Hacker News Reader

Comment by taxicabjesus | Hacker News Reader

I referred to them as The Company Which Cannot Be Named (Harry Potter reference) or 'duper.

I once pulled up to a bar 2 minutes after getting a call. The passenger got in the cab, and the passenger's (male) friend had assumed the pose that marked him as waiting for a 'ride'. (The observation is typically used by scumbags in Scottsdale to trick women waiting for a 'ride' into getting into random cars, which is why the taxi company I drove for lobbied to force ride-vehicles to have some sort of branding.)

Me: is your friend waiting for a 'duper? Passenger: 'duper? (Confusion, then...) do you mean UBER? Me: FRIENDS don't let friends get DUPED by eww-ber! Passenger: LOL.

Really, though... "Ridesharing" is unsustainable for many reasons, the main one being that cars are expensive, and should the economy rebound, people won't be willing to wear out their cars for peanuts.

View on HN

> The observation is typically used by scumbags in Scottsdale to trick women waiting for a 'ride' into getting into random cars, which is why the taxi company I drove for lobbied to force ride-vehicles to have some sort of branding.

I'm sure that the cost and bother to the competition had nothing to do with that lobbying effort.

The taxi company's lobbying efforts had two main points:

1. public safety. 2. fairness

Rideshare companies had no infrastructure for basic safety inspections, so they didn't think it was important.

Rideshare drivers had no insurance contract for the time they were on the clock. 'Duper said "we've got you covered", but their drivers didn't have any paperwork supporting this claim. The taxi company lobbied to force the ridesharing companies to provide certificates of insurance to their contractors, so that if their driver was involved in an accident they could provide the ridesharing company's insurance information, instead of their personal policy.

> The taxi company's lobbying efforts had two main points: > 1. public safety. 2. fairness

Denying that taxicab companies lobby their own self-interest is completely unbelievable. All that is missing is to get "for the children" in there somehow and it'd be a perfect political BS speech.

No, I mean I get the point where taxicabs, being regulated up the wazoo, think that if they have to del with all that, why competition hasn't. But trying to sell the idea they are just saints looking for public's good and it has nothing to do with their own interest... right. Not buying that bridge.

The insurance industry was on the taxi industry's side in the lobbying effort, so as to reduce insurance fraud.

Freeloading hurts everyone.

Does uber pay less than Pizza delivery drivers? People have been wearing out their cars for many many years for peanuts to get pizza to your door.

Plus, in 10 years we have robot cars and the economics totally shift.

You can deliver pizza in a worn-out old car. 'Duper has standards for their vehicles.

The taxi company I drove for also lobbied to force 'duper's vehicles to be inspected by mechanics... Semi-annually, iirc.

Edit: the inspections were probably mandated every 3 months (quarterly); the taxi company inspected its version of ride-share vehicles bi-monthly (iirc), which just cost their drivers time (because the mechanics were already employed by the taxi company), whereas an inspection was another cost for 'duper drivers.

> I referred to them as The Company Which Cannot Be Named (Harry Potter reference)

I don't get the reference, but then again https://stallman.org/harry-potter.html ;)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com