61–70 of 161 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No thanks! If drivers need to be compensated better, I would suggest increasing the fare or Uber taking a smaller cut. A lot of people prefer Uber just so they don't have to deal with tipping like in traditional cabs.
Uber isn't taking a cut. They're subsidizing fares. https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/uber-true-cost-uh...
As a part-time Uber driver in Toronto I haven't noticed any drop-off in ride requests whatsoever. Uber will survive, at least unless someone else beats them to market with an autonomous alternative. I don't get any incentives or bonuses either, just ~75% of the gross receipts from the customer.
The only reason I have Uber on my phone is for trips to Ottawa.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I suspect that most CEOs would like that level of control, but they shouldn't get it.
Care to elaborate on why? The initial condition here is founders having full voting rights. In a free marketplace, they're free to sell shares without (or with little) voting rights as they wish. If investors aren't happy with it (which doesn't seem to be the case), they're free to not invest. You seem to be stating that there's a moral imperative that founders voluntarily give away voting rights to investors.
In the case of Uber, the CEO could run the company into the ground, and nobody would be able to prevent that.
A trend toward worse corporate governance could harm the entire economy eventually.
Uber is too young for the phrase "biggest crisis in its history". It has no history. It has none of the institutional depth to warrant such comparisons. That comes only after decades, after a company has survived multiple boom and bust cycles spanning multiple administrations. This is an upstart company run by upstart kids. That isn't bad per se, but we should expect unpredictability. Talk about company history when…
To me, a crisis would be if software stopped working as intended.
Uber is too young for the phrase "biggest crisis in its history". It has no history. It has none of the institutional depth to warrant such comparisons. That comes only after decades, after a company has survived multiple boom and bust cycles spanning multiple administrations. This is an upstart company run by upstart kids. That isn't bad per se, but we should expect unpredictability. Talk about company history when…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The entire point is that tipping shouldn't make the difference between being able to pay your heating bill. Tipping, as it exists in the US, is pretty much a dark pattern.
Then Uber should raise their rates - as it is, they take a greater cut of the fare than Lyft, charge less than Lyft, and don't offer tipping (which is always optional). This is a worse deal for the drivers overall from what drivers on both Uber and Lyft tell me, which is why I don't understand the tipping argument for when it comes to specifically using Uber or Lyft.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Around twenty people signed on to Trump's advisory committee, many of them very well-known figures in the tech and manufacturing industries. How many others, besides Kalanick, can you name off the top of your head? Given the volume of comments mentioning their role in the committee I've seen on HN, I'd say that HN users are probably at least as likely to know about Elon Musk being on the committee (and unlike Kalan…
Yeah, Elon Musk is the only one I could personally recall besides Travis Kalanick, without looking at an article listing the other members. Not a lot of people seem upset about Musk's presence on the committee, or about anyone else's for that matter. Funny. I'm sure it's all just a coincidence, or karma, or a spontaneous self-organizing feeding frenzy, or something.
Now, Kalanick actually managed to draw more attention by creating additional news by his dramatic resignation, but as far as criticism of the initial decision, I don't see any evidence he was treated differently than Musk; often, the two were mentioned together in both news articles and criticism.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The entire point is that tipping shouldn't make the difference between being able to pay your heating bill. Tipping, as it exists in the US, is pretty much a dark pattern.
Then Uber should raise their rates - as it is, they take a greater cut of the fare than Lyft, charge less than Lyft, and don't offer tipping (which is always optional). This is a worse deal for the drivers overall from what drivers on both Uber and Lyft tell me, which is why I don't understand the tipping argument for when it comes to specifically using Uber or Lyft.
IMHO as a part-time Uber driver, Uber could fix a lot of their current problems by putting tipping into the app. The self-driving car is not here yet, and Uber does not do enough for its drivers. If they would just add tipping I think that better drivers in better cars would start driving again. Without the tips, it's just not worth it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The entire point is that tipping shouldn't make the difference between being able to pay your heating bill. Tipping, as it exists in the US, is pretty much a dark pattern.
"Shouldn't" and "doesn't" are worlds apart. I think most people hate tipping because they hate when people ask for tips. But a formal tipping system might reduce the number of Uber drivers who already ask for tips.