|
Aerdan posted:In case anyone missed it, here's a nice capsule summary of Uber's fuckedness. Is this really going to go down as the author suggests? I'm no lawyer but don't these suits usually end with a few slapped wrists and and a fine or two(not that there wouldn't be a large fine)?
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 16:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 00:29 |
|
|
Solice Kirsk posted:Skates left the ice. He's gonna be getting a letter from the league about that one! Habs, and their fans, are fair game 
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 16:30
|
|
|
Grem posted:Security stopped being polite after Monica Seles got stabbed. Yeah but she got stabbed by a guy that was still in the stands, not someone on the court.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 16:35
|
|
|
ultrabindu posted:Is this really going to go down as the author suggests? You're thinking of when big companies break laws. This is Google suing Uber, not some regulation being violated. It could go very bad for Uber.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 16:38
|
|
|
I see, my mistake. How bad is very bad?
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 16:44
|
|
|
ultrabindu posted:Is this really going to go down as the author suggests? Uber is wildly unprofitable. They lost $3,000,000,000 in 2016 alone. They are burning VC cash and losing money on every ride to 1) increase brand awareness and 2) drive out competition from Lyft and traditional taxi services. Investor storytime says that Uber's ultimate path to profitability rests on getting autonomous vehicles up as quickly as possible and firing all their drivers. Acquiring Otto was the lynchpin in getting to that future (and making the investors wealthy). Now that future is in jeopardy. Uber can continue along without Otto tech but eventually they will run out of suckers willing to pour money into this sinkhole.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 16:47
|
|
|
skateboardjesus posted:Yeah but she got stabbed by a guy that was still in the stands, not someone on the court. There was this douchebag father and son duo that jumped on the field and assaulted the KC Royals first base coach back in 2002. http://www.sbnation.com/2010/9/19/1087003/9-19-2002-fans-attack-tom-gamboa
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 16:51
|
|
|
Glazier posted:Habs, and their fans, are fair game Wrecked by a zebra, a shameful fan
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 16:51
|
|
|
Speaking of Uber, they've pulled out of Austin. http://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/ubers-bad-behaviour-1.4023006quote:Uber's absence from Austin is the result of just one of the company's many battles with municipalities, which, in the past, has seen Uber deliberately operate without permission and deceive local authorities. This time around, Uber opted to pull its service from the city entirely after Austin residents voted to pass a regulation requiring ridesharing services to fingerprint drivers as a security precaution. Rather than comply, the company just left. gently caress you austin, you can't tell me what to do!!!!
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 16:56
|
|
|
canyoneer posted:Wrecked by a zebra, a shameful fan Didn't even have the puck, so that should have been an easy interference call as well. Frankly, I'm embarrassed at the lack of reffing going on in that gif. The fans should be on a 2 minute power play in the very least.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 16:56
|
|
|
Facebook Aunt posted:Speaking of Uber, they've pulled out of Austin. http://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/ubers-bad-behaviour-1.4023006 Didn't that happen a while ago?
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 17:10
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:Didn't that happen a while ago? SxSW was the first real test of non-uber/Lyft ride sharing. There are a few companies that followed the Austin rules (finger prints/background checks etc) for ride sharing, but they failed hard. Uber/Lyft managed fine last year.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 17:21
|
|
|
what do they think is so expensive about fingerprinting? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 17:22
|
|
|
Goa Tse-tung posted:what do they think is so expensive about fingerprinting? Precedent, and friction.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 17:23
|
|
|
Subjunctive posted:Didn't that happen a while ago? Yeah. The actual Schadenfreude there is that the two companies that popped up to take over ridesharing in Austin went down during SXSW.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 17:23
|
|
|
Goa Tse-tung posted:what do they think is so expensive about fingerprinting? Uber doesn't like cities telling them what to do and if they cave and follow austins rules it will open the door. They are not always the most forward thinking company.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 17:28
|
|
|
Uber also had one of their drivers actually stop an attempted mass shooting in Chicago by shooting the perpetrator when he began firing nearby. Uber responded by immediately firing him, as he wasn't allowed to carry a licensed gun while driving for them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 17:30
|
|
|
I'm all for gun rights and I love guns, but I don't have a problem with a company firing an employee for carrying a gun when they request you don't.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 17:34
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T4afzQyGo5Q New Pretty Good, because it's the best thing on YouTube. Also, because of the schadenfreude of team putting ) in a single basketball game.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 17:45
|
|
|
Solice Kirsk posted:I'm all for gun rights and I love guns, but I don't have a problem with a company firing an employee for carrying a gun when they request you don't. A more reasonable company would also be willing to give a dude a pass when his breaking of the rules literally saved peoples' lives. Uber's perfectly fine with doing things like acting as scabs in NYC during a taxi driver protest, but Heaven forbid someone violate policies to save people!
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 17:49
|
|
|
It's also a massive risk to insert yourself and your firearm into a shooting and Uber doesn't want their drivers acting like vigilantes. Uber sucks but I got no problem with this one.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 17:51
|
|
Tater Love 
|
Goa Tse-tung posted:what do they think is so expensive about fingerprinting?
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 18:03
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:Uber also had one of their drivers actually stop an attempted mass shooting in Chicago by shooting the perpetrator when he began firing nearby. Uber responded by immediately firing him, as he wasn't allowed to carry a licensed gun while driving for them. For every one that stops a shooting, there's one that does the shooting.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 18:24
|
|
|
I’ve heard enough stories about creepy Uber drivers to really not want an armed Uber driver. But why make laws when criminals will just ignore them? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 18:27
|
|
|
Nighthand posted:For every one that stops a shooting, there's one that does the shooting. Oh good, taking a detour at guns rights station sounds like a wonderful idea.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 18:32
|
|
|
whoops I didn't read
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 18:46
|
|
|
Alereon posted:The premise of Uber is that normal people can decide, essentially on a whim, to start picking up fares for extra cash. If you make it so people have to go through a fingerprinting process before they can even try it out, they just won't. The concept of "instantly carpool with strangers" is fantastic for reducing the number of miles driven and thus pulling cars off the road, but what we actually got was "uninsured gypsy taxis" which aren't really taking cars off the road.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 18:49
|
|
|
The only way to stop a bad Uber driver with a gun is a with a good Uber driver with a gun. So Uber drivers are like ninjas, only an Uber driver can kill another Uber driver. Uber is a funny word.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 18:51
|
|
|
Sunswipe posted:The only way to stop a bad Uber driver with a gun is a with a good Uber driver with a gun. So Uber drivers are like ninjas, only an Uber driver can kill another Uber driver. Uber drivers will keep killing each other Highlander style until there is but one Uber Uber driver.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 18:55
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:I’ve heard enough stories about creepy Uber drivers to really not want an armed Uber driver. Because the laws in question are focused on possession/carry of an item which is lawful and can be used for lawful purposes. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 18:58
|
|
|
canyoneer posted:The concept of "instantly carpool with strangers" is fantastic for reducing the number of miles driven and thus pulling cars off the road, but what we actually got was "uninsured gypsy taxis" which aren't really taking cars off the road. Quite the opposite, actually: http://www.sfexaminer.com/sf-blasts-uber-lyft-downtown-traffic-congestion/
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 18:58
|
|
|
Flash Gordon Ramsay posted:Uber drivers will keep killing each other Highlander style until there is but one Uber Uber driver. So no guns, but all Uber drivers should have katanas.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 18:59
|
|
|
Sunswipe posted:So no guns, but all Uber drivers should have katanas. Sure, give them something even more deadly.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 19:00
|
|
|
GrandpaPants posted:Quite the opposite, actually: Traffic was always bad in SF, at least now you don't have to wait over an hour for the taxi cab just to refuse to take you to your destination. Taxi's are still the worst drivers in SF too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 19:02
|
|
|
Sunswipe posted:So no guns, but all Uber drivers should have katanas. I'm all for paying less for my journey, but I really don't want short cuts.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 19:04
|
|
|
canyoneer posted:The concept of "instantly carpool with strangers" is fantastic for reducing the number of miles driven and thus pulling cars off the road, but what we actually got was "uninsured gypsy taxis" which aren't really taking cars off the road. https://twitter.com/mims/status/841262927403450369 They just now discovered the concept of "splitting a cab", give them a break
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 19:13
|
|
|
FCKGW posted:Uber is wildly unprofitable. They lost $3,000,000,000 in 2016 alone. They are burning VC cash and losing money on every ride to 1) increase brand awareness and 2) drive out competition from Lyft and traditional taxi services. Investor storytime says that Uber's ultimate path to profitability rests on getting autonomous vehicles up as quickly as possible and firing all their drivers. Acquiring Otto was the lynchpin in getting to that future (and making the investors wealthy). Now that future is in jeopardy. Why does Uber's business model depend on robot space technology and special snowflake legislation and revolutionary levels of corporate assholishness but Lyft is apparently an existential thread for them while doing none of those things?
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 19:14
|
|
|
Data Graham posted:Why does Uber's business model depend on robot space technology and special snowflake legislation and revolutionary levels of corporate assholishness but Lyft is apparently an existential thread for them while doing none of those things? Lyft's profits are increasing and losses are shrinking (about 1/5 of Uber's). The are content to stay the same course they are on now. Uber's trajectory is going the opposite direction. Losses are growing yoy. There is also zero risk to drivers if Uber goes under because Lyft exists. Most drivers drive for both anyways and they seem to prefer to drive for Lyft because they allow tipping where Uber does not. If Uber starts cutting fares more and more to stay afloat and more people keep using Lyft, then you have this death spiral where both your customers and your drivers abandon your platform, and less drivers means longer wait times and longer wait times lead to less customers, etc... FCKGW has a new favorite as of 19:21 on Mar 14, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 19:17
|
|
|
Uber's business model doesn't depend on robotic cars. That's a boondoggle story they sell the investors. Their true business model depends on wiping out all competitors, monopolizing the market so they can raise their rates to a profitable level. That's why literally any other ride-hailing company, regardless ofwhat they're doing, is an existential threat
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 19:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 29, 2024 00:29 |
|
|
I hate taxis be sure they charge too much and it's impossible to get one when you need one, mostly because they have a virtual monopoly due to licensing. Having a few sensible restrictions, requierements and a reasonable licensing fee would negate the need for uber. Of course the taxi lobby or whoever's got a financial interest won't let that happen.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2017 19:34
|
|
