to the overpriced medallion system, which crops up in newspapers every now and again. Most people wouldn't understand that Uber's profit largely comes from shifting the risk from themselves to the drivers.

Re: I was an undercover Uber driver

#146

Post by hueving »

maceo wrote: post #79
smil wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That labor is a commodity is not an "idea", but in the case of Uber drivers and the Foxconn workers who assemble iPhones, a fact. It is a fact because that's how those jobs and service/production processes have been designed. The work has been broken down into their smallest parts, so that it will require no special skill or intelligence to perform them. As anyone can do those jobs, they have been de facto commoditiz…

In that regard, it's been a fact since the division of labor was first outlined (and then fetishized) in the late 18th century. In terms of breaking down the tasks needed to build the final product, early Ford factories were just as efficient as modern Foxconn assembly plants. I'm not arguing whether it's a fact or not. Culturally, in 2015 America it's a fact. In 1915 America, the same "fact" would have been handily…

>The solution isn't to push everyone into some multi-disciplinary creative class. Many people would be very happy as uber drivers, or any other menial job, if they were treated with respect by their employer.

I'm not going to use Uber if they are paying the driver $40/hr as a real employee (which translates to closer to $80/hr cost) simply because it will cost more than a cab at that point.

Re: I was an undercover Uber driver

#147

Post by peteretep »

icebraining wrote: post #134
peteretep wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "remember - UberBLACK and UberSUV vehicles MUST be black > on black. Colour? If so, that's not true in practice in Bangkok. All the cars here seem to be Toyota Camry's (or SUVs), and I've had a fair number of white ones.

Are you sure that's UberBlack, not UberX?

Yes

Re: I was an undercover Uber driver

#148

Post by bayesianhorse »

Driving people from A to B individually would be a "perfect competition" kind of situation without regulation. Some of the motivation behind regulating this market was that some taxi drivers just started robbing their customers.

Now Uber is doing away with the regulation, and it's "perfect competition" again, the state of affairs when prices have to be so low that there is almost no profit for the suppliers. Uber will always make the most overall profit with their drivers just on the edge of survival.

Uber may actually set the fares just below the profitability point, because new drivers or those "driving for fun" actually put money on the table rather than being paid.

Re: I was an undercover Uber driver

#149

Post by fx85ms »

danieltillett wrote: post #38
aikah wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It has to So basically you mean than Uber can only make money if most their drivers do not respect the law. Which gives Uber an unfair advantage over the competition (regular taxis that do respect the law ). It's like saying employer X doesn't check if his employees are legal workers, because if he did it would be too expensive to do business. But hey, even startups got to hussle to make a good living.

This is the whole idea behind regulatory arbitrage. Find an industry that has built up "inefficiencies" due the law and then undercut by deliberately breaking the law. The only thing that amazes me about uber (apart from its current valuation) is that the taxi industry is powerful enough to prevent the issuing of more taxi medallions, but not powerful enough to get the current laws enforced against uber. Assuming ube…

Forgive me if I sound ignorant of America's laws because I'm not from this country, but I'm really puzzled as to why Uber is able to continue to operating in the country. Why is Uber exempt from all the taxi laws that are currently in place in the states, able to make itself sound like a legitimate business despite breaking regulations everywhere? Feels to me as if you can justify breaking regulations by "satisfying customer demands". I'm really curious.

Re: I was an undercover Uber driver

#150

Post by olalonde »

I found it interesting that many customers were complaining about drivers with accents. I wonder if, would Uber implement per-driver pricing, those people would really pay a premium for drivers with no accent.
Post reply on HN