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

Disruption for Thee, But Not for Me

locusmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 128 posts

Re: Disruption for Thee, But Not for Me

#21

Post by chrisseaton »

em3rgent0rdr wrote: post #11

This article is a good time to plug LibreTaxi: "Free and open source alternative to Uber/Lyft connecting passengers and drivers. LibreTaxi makes ridesharing affordable by getting rid of the third party between passengers and drivers. Negotiate the price before the ride is confirmed, pay cash upon arrival. 1-minute hiring for all drivers." https://libretaxi.org/

> Negotiate the price ... pay cash upon arrival

But avoiding an argument about price and then having to hand over cash is a large part of why I use Uber...

Re: Disruption for Thee, But Not for Me

#22

Post by mprev »

em3rgent0rdr wrote: post #11

This article is a good time to plug LibreTaxi: "Free and open source alternative to Uber/Lyft connecting passengers and drivers. LibreTaxi makes ridesharing affordable by getting rid of the third party between passengers and drivers. Negotiate the price before the ride is confirmed, pay cash upon arrival. 1-minute hiring for all drivers." https://libretaxi.org/

Cool.

I have to say, though, that not having to negotiate a price is a key benefit of Uber. The price is the price, no quibbling, no bait and switch.

Similarly, paying by cash feels like a step back.

Re: Disruption for Thee, But Not for Me

#23

Post by icebraining »

reubenswartz wrote: post #4

Thoughtful article. Wonder why you couldn’t have a meta ride app that would tell you which ride share app(s) to install based on your current location or on a search (say if you’re about to visit Austin for SXSW). A simple API for people to submit apps (and perhaps reviews) and no need to hack the incumbents’ apps (although there would be some karmic justice in that, I don’t think it’s right, and would probably lead…

If you want that, you can just go to the App or Play Store and search for "rides ".

What Uber provides, and what Cory's proposal piggybacks on, is trust: just like when you ask for a Big Mac, you know more or less what you're getting when you're matched an Uber driver with 4.8 starts, yet the same is not true for some other ridesharing app you've never heard of.

But that also backfires on his argument about Uber's rates and goal of replacing it; they can charge an higher rate because they provide a service that others don't - a reasonably consistent experience worldwide - and one can't get rid of it without harming the meta-app itself.

Re: Disruption for Thee, But Not for Me

#25

Post by ataturk »

chrisseaton wrote: post #21
em3rgent0rdr wrote: post #11

This article is a good time to plug LibreTaxi: "Free and open source alternative to Uber/Lyft connecting passengers and drivers. LibreTaxi makes ridesharing affordable by getting rid of the third party between passengers and drivers. Negotiate the price before the ride is confirmed, pay cash upon arrival. 1-minute hiring for all drivers." https://libretaxi.org/

> Negotiate the price ... pay cash upon arrival But avoiding an argument about price and then having to hand over cash is a large part of why I use Uber...

Cash is freedom, credit is chains. Convenience is how they get you.

Re: Disruption for Thee, But Not for Me

#26

Post by mprev »

marcosdumay wrote: post #10
ykevinator wrote: post #3

I love this. It indirectly calls out that uber has relatively easy to clone tech. A co-op network is a great idea and a white label or open source uber application is probably a great idea.

There is a long line of people willing to subsidize cab service. A white label app can not compete with them. After investors decide it's a sure way to lose money, it may happen.

I keep reading that Uber uses VC and other cash to subsidise rides. But if 25%, 30%, or whatever is Uber's cut then I feel like the VC cash is less about subsidising rides and more about subsidising the Uber infrastructure.

It might be a nitpick, but if a $10 ride already feels cheap and the driver only gets $7, then to some extent the driver is part of the chain of people subsidising the ride.

Re: Disruption for Thee, But Not for Me

#28

Post by blfr »

zozbot123 wrote: post #14
cs702 wrote: post #9

The main challenge to successful (i.e., market-dominating) cooperatively-owned platforms like the ones Cory wants is that usually there are no incentives that motivate individuals to dedicate their lives and souls in the creation, launching, running, and perpetual improvement of such platforms for the benefit of others. The exceptions, including successful projects like GNU and Linux, tend to be led by rather unique…

Creating a federated platform is technically quite feasible. E-mail, the Web, Usenet (before it was overrun by spam anyway), IRC... plus these days, stuff like PeerTube and Mastodon. Sure, not every one of these is "successful", but the trend is there.

The trend is definitely not there. The trend is away from IRC towards Slack, away from open web to walled gardens (or trashpiles) of Facebook, away from Usenet towards unfederated forums like this one.
Post reply on HN