Google Takes on Uber with New Ride-Share Service • Hacker News Board

Re: Google Takes on Uber with New Ride-Share Service

#471

Post by stevenwiles » Wed, Aug 31, 2016, 11:50 PM UTC

oldmanjay wrote: post #46

tajen wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you ironic? Do you see what's strange in that? Machine learning isn't exempt of racism. Google has a lot of background on people, but it's generally accepted as unethic to filter undesirable people based on generalizations, even if they were statistically correct.

I can't tell if you're continuing the jocular tone of your parent or if you're serious that this is the concern that actually came to your mind first. I charitably hope it's the first.

Haha, looking through your comment history, you have absolutely no right to be using such a concescending tone.

Does your resume include any position besides "old, disgruntled, unhappy, friendless programmer"?

Re: Google Takes on Uber with New Ride-Share Service

#472

Post by ghshephard » Thu, Sep 01, 2016, 12:00 AM UTC

relaytheurgency wrote: post #469

ghshephard wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have never given a 0% tip in the United States. If the service is that bad, get the manager, have them fired - but as long as they are working, they should be paid. Not tipping is equivalent to asking someone to work without salary. Tipping 10% is pretty damn aggressive, and the few times that I've done it, it's certainly gotten a reaction. What people have to understand, is that a "Tip" in the United States for a…

How, exactly, does not tipping result in someone not being paid. A bit hyperbolic.

Not hyperbolic at all. If you read through this thread, the "salary" they are paid assumes that they are making money through tips. It doesn't get adjusted if they are tipped less.

Re: Google Takes on Uber with New Ride-Share Service

#473

Post by euyyn » Thu, Sep 01, 2016, 12:40 AM UTC

flukus wrote: post #372

euyyn wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those books aren't really mentioning Google Search as an example, right? It didn't have first-mover advantage.

It kind of did, AFAIK it was the first functional search engine. Everything else at the time was pretty terrible.

Yeah, no true Scotsman ends up losing first-mover advantage.

Re: Google Takes on Uber with New Ride-Share Service

#474

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Sep 01, 2016, 1:05 AM UTC

coldpie wrote: post #411

hyperbovine wrote: post #82

> Unlike Uber and its crosstown rival Lyft Inc., both of which largely operate as on-demand taxi businesses, Waze wants to connect riders with drivers who are already headed in the same direction. Funny because that is Lyft's (né Zimride) original model. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

> Funny because that is Lyft's (né Zimride) Holy crow, I've always seen it spelled née, and sure enough, it's because it's almost always used when referring to a woman's name before marriage. Turns out né exists for men! Are companies masculine, then? (Gendered languages belong in the dumpster of history.)

[deleted]

Re: Google Takes on Uber with New Ride-Share Service

#475

Post by flukus » Thu, Sep 01, 2016, 1:50 AM UTC

euyyn wrote: post #473

flukus wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It kind of did, AFAIK it was the first functional search engine. Everything else at the time was pretty terrible.

Yeah, no true Scotsman ends up losing first-mover advantage.

It's not no true scotsman though. Google search was very different to what came before it. The only similarity was the UI.

Re: Google Takes on Uber with New Ride-Share Service

#476

Post by vegabook » Thu, Sep 01, 2016, 9:51 PM UTC

chc wrote: post #40

htaunay wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is this being downvoted? Honest question. After Glass, G+, Fiber and possibly Boston Dynamics, I'm failing to see any moonshots living up to the hype as well. At least up until now.

Probably because it's a middlebrow dismissal that's barely even middlebrow.

well it doesn't get more "middle brow" than your vacuous meta non-comment. Actually the reality is that it's being downvoted because being anti-google is not a popular stance amongst the tech set, even if there is, as this poster seems to suggest, merit to the logic.

Re: Google Takes on Uber with New Ride-Share Service

#477

Post by vegabook » Thu, Sep 01, 2016, 10:18 PM UTC

euyyn wrote: post #345

vegabook wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well clearly they're brilliant at creating free platforms for advertising. They just seem to be poor at doing anything that requires explicit payment.

I knew you could do it.

haha... yeah. :-) Good ol' google.

Re: Google Takes on Uber with New Ride-Share Service

#478

Post by relaytheurgency » Fri, Sep 02, 2016, 9:00 PM UTC

ghshephard wrote: post #472

relaytheurgency wrote: post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How, exactly, does not tipping result in someone not being paid. A bit hyperbolic.

Not hyperbolic at all. If you read through this thread, the "salary" they are paid assumes that they are making money through tips. It doesn't get adjusted if they are tipped less.

What? They are paid the standard minimum wage if they aren't tipped. It's actually the opposite of what you're saying. Their hourly pay from their employer DOES get adjusted when they are tipped below a rate which satisfies the federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour.

Re: Google Takes on Uber with New Ride-Share Service

#479

Post by fletom » Fri, Sep 02, 2016, 9:05 PM UTC

jdavis703 wrote: post #36

speg wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I took an Uber home from the train station last week and it was less than $15. I'm not sure how much a taxi would've been, probably at least $25. I don't feel good about it. How can someone provide good service if they're taking home so little? I fear that soon Uber will be overrun with poor service because all the quality drivers have been driven out by low costs.

Uber also subsidizes your ride sometimes. I had a ride that Uber paid the driver about $60 for (we were talking about the economics of the service and this came up), and I paid only $3.

Either you or the Uber driver in question completely made that up. Nobody is paying drivers $60 for $3 rides.

Re: Google Takes on Uber with New Ride-Share Service

#480

Post by ghshephard » Sat, Sep 03, 2016, 3:46 AM UTC

relaytheurgency wrote: post #478

ghshephard wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not hyperbolic at all. If you read through this thread, the "salary" they are paid assumes that they are making money through tips. It doesn't get adjusted if they are tipped less.

What? They are paid the standard minimum wage if they aren't tipped. It's actually the opposite of what you're saying. Their hourly pay from their employer DOES get adjusted when they are tipped below a rate which satisfies the federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour.

That presumes first class (or at least credible) payroll management, which, while there are probably instances of in the Restaurant Industry, is less common than one might hope. In practice, waitresses are paid their minimum server wage and are then on their own to scrounge up tips to make up the difference. For each case where we can find where a restaurant actually made up the difference in missing tips, we will likely also find several examples of where it doesn't happen.

And, while that "$7.25/hour" is OK in some place like Terre Haute, Indiana, It's destitute poverty in a lot of cities, so the societally agreed convention is that in order to live/pay groceries/utilities/bus-fare/etc... tips are essential.

It's reasonable to assume that when a serving person in the United Stated doesn't receive a tip of 18-20%, then that money is resulting in a reduction of expected baseline salary.