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

Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still operate while appealing

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 520 posts

Re: Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still operate while appealing

#251

Post by cmcaine »

kd5bjo wrote: post #214
itamarst wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You would think Uber Autonomous Vehicles group would do everything they can not to hit pedestrians. Yet according to the NTSB, previous to killing a pedestrian in Arizona Uber had a weak safety culture ( https://www.ntsb.gov/news/events/Documents/2019-HWY18MH010-B... ). Even worse, "Pedestrian outside crosswalk not assigned goal of crossing street", "Tracking history not considered when classification changes", "Pred…

> "Pedestrian outside crosswalk not assigned goal of crossing street", "Tracking history not considered when classification changes", "Predicted path depended on object’s goal" To be fair, I could see myself implementing these sort of heuristics to get a working prototype. On the other hand, I deliberately avoid working on life-critical software because of how easily it can go wrong.

OK, but you absolutely wouldn't let a self-driving car out without ernest human supervision or really rigorous testing would you?

Re: Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still operate while appealing

#252

Post by Jommi »

lhopki01 wrote: post #167
isostatic wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Private hire drivers are vetted, and their cars have to undergo enhanced MOTs

And this is why Uber lots it's license. It wasn't properly vetting private hire drivers. It's not hard. Follow the rules and they'll get their license back.

I'm just perplexed. What are you even commenting on? Uber isnt the one vetting private drivers, they just check if they have the private driver license or not. This is up to tfl.

Re: Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still operate while appealing

#253

Post by Angostura »

thathndude wrote: post #200
harel wrote: post #198

I'm not a fan of companies like Uber or AirBnB who attempt a violent takeover of a market. However, as a consumer who needs to get from A to B, or stay at some random city, I find those services invaluable. The black cabs in London are expensive, never around when you need them, and until recently might have refused card payments (now they just seem unhappy about it). At the very least I was hoping Uber would make th…

Yep. I'm always amazed at how quickly people crap on Uber. In hindsight it's not a particularly revolutionary service. But does everyone remember how much the Taxi system sucked?

I remember calling my local minicab company and usually getting a ride in 10 or 15 minutes. Or grabbing a black cab. Never used Uber.

Re: Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still operate while appealing

#254

Post by criddell »

ApolloFortyNine wrote: post #237
thinkindie wrote: post #217

have you ever wondered what makes services like Uber affordable? 1) underpaid drivers 2) VC money dropped into an otherwise unsustainable business I'm pretty sure Uber will raise prices the moment it kills the competition

> underpaid drivers This is and always will be a matter of opinion. Uber is not putting a gun to anyone's head. If it's not profitable for you to drive, you don't have to.

Since drivers can't set their own rates, I've always felt the government should regulate the split. Uber's portion should be capped at something like 5%. The marginal cost for them to connect a driver to a rider is close to 0 so even 5% feels very generous.

Re: Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still operate while appealing

#255

Post by oefrha »

NikolaNovak wrote: post #172
pluma wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, Uber is more exploitative for the drivers and less safe for the riders, so the choice seems clear. On the other hand Uber has a flashy logo and an app and is sometimes cheaper.

It may be specific to markets. In Canada's national capital region (Ottawa/Gatineau), where I travel to frequently, I've used Uber extensively even though it's more expensive and less convenient (taxi is right in front of hotel, Uber I have to call and wait for), simply because all cars were in good shape and all drivers were polite and reasonable. For some reason in that region, majority of taxi drivers: a) Have car…

My god, the number of times I sat in a cab with the driver loudly honking and/or swearing at cyclists in the pre-Uber era... And all too often the awkward “conversations” where I had to um, hmm, yeah all the way...

Uber drivers are actually refreshingly polite, I even enjoyed the conversation a few times. Out of my more than a hundred rides there was only one bad experience (other than occasionally waiting for a driver that’s motionless or moving away from me): obviously new driver, didn’t know where the fuck he was going, couldn’t seem to follow GPS, asked for tip at the end of the exceptionally bad, twice as long trip.

Re: Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still operate while appealing

#256

Post by Jommi »

pgl wrote: post #20
samwillis wrote: post #5

The article doesn't really explain... their current temporary license (they have been on a temp one since last year) expires at 11.59 tonight, TFL won't give them a new permanent one. This will be in the courts today and they will probably be granted another temporary one before the day is out.

From the TfL press release: > Legislation means that Uber now has 21 days to appeal, during which it can continue to operate pending any appeal and throughout any potential appeals process. Uber may seek to implement changes to demonstrate to a magistrate that it is fit and proper by the time of the appeal.

Exactly, so 21 days + how long the appeal process and outcome takes time. And the end result may as well be them being given a new temp. license.

Re: Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still operate while appealing

#257

Post by oarsinsync »

eggy wrote: post #247

If the concern over rider safety was that somebody could pose as an Uber driver and update a photo to make it work, why are black cabs not also deemed unsafe? Couldn't somebody borrow a friend's black cab, slap on a fake photo, and work the city? Maybe a stretch, and more work, but the same concern is there, no? I guess the black cabs have some powerful lobbyists in parliment? Yellow taxis in NYC were a monopoly, and…

I don't know the answer to this, but I suspect it may have something down to the difference in penalty for fraudulent behaviour.

At the very least, if the only penalty is getting booted off the 'platform', getting added to Uber's platform is relatively cheap. Getting added to the black cab 'platform' requires getting licensed, which takes years and costs a lot of money.

I'd imagine that fraudulently impersonating a black cabbie comes with significantly more penalty than getting 'booted off the platform' (license revocation).

Re: Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still operate while appealing

#258

Post by pjmlp »

thathndude wrote: post #200
harel wrote: post #198

I'm not a fan of companies like Uber or AirBnB who attempt a violent takeover of a market. However, as a consumer who needs to get from A to B, or stay at some random city, I find those services invaluable. The black cabs in London are expensive, never around when you need them, and until recently might have refused card payments (now they just seem unhappy about it). At the very least I was hoping Uber would make th…

Yep. I'm always amazed at how quickly people crap on Uber. In hindsight it's not a particularly revolutionary service. But does everyone remember how much the Taxi system sucked?

On the German city where I live, they are pretty alright.

Re: Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still operate while appealing

#259

Post by Joe8Bit »

thathndude wrote: post #200
harel wrote: post #198

I'm not a fan of companies like Uber or AirBnB who attempt a violent takeover of a market. However, as a consumer who needs to get from A to B, or stay at some random city, I find those services invaluable. The black cabs in London are expensive, never around when you need them, and until recently might have refused card payments (now they just seem unhappy about it). At the very least I was hoping Uber would make th…

Yep. I'm always amazed at how quickly people crap on Uber. In hindsight it's not a particularly revolutionary service. But does everyone remember how much the Taxi system sucked?

London has had 10,000's of mini-cabs for decades that served a big chunk of this non-Black cab market. They weren't perfect but they were cheap, pretty ubiquitous and served most (if not all) of the spaces left in the market by black cabs.

So Uber as a service hasn't been that revolutionary in London, the things they HAVE done is improve the ordering UX and making CC's ubiquitous.

Re: Uber loses licence to operate in London, will still operate while appealing

#260

Post by johnnycab »

NeedMoreTea wrote: post #116
bloke_zero wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In London minicabs and black cabs are very different. Black cabs can be hailed whereas minicabs have to be booked and are regulated differently.

Yeah I know, that's why I pointed out that it was mainly private hire. Yet it wasn't solely them as most black cab firms also took calls and bookings and despatched just like minicabs, opening them up to the same scam. Genuine street hire only black cabs still exist, but they're pretty damn rare now.

>Genuine street hire only black cabs still exist, but they're pretty damn rare now.

They are not rare in city centres, which is their natural habitat eg. take a trip into Central London/Westend/City of London etc., you will find them everywhere. Unless, you are talking about the suburbs, where they have always been as rare as hens teeth.

https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/taxis-and-private-hire/licensing...

Post reply on HN