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

Ride services decimate S.F. taxi industry's business

sfgate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–49 of 49 posts

Re: Ride services decimate S.F. taxi industry's business

#41

Post by nathannecro »

lolwutf wrote: post #25
eldavido wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amen to that. Living here in SF, the customer service aspect of cabs is appalling. I'm tired of getting dirty looks for paying with a credit card, having cabs with their light on and nobody in them drive right by me, playing the "where are you going" game, drivers talking on phones, and general surliness. The day the industry unionized, that pushed me over the edge. I'm now 100% using Uber to get around and my only r…

Don't forget: Uber and Uber's drivers have been responsible for children's deaths, interfering with the normal course of competitor's business, stuffing blind persons' service dogs in the trunk, price gouging during states of emergencies. All on top of a proprietary, unpublished 'surge pricing' algorithm. I know you think taxis are the devil, but Uber's behavior as a parent company has been downright heinous. Persona…

Aye, upvoted. Unsure why you're being downvoted so heavily.

I think we can all agree that cabs in the Bay Area are terrible. Uber and its kin have certainly changed the market.

Uber however, seem to be resorting to immoral and rather ruthless tactics to serve themselves.

Re: Ride services decimate S.F. taxi industry's business

#42

Post by cbd1984 »

Jedd wrote: post #33
Mandelbug wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interestingly, asking Google to define "decimate" returns a modern definition, "kill, destroy, or remove a large percentage or part of", and a historical one, "kill one in every ten of (a group of soldiers or others) as a punishment for the whole group". The English language has apparently moved on.

Certain uneducated users of the language may have 'moved on'. Doesn't mean the rest of us should encourage this misuse. The word devastate much better suits the intent here, which would leave decimate to continue meaning something quite specific (and useful).

Modern Parisians speak the most atrocious Latin, wouldn't you agree?

Re: Ride services decimate S.F. taxi industry's business

#43

Post by henrikschroder »

jfoster wrote: post #32
henrikschroder wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meanwhile, outside the Valley, across the ocean, five years ago, some regular taxi companies where I lived launched hailing apps, all on their own. No startups required. Maybe the competition was stronger?

Where is that? Would be interesting to know how Uber is doing in that market.

Stockholm, Uber just entered it, so that's going to be interesting to follow.

To be fair though, Uber's app is (now) better than the existing taxi company apps, with its integrated payments and map where you can see how far away your car is, so there's some value there.

Re: Ride services decimate S.F. taxi industry's business

#44

Post by drivingmenuts »

ghshephard wrote: post #19
drivingmenuts wrote: post #6

Want to kill Uber and Lyft? Require drivers to be as ADA-compliant as taxi services.

Given how few rides occur (less than what a single taxi driver sees in a month), it seems like the sort of thing Uber/Lyft could subsidize, particularly if all they commit to is the incredibly crappy service levels you get from the Taxi company.

The really evil part of me is thinking, and maybe I've got the wrong end of the stick here, like this:

When you request a ride with a taxi-service, it's up to the discretion of the service which car to send. You need something for a wheelchair? Fine, they send you what's available from their fleet.

When you request a ride from Uber or Lyft, those two are just middlemen who put you in touch with one of a thousand little companies. Potentially, each one is available.

So, here's the evil bit: require each ride-providing service (a taxi company or an Uber contractor or a Lyft contractor) to provide a minimum of one or two ADA-compliant vehicles.

The independent contractors for Uber and Lyft immediately go away, except for the one or two that are so wealthy as to be able to afford a ramp-van or other compliant vehicle.

Re: Ride services decimate S.F. taxi industry's business

#45

Post by panarky »

jliptzin wrote: post #11

Usually I feel bad for traditional businesses quickly displaced by emerging startups. However, I've been in too many cabs where the driver is constantly on the phone while driving, abusing the speed limit, slamming on the breaks every 8 seconds, foul odors, dirty vehicles, roundabout routes, the list goes on. Good riddance.

Bald tires, stopping to get gas with the meter running, no change for a $20 on a $12 ride, wait 40 minutes for a cab that doesn't show up, etc., etc.

While they weren't looking, the internet ate their lunch.

Now on to the next assignment ... how can Uber and Lyft encourage new regulation to put up barriers to new entrants?

Re: Ride services decimate S.F. taxi industry's business

#46

Post by Mandelbug »

Jedd wrote: post #33
Mandelbug wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interestingly, asking Google to define "decimate" returns a modern definition, "kill, destroy, or remove a large percentage or part of", and a historical one, "kill one in every ten of (a group of soldiers or others) as a punishment for the whole group". The English language has apparently moved on.

Certain uneducated users of the language may have 'moved on'. Doesn't mean the rest of us should encourage this misuse. The word devastate much better suits the intent here, which would leave decimate to continue meaning something quite specific (and useful).

Honestly I have never really found a situation where I wanted to exactly (or even slightly) mean reduce by 10%. It is too specific of a definition to be truly useful.

I find it much more convenient, and useful, to have a word that means the current modern definition of decimate. Perhaps decimate is a poor choice to represent that, but honestly not every word has to sound or have roots that directly relate to the definition of the word. It is more important words are used, rather than languish or die in history books.

Re: Ride services decimate S.F. taxi industry's business

#48

Post by MilnerRoute »

jliptzin wrote: post #11

Usually I feel bad for traditional businesses quickly displaced by emerging startups. However, I've been in too many cabs where the driver is constantly on the phone while driving, abusing the speed limit, slamming on the breaks every 8 seconds, foul odors, dirty vehicles, roundabout routes, the list goes on. Good riddance.

"It's the end of the world as we know it. And I feel fine...."

Re: Ride services decimate S.F. taxi industry's business

#49

Post by Jedd »

Mandelbug wrote: post #46
Jedd wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Certain uneducated users of the language may have 'moved on'. Doesn't mean the rest of us should encourage this misuse. The word devastate much better suits the intent here, which would leave decimate to continue meaning something quite specific (and useful).

Honestly I have never really found a situation where I wanted to exactly (or even slightly) mean reduce by 10%. It is too specific of a definition to be truly useful. I find it much more convenient, and useful, to have a word that means the current modern definition of decimate. Perhaps decimate is a poor choice to represent that, but honestly not every word has to sound or have roots that directly relate to the defi…

There's somewhere around 1,000,000 words in the English language.

> Honestly I have never really found a situation where I wanted to exactly (or even slightly) mean reduce by 10%. It is too specific of a definition to be truly useful.

I hope you realise that your use cases for words isn't the same as every other English-speaker's.

> I find it much more convenient, and useful, to have a word that means the current modern definition of decimate.

The word you're looking for, as mentioned, is devastate. Perhaps ruin, destroy, wreck, ravage, desolate, demolish, raze, etc. If you're happy with a phrase rather than a single word there's plenty more to choose from to convey your desired meaning.

> Perhaps decimate is a poor choice to represent that, but honestly not every word has to sound or have roots that directly relate to the definition of the word.

Agreed, but where words have a specific use (even if not to you) it's frustrating to have their meaning modified to a concept that is more than adequately conveyed by dozens of other, existing, commonly used words.

That's my point.

> It is more important words are used, rather than languish or die in history books.

I'm not even sure what to make of that claim.

Post reply on HN