Live data from Hacker News

It's not a crime if we do it with an app

pluralistic.net

461–470 of 640 posts

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please cite example of farting in the wrong courtroom. Either that, or your post is hyperbolic.

Yes. Yes it is. Congrats you cracked the code.

And yet, if someone replies “that’s exaggerated” they’ll be told they’re wrong.

Have your cake and eat it too

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#462

This is the way our world works. If you steal a potato, you will be arrested immediately and the case will be resolved in a few weeks or months. If you illegally fix the price of potatoes and steal billions from the market, you will be allowed to operate for years in the open while a lengthy civil procedure eventually may ask you to give 1 or 2% of what you stole back in fines. Don't blame the potato theives or potat…

> Don't blame the potato theives or potato cartels, blame the politicians that built the system to work this way.

The corporations and politicians are not independent though. The corporations lobby to get a rigged system they want.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Forget about oil for a second. Why is a large box of cereal $8 at the supermarket? It costs pennies to produce, maybe a dollar in landed cost. The small box costs almost the same landed and it's $5, which is also absurd. There is no supply shortage of corn and sugar, and no glut of demand for cereal. I'm not stupid, I understand supply and demand. COVID was 4 years ago. Explain the $8 box of cereal.

The company that makes the cereal is a low margin business. In fact most food that isnt high end is low margin. Somewhere they have a lot of costs to cover.

None of that answers the question of why a box of cereal that costs a dollar or so to deliver landed to a store costs me $8 to buy. Middle men are taking a huge chunk of the pie!

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#464

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If Uber has let so many drivers on the app such that they cannot earn a minimum wage, they should stop aggressively enrolling new drivers. Why? All Uber cares about are the fees it collects, which are dependent on the total number of miles and total number of rides. It has no reason to care if its drivers make minimum wage or not, unless it can be shown that if they cannot, Uber will not have enough drivers. Fortun…

> It has no reason to care if its drivers make minimum wage or not Is the question "are we breaking any laws" not a reason to care?

Given the legal record w.r.t Uber, I think its fairly clear that it is not.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#465

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Uber has let so many drivers on the app such that they cannot earn a minimum wage, they should stop aggressively enrolling new drivers. They could have also kicked people out for full days, rest of shift, or given an indicator of when they may try again. Something that leaves it more clear they are off and don't linger around to try and get back in. Restaurants/retail will reduce staffing due to demand, but they d…

> If Uber has let so many drivers on the app such that they cannot earn a minimum wage, they should stop aggressively enrolling new drivers. The number of drivers needed at any given time is completely variable. It's obviously a larger number during peak travel periods. Suppose number of drivers needed off-peak is 100 and the number needed at the peak is 500 and they have 300 drivers. They need to sign up another 200…

I mean this is just a private corporation that replaced an older private corporation (a taxi company) who in turn was trying to solve the core issue with car dependent infrastructure, which is: what does one do if one doesn't have a car?

Because if you're just at home, car centered infrastructure while expensive, inefficient, and dangerous, does function. But then, if you leave home on a business trip or a vacation... the problems become quite apparent quite quickly.

And you're completely correct here diagnosing the problem:

> Suppose number of drivers needed off-peak is 100 and the number needed at the peak is 500 and they have 300 drivers. They need to sign up another 200 drivers to satisfy the peak demand, but they already have 200 more than they can use off-peak. What would you have them do? They effectively need a large proportion of the drivers to be working part time specifically during peak hours.

Where I disagree is that there's a car-based answer to this, because restricting ourselves to working within the bounds of the car has caused the damn problem: because you need X number of cars with X number of drivers available to move Y number of people at Z time of day, and all three of these are going to change with availability in unpredictable ways. Whereas just... good mass transit could move all of those people, with less fuel, FAR less vehicles, and while those journeys would all probably take a bit longer even in ideal conditions, they would be safer, our air would be cleaner, and you wouldn't even need a taxi company or an app that pays people slave wages to take you places.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#466
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The current administration, however, plans to let M&A run wild. Oligopolies don’t need an app for uncoordinated price fixing. The fact that there’s a cartel that controls 97% of the frozen potato market is wild . This will only get worse without breakups.

> cartel that controls 97% of the frozen potato market This is a weird and emotionally loaded statement. Properly stated, the top four frozen potato producers have 97% of the market share . That doesn't sound odd? In a mature market with very little technology innovation (potatoes) and very little geographic specificity (frozen), how many companies would you expect? How many laundry detergent companies are there? How…

In a healthy economy I would expect the government to prevent that level of concentration and ensure that every potato producer and every potato buyer had multiple local options for processing and distribution. Like you said, mature technology, very little innovation or geographic specificity - anyone with startup capital should be able to get in the business. Instead we let a handful of corporations define and regulate the market for their own benefit. How does that make any sense?

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#467

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how many companies - lifetime - have actually been charged, convicted and significantly impacted by the sherman act?

Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Amazon are the ones in FANMAG off the top of my head. Also keep in mind that the existence of the law guides decisions around compliance. There is ample evidence that all of the big decisions at FANMAG are viewed through compliance with anti-trust as a concern. Basically, a lot of big companies haven't been prosecuted because they have armies of lawyers working on where exactly that law k…

Google, Meta, Microsoft, Amazon have really been hurting … :)

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#468

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't doubt uber could have done better here, but characterizing poor UI as "circumvent the NYC law to try and ensure Uber drivers get a fair minimum wage" is a stretch. Honestly, that's _exactly_ what it looks like to me. Law makes it so that they have to pay drivers that are available to drive but aren't actively involved in a fair... so they change the system so that, if they don't have fairs for you you're no…

The actual problem is that it's a stupid law. You effectively have two options. Option one, Uber signs up as many drivers as they have customers during off-peak hours and then if you want to drive only during peak hours to take advantage of surge pricing you can't and if you want a ride then there won't be enough drivers, because they won't sign up any more if they'd have to pay someone for 8 hours to have them only…

Option three: They get enough drivers to cover most of the peak, and end up paying for some idle time otherwise. Just like almost every company with permanent staff.

Alternatively option two with an explicit, upfront decisions who is actually part-time, so there are no surprises and the rules are known.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Forget about oil for a second. Why is a large box of cereal $8 at the supermarket? It costs pennies to produce, maybe a dollar in landed cost. The small box costs almost the same landed and it's $5, which is also absurd. There is no supply shortage of corn and sugar, and no glut of demand for cereal. I'm not stupid, I understand supply and demand. COVID was 4 years ago. Explain the $8 box of cereal.

What it costs to produce is irrelevant in an equilibrium price for supply and demand. I'm not sure you do understand. Many people are buying the cereal for $8. Its that simple. There is enough demand for it at $8 that the company is happy with the market clearing their supply at that price point. If people were not buying the cereal at that price, they would lower it, or have gone out of business by now. If someone c…

But why is all that cereal $8? Where's the competition driving prices back down?

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you steal a potato, you will be arrested immediately and the case will be resolved in a few weeks or months Have you been to San Francisco? We don't prosecute petty crime in America. If you want a proper example, compare it to wage theft (including by small businesses).

> We don't prosecute petty crime in America. Yes we do; at rates that horrify the rest of the world. It's very expensive. You can find a lot of detail here: [0]. > Most people in the U.S. criminal legal system are not accused of serious crimes; more often, they are charged with misdemeanors or non-criminal violations. Yet even low-level offenses, like technical violations of probation and parole, can lead to incarcer…

> Most people in the U.S. criminal legal system are not accused of serious crimes; more often, they are charged with misdemeanors or non-criminal violations

I've probably committed misdemeanors; I don't think I've committed a felony. If misdemeanors are committed at a higher rate than felonies, and felonies are prosecuted at a higher frequency than misdemeanors, most prosecutions will be misdemeanors and most uncaught crime would have been charged as a misdemeanor.

> low-level offenses, like technical violations of probation and parole

It's difficult to call probation or parole violations "low-level offenses" without knowing the underlying offense.

Post reply on HN