|
Popular Thug Drink posted:
That's pretty easy to say if you're not LGBT or a woman who might need an abortion at some point in their lives. The local and state laws also tend to be much more pro labor than the places you speak of.
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 10:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 22:54 |
|
|
punk rebel ecks posted:You can laugh at this but it is only a matter of time before things end up like this: This is already happening. Oracle, Sales force and Microsoft to a lesser degree are hoovering up a lot of the B2B marketing space. I don't know to what extent this is happening in the B2C world, but I imagine there's some of it going on (by Google if I had to guess).
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 13:21
|
|
|
Is there a text version of this? ....preferably formatted in such a way that will make for easy importing into uBlock origin?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 13:39
|
|
|
if there's one thing to be said for Uber it at least forced the archaic taxi systems in the cities to try and step up their game. NYC yellow cabs now have their own app called Arro that hails and pays for them, and I'm sure other cities are working on their own competitors
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 14:16
|
|
|
Scrub-Niggurath posted:if there's one thing to be said for Uber it at least forced the archaic taxi systems in the cities to try and step up their game. Oh, definitely. There had not been much hurry to innovate in the world of taxis before and I'm glad uber stirred poo poo up. This is especially true in some of the more entrenched markets outside the US.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 14:25
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:That's pretty easy to say if you're not LGBT or a woman who might need an abortion at some point in their lives. The local and state laws also tend to be much more pro labor than the places you speak of. I was raising children there, and I'm glad we got them out, not least because one of them turned out to be a lesbian and very grateful for the supportive environment in California. e: To bring this thread back on-topic, Facebook is threatening to pull out their datacenter, a significant job provider IIRC, because the government slashed solar subsdies. Turns out they built it anyway. Arsenic Lupin fucked around with this message at 16:30 on Feb 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 16:23
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:That's pretty easy to say if you're not LGBT or a woman who might need an abortion at some point in their lives. The local and state laws also tend to be much more pro labor than the places you speak of. Just move to Asheville. Actually don't, let us have it to ourselves.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 16:27
|
|
|
Arsenic Lupin posted:e: To bring this thread back on-topic, Facebook is threatening to pull out their datacenter, a significant job provider IIRC, because the government slashed solar subsdies. Turns out they built it anyway. I talked to a corporate lawyer once, and they full on admitted that once they decided they had a market in a certain area, it's nice to have the tax cuts, but them not passing through the County/State Legislature wasn't expected to stop them from building their latest storefront. Anecdotal, I know, but I think about it every time another company threatens they're totally going to take up root and move to X if sweet deal Y doesn't come through.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 16:51
|
|
|
Dmitri-9 posted:Northern California will always be valuable real estate over our lifespans because of its Mediterranean climate. Greece also has a Mediterranean climate. I don't think that has that much of an effect on real estate prices to be honest.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 17:17
|
|
|
Freezer posted:Oh, definitely. There had not been much hurry to innovate in the world of taxis before and I'm glad uber stirred poo poo up. This is especially true in some of the more entrenched markets outside the US. The only thing is that Uber has a huge first-mover advantage. Hailo was one of the first companies to try to unify mobile taxi hailing worldwide, but ended up pulling out of the US because Uber was eating their lunch. Like it or not, Uber isn't going anywhere any time soon, and certainly won't as long as a company like Flywheel or Arro hasn't gotten global penetration even as Uber continues to grow.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 17:20
|
|
|
Freezer posted:Oh, definitely. There had not been much hurry to innovate in the world of taxis before and I'm glad uber stirred poo poo up. This is especially true in some of the more entrenched markets outside the US. Yep. Even in my small city in the southern hemisphere taxi companies brought in an SMS text messaging warning which tells you when they are about a 1/2 mile from picking you up so you don't have to wait outside wondering (one of the best things about uber)
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 17:23
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:The only thing is that Uber has a huge first-mover advantage. Hailo was one of the first companies to try to unify mobile taxi hailing worldwide, but ended up pulling out of the US because Uber was eating their lunch. Like it or not, Uber isn't going anywhere any time soon, and certainly won't as long as a company like Flywheel or Arro hasn't gotten global penetration even as Uber continues to grow. The thing is that Uber is unsustainable, and not in the "Climate Change will kill us in 50 years" sense but in the "Housing prices can only go up!" sense. Once they run out of money (and they're losing something like $400 million annually) they will die.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 17:26
|
|
|
computer parts posted:The thing is that Uber is unsustainable, and not in the "Climate Change will kill us in 50 years" sense but in the "Housing prices can only go up!" sense. Of course. Hence my "as long as Uber continues to grow" comment. It's absolutely true that a niche will open if Uber fails for financial reasons, but we aren't there yet. And these taxi hailing apps have to compete in the market as it is today, not in the market that might possibly exist at some point in the future.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 17:30
|
|
|
computer parts posted:The thing is that Uber is unsustainable, and not in the "Climate Change will kill us in 50 years" sense but in the "Housing prices can only go up!" sense. Maybe they'll go back to trying to license out their app to the local livery companies like I understood they tried to do at first. With all the headlines/customers Uber has made made, I can see some franchises readily accepting a Powered by UberTM app now. ComradeCosmobot posted:Of course. Hence my "as long as Uber continues to grow" comment. It's absolutely true that a niche will open if Uber fails for financial reasons, but we aren't there yet. And these taxi hailing apps have to compete in the market as it is today, not in the market that might possibly exist at some point in the future. The MTData app a bunch use right now isn't that bad, the main annoyance is that since they're all separate companies, you need a copy of the app for each city.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 17:45
|
|
|
Suppose that Uber does collapse, and all that remains is that taxi companies were forced to modernize. That wouldn't be that bad, would it?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 18:11
|
|
|
Freezer posted:Oh, definitely. There had not been much hurry to innovate in the world of taxis before and I'm glad uber stirred poo poo up. This is especially true in some of the more entrenched markets outside the US. Huh, that's an interesting point, I can only imagine what the reaction of the London cabbies was/is to Uber
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 18:18
|
|
|
duz posted:The MTData app a bunch use right now isn't that bad, the main annoyance is that since they're all separate companies, you need a copy of the app for each city. That's what I was getting at with the "global reach" thing. So long as Uber can be used where ever you exit an airport, it's got a leg up on any taxi company or hailing app that can't.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 18:22
|
|
|
Shifty Pony posted:They have been doing things like charging patients $7 for a test then paying UC San Francisco >$300 for a comprehensive panel on it because Theranos's wonder machines don't actually work. I've read through Theranos' partially-redacted 483 forms from their FDA inspection last year, and frankly, they're straight up hosed even aside from profitability of their business model. They're a great case example of pushing an idea without any means of actually backing it up or implementing it adequately. Just as Uber "disrupted" taxi markets while conveniently ignoring local regulations, operating illegally in some places, etc etc, Theranos was/is trying to operate without even the most basic of legal requirements met for their product design, validation, filing support, etc. They had two observations for trying to draft documents to support their validation and device designs after the FDA asked for them, when they're all necessary pre-requisites (e.g., why is your IQ/OQ documentation all signed and dated yesterday, when you performed the validation nine months ago). They failed to characterize any design spaces or perform any risk analyses for their device validations. They didn't provide any references, supporting data, dates, times, anything on a lot of their reports and procedures. Their validations didn't mimic actual-use or even simulated-use conditions, but were not even representative of their real product. All of these things are enormous no-nos in the industry, and they're nowhere near big enough or valuable enough to apply any clout to the FDA to sway decisions (not that bigger companies should be able to either, but they do). Edit: Oh, and trying to push their product for well over a hundred different tests/diagnostics when they only have approval for a single test. Not allowed either, and fines for repeated off-label offenses in the last few years have been larger than the entire estimated value of Theranos. They're a total mess, and odds are that by the time they get their act together, they're going to be bankrupt. Sundae fucked around with this message at 18:32 on Feb 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 18:29
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:I talked to a corporate lawyer once, and they full on admitted that once they decided they had a market in a certain area, it's nice to have the tax cuts, but them not passing through the County/State Legislature wasn't expected to stop them from building their latest storefront. Anecdotal, I know, but I think about it every time another company threatens they're totally going to take up root and move to X if sweet deal Y doesn't come through. Companies absolutely will do this. It's dependent on whether the costs of moving seem to outweigh the benefits, and in particular there's a secondary benefit of moving- it adds to your company's reputation as a ruthless negotiator. Larger companies are more able to toe this line. Walmart is infamous for forcibly rearranging whole legal regimes, then pulling multiple stores on a pretext if something doesn't go their way.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 18:34
|
|
|
Sundae posted:They're a total mess, and odds are that by the time they get their act together, they're going to be bankrupt. Yes, everything you posted, but also there's the part where their product literally does not exist. Uber is an overvalued hive of scum and villainy, but they actually started with a product that pretty much worked the way they told investors it would, and needed the money to scale. Theranos never had a product, and almost certainly never will.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 18:56
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:That's pretty easy to say if you're not LGBT or a woman who might need an abortion at some point in their lives. The local and state laws also tend to be much more pro labor than the places you speak of. see? chauvinism. not everywhere between the coasts is a hellhole but if that's what you want to believe friend go for it
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 18:58
|
|
|
All this Uber talk reminds me of this image a friend shared a week ago, 125 GBP uber to the airport. Driver inadvertently took the scenic route... If this were a regular cab, it would be almost impossible to get some of your money back. With Uber you have the evidence and a handy report button. Not saying that Uber is the future, but it's pushing forward some good ideas for the industry along with all of its underhanded poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 19:06
|
|
|
Freezer posted:All this Uber talk reminds me of this image a friend shared a week ago, 125 GBP uber to the airport. Driver inadvertently took the scenic route... Funny because one of Uber's main selling points is that their drivers don't do that in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 19:07
|
|
|
Double post; move on.
Arsenic Lupin fucked around with this message at 21:18 on Feb 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 19:09
|
|
|
And holy cow, Theranos, what were you smoking?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 19:10
|
|
|
Arsenic Lupin posted:And holy cow, Theranos, what were you smoking? There are many companies working in this space and theranos isn't the only one making big claims. Pathway genomics got called out by CBS last night for exagerating too. It's a large market, that won't go anywhere as along as people exist. The liquid biopsy cancer market alone is estimated to have a cap around 20 billion dollars. 100s of millions (maybe billions at this point?) are being thrown at companies to commercialize lab tests. It's not too surprising that some are trying to get a first mover advantage, even if that means exaggerating their efficacy. But yeah it was very obvious to other people in the field that Theranos was full of poo poo. There are some physical constraints on these problems that require a full blood draw and you can't just magic them away. There are some paths forward but are likely many years, maybe decades, away from being clinically viable.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 19:46
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Funny because one of Uber's main selling points is that their drivers don't do that in the first place. Fortunately there's no regulator to force them either way!
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 20:40
|
|
|
Twitter has announced that they lost users in the last quarter.quote:In its letter to shareholders, Twitter emphasized its belief that the fall-off was a temporary state of affairs. “As of the end of January, we have already seen total MAUs [monthly active users], excluding SMS Fast Followers, return to Q3 levels,” wrote the company’s executives.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 00:36
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:Companies absolutely will do this. It's dependent on whether the costs of moving seem to outweigh the benefits, and in particular there's a secondary benefit of moving- it adds to your company's reputation as a ruthless negotiator. Larger companies are more able to toe this line. Walmart is infamous for forcibly rearranging whole legal regimes, then pulling multiple stores on a pretext if something doesn't go their way. Which is a pretty good argument in favor of preventing companies that massive from existing in the first place. Or, alternately, saying "knock this poo poo off here are some laws if you do this again we'll come after you." One of the issues with the internet and tech in general is that you suddenly have easy access to like...the loving planet. If every search engine is just a few letters in a box away why bother using anything but the best one? If there are 500 apps that all do the some thing, they all cost the same, and you can install them with a click why bother with the other 499? Especially if you already have and are using one you like. Sometimes whoever gets there first gets the big market share and good luck dethroning them. Plus if Uber is losing money continually, well...that makes me think of the fuckery that was going down in the 19th century. Standard Oil was notorious for moving into new markets and obliterating smaller companies that wouldn't sell by selling oil at a massive loss until the other company went under. If Uber is deliberately pricing under cost then they're going to strangle out literally everything else if their pockets are deep enough.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 00:43
|
|
|
The leaked slides from the last funding round showed uber burned through $700 million in Q3 of 2015 alone.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 00:58
|
|
|
Shifty Pony posted:The leaked slides from the last funding round showed uber burned through $700 million in Q3 of 2015 alone. I wish I had 700 million dollars to blow through Hookers and blow for everyone. And a ferrari for me 
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 01:31
|
|
|
Shifty Pony posted:The leaked slides from the last funding round showed uber burned through $700 million in Q3 of 2015 alone. I know the answer will be the founders blowing money on themselves at an amazing rate but what in the hell could Uber waste that much money on? They don't supply their drivers with anything so what are they dropping near a billion dollars on? Do car mustaches just cost that much?
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 01:37
|
|
|
Dr. VooDoo posted:I know the answer will be the founders blowing money on themselves at an amazing rate but what in the hell could Uber waste that much money on? They don't supply their drivers with anything so what are they dropping near a billion dollars on? Do car mustaches just cost that much? Lawyers and overpaying drivers/under charging customers.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 01:58
|
|
|
This is probably specific to Twitter in some regard because they don't understand they partially get used because of the limitations decided in the past. They wanted SMS messages to work so 140 characters. Doing algorithms is hard, so just a raw reverse chronological post list. They instead are looking at Facebook and thinking they can close the gap if they just become a little more like them, and plus it'll make Twitter more attractive to advertisers because they can post huge tweets that will be rocketed up to the top of your timeline. So it's definitely a case of being overvalued from the start, turns out to actually be somewhat popular among certain groups of people, and now forced to make platform changes that appeal to possible sources of money, but not their users.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 02:21
|
|
|
Arsenic Lupin posted:Everybody agrees about that. What we really need is a regulatory system that allows new taxi businesses to start up, instead of providing a state-imposed monopoly on the number of people who can get permits to drive taxis. However, Uber is bypassing not only the medallion system, but also standard rules about insurance, liability, training, security checks .... all under the claim that it's just private citizens moonlighting. I think the argument that Uber is providing a more dangerous or less regulated service is a non-starter at this point. In practice, the Ubers I have been in (I'm several hundred rides in at this point) have generally been in nicer, better maintained cars than the cabs or town cars I've taken during that time. I took a town car from the Seattle airport to downtown Seattle the other day, and it cost probably 75% more than an Uber would have for the same distance, the suspension was disconcertingly soft, and the driver's wireless CC machine took over 5 minutes to get a signal. And this wasn't even a *bad* experience -- this is pretty middle of the road by cab standards. Everyone that uses Uber for even a small amount of time pretty quickly realizes that it is a better system in just about every way conceivably possible. You don't feel at danger in an Uber, and if something were to happen to you in one of them you almost certainly would be 100% made whole with VC dollars due to the bad press/optics such a thing might bring. And while there have certainly been some horror stories about Uber drivers doing various sketchy or illegal things that their background checks should almost certainly have caught, the fact that taxi drivers are routinely stopping traffic to protest Uber, attacking Uber drivers and harassing their fares doesn't exactly instill me with confidence that cabbies are somehow a more trustworthy class of people on average. IMO the true argument against Uber is how drivers are treated and how their endgame essentially involves driving the cost of human capital as low as it can possibly go (just as the true argument against AirBnB isn't the inherent danger of short term rentals, but rather the negative effects of removing rental stock in favor of low-utilization short-term rentals in low-vacancy areas). But this seems to be a much less popular line of reasoning than the current one. computer parts posted:Once they run out of money (and they're losing something like $400 million annually) they will die. I think that if they stopped focusing on hypergrowth they probably do have a sustainable business model and enough network effects at this point to be profitable. But in the meantime it's nice to get all my transportation subsidized by VCs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 02:32
|
|
|
Dr. VooDoo posted:I know the answer will be the founders blowing money on themselves at an amazing rate but what in the hell could Uber waste that much money on? They don't supply their drivers with anything so what are they dropping near a billion dollars on? Do car mustaches just cost that much? Uber is getting the poo poo sued out of them everywhere and some of the court cases where their drivers kill people are coming due.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 02:38
|
|
|
I'm glad that Uber was able to revolutionize the livery business by allowing me to order a cab with my phone.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 02:50
|
|
|
blah_blah posted:I think that if they stopped focusing on hypergrowth they probably do have a sustainable business model and enough network effects at this point to be profitable. But in the meantime it's nice to get all my transportation subsidized by VCs. lol no. Uber loses money/breaks even on most of its fares. They do this because they have the cash to burn, it makes them look good, and it sucks drivers in. Once the VC stops flowing, Uber will disappear in a flurry of lawsuits.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 02:59
|
|
|
I don't think that's particularly relevant. They are heavily incentivized by their backers to burn through obscene amounts of $$$ chasing market share rather than being profitable.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 03:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 22:54 |
|
|
Dr. VooDoo posted:I know the answer will be the founders blowing money on themselves at an amazing rate but what in the hell could Uber waste that much money on? They don't supply their drivers with anything so what are they dropping near a billion dollars on? Do car mustaches just cost that much? They subsidize the rides and give a bunch of freebies to gain market share.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2016 03:30
|
|