Hacker News Reader

One of them could take all of the other's business in Austin by integrating with a background check service, but they were both either too stubborn or too slow to implement integration with such a service in case their proposition failed. Now they're both losing business on top of the money already lost campaigning.

View on HN

In case you didn't notice, it's not about fingerprints. It's about the principle. It's a fight between business and government. Government wants money and control, businesses show they can't be blackmailed like that and pull out. There is literally nothing Uber or Lyft did wrong. They have all the right in the world to take their business elsewhere.

If I believed in democracy, I'd say people should be voting better next time, but I don't.

> They have all the right in the world to take their business elsewhere.

Nobody is claiming otherwise, just that they're stupid for leaving the profits to the taxi companies, who do comply with the background check laws. Either one of them could have become the dominant transportation player in Austin, but they were both too incompetent to make contingency plans.

I really think the fingerprinting is a red herring. I think they were just trying to set a precedent to simplify their regulatory landscape.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com