California law bans delivery apps from listing a restaurant without an agreement

Post by saagarjha » Sun, Jan 03, 2021, 4:26 AM UTC

ashtonkem wrote: post #373

lostcolony wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it IS a matter of expectation, yes. If I go and pick up something that doesn't sit around at room temperature well (let's say a milkshake), and drive 20 minutes home before eating it, I'm not going to ding the restaurant for the fact it's melted. If, however, milkshakes are offered for takeout (reasonable), but then a third delivery party gets involved and starts offering them for delivery, anyone ordering it…

Funny fact, one of the best deliveries I’ve gotten this year was ice cream. The local creamery[0] has an option to sign up for weekly deliveries. They obviously bring the equipment to keep it properly frozen (easier than a milkshake I know), and check IDs for their alcoholic ice creams. I suspect that if they wanted to, they could have pulled off milkshake deliveries, although the logistics wouldn’t scale. 0 - https:…

Post by oarsinsync » Sun, Jan 03, 2021, 7:43 AM UTC

behnamoh wrote: post #632

wutbrodo wrote: post #628

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The claim is not that you have to be dumb to want a suboptimal burger over optimal Chinese food. It's that it doesn't make sense to do so and then blame the restaurant for the burger not being as fresh as it would be if you got it in-person. Also note that I'm not claiming that this is simply due to people being dumb. It's just my experience that, in the absence of an explanation for why someone does something "obvio…

I know people have different degrees of intelligent judgment, but you should also consider the fact that people who order online have already accepted the absurd fees and taxes imposed by the app (19% fee on Doordash, 16% on Grubhub, + tips + taxes). If you're willing to pay extra money in order to get your desired food while you're busy doing your own work, isn't it reasonable to get mad at the restaurant and the ap…

Post by scotty79 » Sun, Jan 03, 2021, 8:53 AM UTC

colejohnson66 wrote: post #584

whiddershins wrote: post #575

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But in that instance the dish wouldn’t be available for take out either. If the restaurant sells takeout, why does it matter whether I take it gone to my house or another person’s house?

DoorDashers have a tendency to pick up multiple orders at the same time without informing me. So I’ll order food expecting it’ll take 20 minutes, then it takes 40 because the dasher decided to take 4 orders at once. With a friend, I know they’re going there and coming right back, and if not, they generally let me know and I can reconsider.

Post by gtyras2mrs » Sun, Jan 03, 2021, 10:39 AM UTC

iamkoby wrote: post #646

What's wrong with CA? It seems to me that state tries it bests to kick innovation out, and start another tech ecosystem somewhere else... If impersonating is the reason they couldn't have just regulated a requirement to clearly list if the ad is by the owner or a third party, and not throw away the baby...

Post by user5994461 » Sun, Jan 03, 2021, 1:08 PM UTC

btilly wrote: post #538

kibibyte wrote: post #516

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> styrofoam is one of the most easily recycled substances Is that actually true? I've always heard to put styrofoam in trash rather than recycling.

It is. I had a friend whose father was a chemical engineer back in the 1980s who did a study on it. The cost per cubic yard to recycle styrofoam was insanely cheap. It was just that it required a specialized process that nobody implemented because creating more was also cheap. So it wasn't recycled, but it could have been.