|
Arivia posted:Who's that? I thought everyone was gawking at what Ezra Levant said. Seriously what did he say because I can't make heads or tails out of it being anything BUT a potshot at Trudeau. It was Ezra. Also, to the shock of no-one, it's not even the truth. Both UN and Canada did do screening. But yeah, he went for a stupid, borderline racist jab at Trudeau.
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 19:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 19:17 |
|
|
Constant Hamprince posted:The barrier to entry is a lot lower for ridesharing services than it is for taxis. How would Uber 'destroy' its competitors? The same way it has so far, undercutting their rates using its first mover advantage and occasional dirty tricks campaigns to harm its competitors reputation. This is really only tangential, but I'd love to know how anything Uber does qualifies as "ridesharing". Their "We called it ridesharing not a jitney service, so it's not illegal" bullshit doesn't count.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 19:03
|
|
|
Constant Hamprince posted:The barrier to entry is a lot lower for ridesharing services than it is for taxis. How would Uber 'destroy' its competitors? A significant part of it has already happened: any competitor trying to compete with Uber in a market where Uber is already established faces the prospect of having to establish infrastructure where Uber already possesses most of it--most people who want to drive for ridesharing services already drive for Uber, most people who want to take ridesharing services already use Uber, Uber has more drivers which means you get a car faster, Uber has a lot more users which means more rewards for its drivers. Having to establish all that infrastructure where a monopolistic competitor already exists is much, much more difficult than establishing one where no one is doing what you do. Maybe you can pick up the 'disgruntled Uber drivers and riders' market but that's hardly enough to get you to real competitor status when a significant amount of inertia already exists behind Uber's operations. Compare it to other monopolistic companies--how easy would it be to set up a competitor to Google? Even if you can code a better search engine, and recognizing that the barrier to entry for setting up a website is really really low, how do you think you're actually going to overtake their dominance in the search engine market? Besides that, there's standard monopolistic anti-competition practices like lowering your prices temporarily to drive competitors out of business, or blacklisting drivers who choose to drive for other companies, or using their billions of dollars on campaigns to smear their opposition, or simply outright buying their competition. There is a lot they can do. e: also this quote:Uber issued an apology on January 24, 2014, after documents were leaked to the Valleywag and TechCrunch publications saying that, earlier in the month, Uber employees in New York City deliberately ordered rides from Gett, a newly established competitor, only to cancel them later. The purpose of the fake orders was two-fold: wasting drivers' time to obstruct legitimate customers from securing a car, and offering drivers incentives — including cash — to join Uber.[162] Uber later issued a statement about the incident on its website.[163] vyelkin fucked around with this message at 19:18 on Dec 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 19:09
|
|
|
Whenever someone goes "oh I hate taxis" I just assume they're being racist. Taxis are perfectly fine and the drivers work really hard to make something that vaguely resembles an honest living, which no driver will ever get from Goober.
Juul-Whip fucked around with this message at 19:15 on Dec 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:A significant part of it has already happened: any competitor trying to compete with Uber in a market where Uber is already established faces the prospect of having to establish infrastructure where Uber already possesses most of it--most people who want to drive for ridesharing services already drive for Uber, most people who want to take ridesharing services already use Uber, Uber has more drivers which means you get a car faster, Uber has a lot more users which means more rewards for its drivers. Having to establish all that infrastructure where a monopolistic competitor already exists is much, much more difficult than establishing one where no one is doing what you do. Maybe you can pick up the 'disgruntled Uber drivers and riders' market but that's hardly enough to get you to real competitor status when a significant amount of inertia already exists behind Uber's operations. Compare it to other monopolistic companies--how easy would it be to set up a competitor to Google? Even if you can code a better search engine, and recognizing that the barrier to entry for setting up a website is really really low, how do you think you're actually going to overtake their dominance in the search engine market? In addition to this, it's worth adding that Uber in particular doesn't exactly sound as though it has the healthiest corporate culture: quote:Uber executive apologises after suggesting the firm dig dirt on hostile journalists
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 19:19
|
|
|
THC posted:Whenever someone goes "oh I hate taxis" I just assume they're being racist. Taxis are perfectly fine and the drivers work really hard to make something that vaguely resembles an honest living, which no driver will ever get from Goober. No, they're not fine. Out of the past 5 times I've taken taxis, 4 of them have flouted traffic laws (distracted driving, running stop signs, ignoring playground zones entirely, running stop signs) and the other one took a needlessly long route to increase the fare. A lot are decent, but a lot are really, really lovely and dangerous. My friend worked as a (properly licensed) limo driver and the horror stories he told about the other drivers makes me think it's more than just bad luck on my part, although I agree it's often a lovely, thankless job. EDIT: I get that Uber sucks in a lot of ways, but I prefer them to taxis at the moment just because I think the current taxi system, in Calgary at least, is so deeply dysfunctional that it needs to be burnt completely to the ground and re-built from the ashes. If I have to temporarily side with Uber to make that happen, it's for the best.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 19:22
|
|
|
Those things could just as easily happen with an Uber.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 19:24
|
|
|
PT6A posted:EDIT: I get that Uber sucks in a lot of ways, but I prefer them to taxis at the moment just because I think the current taxi system, in Calgary at least, is so deeply dysfunctional that it needs to be burnt completely to the ground and re-built from the ashes. If I have to temporarily side with Uber to make that happen, it's for the best. Well, at least accelerationism is linguistically appropriate here.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
THC posted:Those things could just as easily happen with an Uber. Breaking traffic laws, yes. Taking an unnecessarily long route, no, because there's a record of where the driver has gone, and you get a copy on your receipt, so you can contact Uber and complain if the driver takes a really lovely route. Besides, the fact is that, although those things could happen with an Uber, in my experience, they have not. I don't know why either. Maybe Uber drivers are more scared of getting caught.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 19:28
|
|
|
Jan posted:
The "loving promise" was usually stated as tax cuts for the middle class, how loving stupid of the plebs making the median income to think they qualified as the middle class. The platform piece your quoting is misleading in itself, everyone with income between 45K and 200k will see their income tax fall.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 19:35
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Besides, the fact is that, although those things could happen with an Uber, in my experience, they have not. I don't know why either. Maybe Uber drivers are more scared of getting caught. Even if they get caught it's their own fault! and has nothing to do with their driving around, looking for fares at the time. Just independent contractors, independently contracting their way around. e: oh yeah, speaking of inefficient routes
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 19:35
|
|
|
Jan posted:oh gee i make 36k a year this is totes going to apply to me rite!?? People only heard "tax cuts for the middle class" or "tax cuts for those who need it the most," and then made (in my view, reasonable) assumptions as to whom that would target. I talked to my dad the day before the election (which was my birthday) and he didn't have the dimmest clue that the Liberal tax plan was a $670 tax cut for him -- he thought he wouldn't qualify as middle class making some 90k/yr. I hate to be that kind of cynical dickwad, but it doesn't seem like anybody actually gives a poo poo about policy, at least compared to tone and style of rhetoric.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 19:42
|
|
|
THC posted:Those things could just as easily happen with an Uber. Yes, but if you're dissatisfied with the performance of an Uber driver, you can rate them poorly, leading to real repercussions, including other customers learning of the driver's poor behaviour and boycotting them, or even being fired by Uber. If a taxi driver drives like poo poo, and I call the company to complain, precisely jack poo poo will happen. When I call a cab I have no way of knowing if the driver is lovely, except that by experience, they all are. Strangely, Uber regulates the behaviour of the drivers better than our government. Sure, enforce the Uber ban. At the same time, bring stricter regulations to Taxi drivers. If they want to dominate the market, they should be forced to deliver better service.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 19:44
|
|
|
Any time I or my friends left anything in a cab they've either stolen it or ransomed it back. gently caress them. Also gently caress libertarians. Government taxi monopoly with strict conduct rules and good working conditions and fully modern implementation.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 19:46
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Government taxi monopoly with strict conduct rules and good working conditions and fully modern implementation. This. There's zero reason the city couldn't develop it's own Uber-like app and mandate it's acceptance. Like, as I've said in other threads, while Uber is a poo poo company and their business model sucks it's brought to light the fact that there is a huge number of problems with the current taxi system and apparently zero motivation to change them. Mr Luxury Yacht fucked around with this message at 19:51 on Dec 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 19:48
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Any time I or my friends left anything in a cab they've either stolen it or ransomed it back. gently caress them. Also gently caress libertarians. Government taxi monopoly with strict conduct rules and good working conditions and fully modern implementation. I'm totally okay with this. It would also be cool if drivers got paid regardless of whether they're on a fare so we could have enough taxis on the road to handle peak times without all the drivers bitching about oversupply the rest of the time. Mr Luxury Yacht posted:This. There's zero reason the city couldn't develop it's own Uber-like app and mandate it's acceptance. Some of the cab companies here do have apps already. The big difference is that they don't work as consistently (I often get "no results found" when I search for my home address, but oddly not all the time) and they aren't automatically linked to a credit card so I still have to worry about paying the driver directly. For all that Uber does wrong, they do have one hell of an app.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 19:51
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Some of the cab companies here do have apps already. The big difference is that they don't work as consistently (I often get "no results found" when I search for my home address, but oddly not all the time) and they aren't automatically linked to a credit card so I still have to worry about paying the driver directly. For all that Uber does wrong, they do have one hell of an app. It's never going to catch on if there's half a dozen apps though. I don't give a flying gently caress if it's a Co-op or Beck or Diamond taxi that picks me up, just that one does. Plus it doesn't help if I need to just hail one on the street.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 19:54
|
|
|
Mr Luxury Yacht posted:It's never going to catch on if there's half a dozen apps though. I don't give a flying gently caress if it's a Co-op or Beck or Diamond taxi that picks me up, just that one does. Plus it doesn't help if I need to just hail one on the street. There's that, too. I'm just pointing out that a one-city app is not likely to be as reliable and easy to use as an app developed by a company that depends on that app worldwide. The development budget just won't be there. EDIT: The people who designed the Checker app for Calgary were also either too incompetent or lazy to use SSL, so I suppose it's a good thing that they don't handle credit cards. This is what happens when you outsource poo poo and have no idea what you're doing, and I see no reason to expect that the city's app would be any better. The City of Calgary's parking app is currently broken and hosed most of the time, too.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 19:55
|
|
|
PT6A posted:There's that, too. I'm just pointing out that a one-city app is not likely to be as reliable and easy to use as an app developed by a company that depends on that app worldwide. The development budget just won't be there. It doesn't have to be as good as Uber's app, just competent. While the App is nice I don't think most of their customers are using the service because they've got good UX designers. It would require a motivated team though, since yeah most government software projects are a clusterfuck. Horrible design, bugs everywhere, and doing poo poo like contravening their own accessibility rules 
Mr Luxury Yacht fucked around with this message at 20:03 on Dec 11, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 19:58
|
|
|
Haha gently caress you guys if you think a government run taxi service will actually be better than the goddamn garbage we have now
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 20:01
|
|
|
Mr Luxury Yacht posted:It doesn't have to be as good as Uber's app, just competent. While the App is nice I don't think most of their customers are using the service because they've got good UX designers. I know, I'm saying the problem is that the current apps that operate in this space, and the current apps that the city provides for other purposes, do not reach the level of competence.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 20:01
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Any time I or my friends left anything in a cab they've either stolen it or ransomed it back. gently caress them.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 20:06
|
|
|
DynamicSloth posted:The "loving promise" was usually stated as tax cuts for the middle class, how loving stupid of the plebs making the median income to think they qualified as the middle class. Maybe it's because I'm a cynical French Canadian from Quebec but yes, I actually do think it's pretty stupid to take in Liberal electoral promises without reading the fine print. Especially since, for once, the fine print was available to read before the promise was ever made into law. Heavy neutrino posted:I hate to be that kind of cynical dickwad, but it doesn't seem like anybody actually gives a poo poo about policy, at least compared to tone and style of rhetoric. Which is precisely what the Grits capitalized on with this "middle class" tax cut. An election campaign, especially one as long as this one, is a lot of information to take in. But to claim you voted based on a particular platform point without even consulting the details and then complain when it turns out to be less than you expected... We're way past "fool me once" material.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 20:11
|
|
|
Cabs in Calgary have multiple times tried to take me to ATMs to withdraw cash when I say I'm paying with credit, most the time they threw hissy fits when I refused and told them it's credit or nothing. I've also been refused fare because they didn't like where I was going therefore wasn't worth their time, which I believe is also illegal. gently caress Calgary taxi's it's not my problem you paid the city off for years to prop up your lovely medallion system and now it's all crumbling, literally couldn't give a gently caress less.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 20:11
|
|
|
^^^ I've had both those things happen to me. I also had a limo driver refuse to give me the standard airport-to-downtown fare, until I told him I was paying in cash and then he gave it to me.THC posted:Cool anecdote. I've had the opposite experience for all that's worth. Yeah, the one time I left my phone in a cab, the guy returned it and just asked for the fare from where he was to where I lived (which seemed perfectly fair, considering he was bringing it directly to me -- I tipped him on it too).
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 20:12
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:A significant part of it has already happened: any competitor trying to compete with Uber in a market where Uber is already established faces the prospect of having to establish infrastructure where Uber already possesses most of it--most people who want to drive for ridesharing services already drive for Uber, most people who want to take ridesharing services already use Uber, Uber has more drivers which means you get a car faster, Uber has a lot more users which means more rewards for its drivers. Having to establish all that infrastructure where a monopolistic competitor already exists is much, much more difficult than establishing one where no one is doing what you do. Maybe you can pick up the 'disgruntled Uber drivers and riders' market but that's hardly enough to get you to real competitor status when a significant amount of inertia already exists behind Uber's operations. Compare it to other monopolistic companies--how easy would it be to set up a competitor to Google? Even if you can code a better search engine, and recognizing that the barrier to entry for setting up a website is really really low, how do you think you're actually going to overtake their dominance in the search engine market? In fairness there are a lot of drivers in SF who drive for both Lyft and Uber (at the same time, effectively). THC posted:Whenever someone goes "oh I hate taxis" I just assume they're being racist. Taxis are perfectly fine and the drivers work really hard to make something that vaguely resembles an honest living, which no driver will ever get from Goober. The ethnic breakdown of Uber drivers in SF has shifted over the last couple of years to become very close to that of taxi drivers, and I've had a lot more black or asian Uber drivers than cab drivers here. Uber is still a much better experience. THC posted:Those things could just as easily happen with an Uber. There is somewhat less incentive to keep you in the car as long as possible with Uber/Lyft; their pricing formula seems to put a much lower weight on time than the ones used by cabs in major cities. And taking a needlessly convoluted route is easy to dispute as PT6A notes. sliderule posted:Yes, but if you're dissatisfied with the performance of an Uber driver, you can rate them poorly, leading to real repercussions, including other customers learning of the driver's poor behaviour and boycotting them, or even being fired by Uber. It's really the latter, not the former. Drivers tend to get terminated pretty quickly when their ratings fall below 4.5 or so, so in practice you don't even get matched with them. Mr Luxury Yacht posted:This. There's zero reason the city couldn't develop it's own Uber-like app and mandate it's acceptance. Cities routinely pay hundreds of thousands of dollars or even millions for lovely Wordpress sites. They have no chance of building a decent app anywhere near the functionality and utility of Uber or Lyft. Mr Luxury Yacht posted:It doesn't have to be as good as Uber's app, just competent. While the App is nice I don't think most of their customers are using the service because they've got good UX designers. I mean, I deleted the Lyft app the first time I used it because I found their UX to be so lovely and only came back because they offered me like 5 rides for free a few weeks later. And Lyft is still a company with a billion-dollar valuation, which has hundreds of thousands of times the resources and talent that a government project would have access to.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 20:14
|
|
|
Do it ironically posted:Cabs in Calgary have multiple times tried to take me to ATMs to withdraw cash when I say I'm paying with credit, most the time they threw hissy fits when I refused and told them it's credit or nothing. I've also been refused fare because they didn't like where I was going therefore wasn't worth their time, which I believe is also illegal. I've had this problem about 1/10 rides in Toronto, as well as some drivers refusing a fare because it's Friday and they think they can do better. It's the minority, but it's why I've switched to Uber. That said, the drivers have a legitimate complaint and reason to protest.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 20:16
|
|
|
 America noticed us again.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 20:16
|
|
|
I'd be okay with it if the city forced Uber to use the same fare structure as normal taxis, too. My main complaint with taxis isn't the price, it's the lack of availability, lack of convenience, and lack of accountability. The cheaper fares were nice, but even without them I'd still prefer Uber.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 20:22
|
|
|
bunnyofdoom posted:
First Trudeau's hair, now this. Slippery slopes in the US of A when it comes to noticing Canada.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 20:28
|
|
|
El Scotch posted:First Trudeau's hair, now this. Slippery slopes in the US of A when it comes to noticing Canada. I like having the Americans notice us being welcoming and open.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 20:33
|
|
|
"Canada is founded upon principles which recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law," Kenney says, quoting the preamble of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Going one extra step further, Kenney suggests Charter rights derive from "being created in the likeness and image of God ... because if our rights are just given to us by a majority, or by the Parliament, or by the state, or by the judges, they can take those rights away." Constitutional law experts seem to take a different interpretation. Lorne Sossin, dean of Osgoode Hall Law School, points out the language in the preamble is "all but ignored by the Supreme Court and by most constitutional observers" and is only meaningful as "a general statement regarding the universal, normative aspirations of the Charter," which he interprets as broad "aspirations to moral good and social justice." Earlier this year, the Supreme Court clarified that "the preamble articulates the 'political theory' on which the Charter's protections are based" and warned against "interpretations" contradicting the Charter's "provisions regarding freedom of religion and conscience." The inclusion of "God" in the preamble was originally "advocated by religious groups and linked by those groups with a particular conservative social agenda" (one particularly "hostile to gay and lesbian rights") and inserted into the preamble as a compromise amendment by Progressive Conservative MP Jake Epp, who also happened to oppose Charter protections for sexual orientation on the grounds that "we can't include every barnacle and eavestrough in the Constitution of Canada."
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 21:13
|
|
|
Some leaked info about Loblaws beer plans I do like the 50% craft beer thing (Yeah motherfuckers, it's beer chat time. Also, one of the ottawa locations is pretty close to my apartment)
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 21:53
|
|
|
There's nothing wrong with beer chat so long as we're talking about policy and not "i drank this hipster brew and it tasted good/bad"
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 22:05
|
|
|
Did you guys see Albertans are calling for Notley to be murdered for passing some farm labor safety bill? loving lol. If Albertans aren't the worst loving scum on earth I don't know what is
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 22:14
|
|
|
Heavy neutrino posted:There's nothing wrong with beer chat so long as we're talking about policy and not "i drank this hipster brew and it tasted good/bad" I am disappointed Kitchisippi didn't make the list. But, I am happy to see Beaus did.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 22:16
|
|
|
bunnyofdoom posted:Some leaked info about Loblaws beer plans I do like the 50% craft beer thing Civil freedom via highest corporate bidder, truly one of the most progressive days in recent Ontario history.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 22:48
|
|
|
In a move that really shouldn't have surprised anyone, the NB Supreme Court struck down Rehtaeh's Law, calling it a "colossal failure" that infringed on the charter so gravely that nothing the AG said could've saved it. I'm happy about this because that law was created so people wouldn't be able to accuse politicians of inaction, and not necessarily because we needed a new law to make a thing that isn't illegal illegal, or because the people writing that law put a moment's forethought into the giant steaming beer poo poo it might dump on various parts of the Charter and revised it until it prevented undesirable things without restricting rights unreasonably (which are both good reasons to write laws).
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 22:50
|
|
|
Cultural Imperial posted:Did you guys see Albertans are calling for Notley to be murdered for passing some farm labor safety bill? loving lol. If Albertans aren't the worst loving scum on earth I don't know what is I deal with farmers quite often given my work. They are easily some of the biggest pieces of poo poo I've seen when dealing with family law cases. 90% of the time they will not hesitate to completely gently caress over their former spouse. I'm not surprised at all they hate any bill that makes it so they can't treat workers/family members like crap.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 23:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 19:17 |
|
|
THC posted:"Canada is founded upon principles which recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law," Kenney says, quoting the preamble of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. I support a greater role for religion in the federal government so long as it means we can declare Anglicanism the state religion and put Papist devil-worshiping traitors like Kenney in camps.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2015 23:06
|
|