Lots of drivers will be reluctant because they can be stiffed on the bill. Lots of passengers will be reluctant to use it due to the inherent risk of riding with what is essentially a stranger.
From the point of view of a driver, this scheme is less dangerous than the status quo, at least there is potentially a little more paper trail to prove a rider rode.
From the point of view of a rider, there is the advantage in regulated taxis that the driver is licensed and identified, but in countries where it's feasible, I don't see why LibreTaxi couldn't have an option to "request licensed driver only" or something
Without someone vetting these drivers and taking a risk and responsibility for people's safety, this seems like a terribly dangerous way for anyone to get around.
I don't see why LibreTaxi, in areas that have a individual driver licensing scheme, couldn't require that. You just look at the driver's license when you get in, or they post it on the back seat. The license information is recorded in LibreTaxi so everyone knows there's a paper trail if anything happens.
This would be identical in safety for everyone to medallion hailable cabs, or am I missing something?
If I was going to do nefarious things, I wouldn't bother with any of that. I'd instead just carjack a taxi and have at it.
Or hopefully they would rather not, at least if they are serious about it and are not just running on a short-lived inspiration to play pretend-Kalanick.
Criminals aren't liable to want to leave an electronic trail driving a taxi just to rob someone. It's likely to be nearly as safe as riding Uber or Taxis in general, which is to say extremely safe.
What's more likely is the driver will get robbed, but even then that's not going to happen very often.
It's funny, isn't it? Every pro-Uber article around here talks about the over-regulated, controlled taxi environment and how damaging it is. Then a service appears that goes the other way: peer-to-peer, no middle-man. Now people complain that it could be dangerous, and they need regulation and control?
Which is it? And what makes anyone believe Uber (or themselves) know what that "proper level" is?
Here in Kenya, and much of the developing world, things are quite different. Traditionally, people would save known and trusted drivers in their phonebook, and call them when needing a taxi. If you're somewhere far from your drivers, you might call a friend who lives there and ask them.
That's how we got started on our own app (http://maramoja.co.ke): we let people favourite drivers, and let them choose the driver for their ride. We show them who's their favourite, who's their friend's (e.g. from Facebook, phonebook, referrals) favourite etc.
Although other apps have now made an inroad here (Nairobi), particularly Uber, whose marketing budget we of course cannot match, there's still quite a number of people who won't use their "just any driver" approach.
Except normal hail-able taxis are driven by professional drivers with background checks and large insurance policies. There's no guarantee the person who picks you up with this app will even be a licensed driver. A lot of the value in Uber is that they take care of these things, not just the app side of things.
Keeping those things in check would have me using the service far more, even if it was slightly more risky - I don't believe the risk would be substantial enough for me to care.
1) There's no check to ensure that the vehicle is ensured for commercial rides before they start taking hails.
2) Likewise, no background check.
3) No regulatory body to investigate cases of e.g. scamming passengers out of money or refusal to comply with agreed-upon rates and dropoff. [1]
4) The local PD doesn't stand ready to treat assault on a driver like assault on a police officer, in terms of marshalling resources.
5) No central registry, or even private registry of cars/drivers in operation.
6) Drivers aren't trained in the relevant anti-robbery countermeasures.
7) In NYC, the barrier to prevent the most obvious kinds of robbery.
That makes a big difference in safety of paying cash to a roving operator!
Sadly, I think the "big corp middleman" does add a lot of value that a free app can't replicate without similar investment, scale, and "walled garden"-ness.
[1] I know commenters here like to roll their eyes about the clumsiness and lackadaisical enforcement -- I'm one of them! But it's at least something, which prevents a major scale-up of this behavior.
I did not find a clear answer on the site wether this project is aiming at independent ridesharing or at being a turn-key solution for more conventional taxi dispatch organisations. There is the idea of "hack and tune it for your city", which is clearly not the global approach, but then they also advertise "1-minute hiring", which is definitely not what I would be looking for if I were to customize it for my hypothetical preexisting organisation.
Something like wordpress or the myriad open source online shop systems, but for taxi dispatch and with a unified smartphone client (or client protocol, actually) that can work with all installations. That might be the best way to avoid a single gobally dominant private network that can set their "tax" on all rides at will. The app/clients might be supported for discovery by a global registry of regional installations and some trust management, but it might actually be not only easier but also more reliable to just leave that to plain old web, with something like libretaxi:-URIs to connect the app to a regional network discovered by your search engine of choice.
Taxi drivers, at least herearound, have mandatory rest periods, which are very strictly enforced. I know that for a fact, since my girlfriend used to drive a cab. Even if you adhere to your rest period (and can prove it), but don't have the paperwork straight this can lead to hefty fines.
There's nothing stopping your friendly Uber driver to drive you around after two back breaking shifts at the factory.
He may even quaff a couple beers, or three, before starting his "Uber shift". Something which is an absolute No!No! for a licensed cabbie. They have very stringent zero tolerance rules when it comes to booze. Your Uber driver does not.
I can't speak for the rest of the world, but imagine that this situation is quite comparable to a lot of places.
He was never a taxi driver - he's a retired teacher.
That's a big difference to an anonymous-by-default cash-only network.
(I have been using the service for years)
However, when I was using the service it was quite common to get the drivers number and contact them directly for the "next" time.
I haven't used it recently but in 2013-2014-2015 it was as an anonymous-by-default cash-only network. (edited original post to reflect it)
Overall I had zero problems, very nice experience, and I met interesting people
For example the price you're allowed to ask is calculated to ensure it's only a cost sharing without any income for the driver.
What? It doesn't make sense... Then why would any driver want to provide services via the app?
Also, I'm not talking about the specifics of the payment or reward systems, I'm just pointing out that they're both considered to be "on the same level" and in the same "difficult to tax" tech service (carpooling, ride-sharing, etc)... just google "blablacar uber" and see the results...
The incentive of the driver is sharing the cost of the gasoline/roads with the rider. Cost of gasoline in EU is higher than in US.
It is considered an entirely acceptable system because the "cost reimbursement" will fully cover the cost of wear + tear + fuel, meaning that a drive across the country can be rendered effectively free for the driver.
Also, "without any income for the driver" isn't necessarily correct - if you have a full car you will make a tidy profit.
Edit: the cost of a blablacar trip to a passenger would be on the order of 13-16 euros for an hour's drive. Comparable or cheaper than a train, with more flexibility.
Other justifications are: having company, decreasing your carbon footprint.
Spain (I know this from a Friend): Pretty harsh regulations, no Uber at all.
[FRANCE] http://www.capital.fr/bourse/actualites/blablacar-uber-sont-...
[SPAIN] http://www.elmundo.es/comunidad-valenciana/2016/04/14/570f66...
[UK] http://www.express.co.uk/life-style/science-technology/60586...
[NETHERLANDS] http://www.nu.nl/internet/4268012/autodeeldienst-blablacar-w...
etc...
Everyone I know (not exaggerating) knows about or has used services from BlaBlaCar.
Students use it regularly. Services like https://www.fromatob.de/ include it in the fare calculation.
Uber and Lyft are basically non-existent here.
I spent quite a lot of time in Russia before Uber took hold there and taking random rides from strangers, negotiating a price up front, was extremely common. Even as a tourist, I did it hundreds of times and it was generally accepted as safe by the populous. Sure, incidents occurred but I would bet if analyzed they were no more frequent than taxis or Uber.
There's always a risk of being a victim of a crime when hailing a ride from a stranger and while Uber/Lyft somewhat mitigate the risk, it's not completely safe either.
Author was also implying that they were visiting Russia. It's much harder to assess safety when you're not a resident, especially when you don't speak the language. And the fact that because many people in a culture engage in some behavior says little about its safety — e.g. riding scooters in Saigon, or smoking!
Yes, Russia especially is one of those places where every car on the road is a potential taxi and a lot of people use them.
I haven't visited personally but friends of mine who have did tell about their experiences on hailing rides from strangers without knowing the language. Don't take my anecdote as a safety recommendation or evidence of it.
It's a matter of cultural differences.
Uber/Lyft provides you with a sense of safety, but if you end up being a victim of a crime in an Uber in Russia, I'm not sure how much they can or will help you afterwards.
That said, on my last visit, I used Uber many times, as it's incredibly cheap and requires no negotiation. But don't be in a hurry. The horrible traffic and very wide, divided streets of Moscow make it particularly challenging to navigate to a passenger's precise location, so it can be an extremely long wait even when free a vehicle is very close geographically. Perhaps LibreTaxi would help solve that by lowering the barrier to entry and drastically improving the number of cars available.
http://www.victimsweek.gc.ca/res/r512.html
Men are overwhelmingly the majority of victims of stranger violence and robberies.
But... evolution dictates that we care more for women than for men.
And if these certificates can be created ad-hoc, then you can always create a new one if you get a zero star review.
A blockchain-based rating system could be the killer app here.
If it was proof-of-work, why would anyone trust that spending CPU time correlates with saying the truth?
If it was proof-of-stake, how can you guarantee that bad actors won't simply create a new public key?
And regardless, who would switch to an app that drains their battery?
Putting it on a blockchain doesn't make that more effective.
If you look at the reviews of strangers, you have to figure out which ones are real and which ones are fake... it works exactly the same with or without blockchain.
A one-way check is better than nothing though.
But you cannot deny that some kind of check is better than no checks at all.
FTFY.
And neither the police nor a taxi commission are capable of doing much to protect anyone before a crime is committed (except by the usual channels, e.g. credibly committing to punishing criminals).
There's no way you could reasonably expect a rideshare service to eliminate all such incidents.
let the trailblazers get axed and eventually the trust ratings will build up on the non-murderers.
then they can use it.
http://www.al.com/news/mobile/index.ssf/2016/08/accused_citr...