Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by zimpenfish | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

zimpenfish

It doesn't matter because Uber are the ones trying to get their license renewed.

(What is it with the rampant "whataboutism" defending Uber?")

View on HN

"Uber are the ones trying to get their license renewed"

They're not the only ones.

There are around 2,400 private hire operator licences in issue currently, so about 40 are renewed per month.[0]

Whether laws and other regulations are enforced uniformly or selectively is a matter of concern to all of us.

[0] https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/taxis-and-private-hire/licensing...

I stand mildly corrected.

So are you saying none of the other private hire licensees have DBS or health checks? I thought the point was that as employees Uber drivers had to have safety checks and that Uber don't want to accept they're employees because then Uber can't keep as much of the money.

Have I read the situation wrong in this respect?

"So are you saying none of the other private hire licensees have DBS or health checks?"

I'm not sure how anything I've written could be interpreted in that way. Perhaps you replied to the wrong comment?

My point is that stats about Uber are only useful when put into context, i.e. compared with stats about other holders of operator licences. Someone said that's irrelevant because Uber are the [only] ones applying for a licence. I pointed out that there are around 40 operator licences granted per month.

Given there are such direct comparisons possible, why are those stating the numbers continuing to do so without sufficient context to make them useful?

It's about context. Anecdotal evidence paired with taking numbers out of context is a keystone of yellow journalism, and is something that is ubiquitous in these articles about Uber. Uber currently fulfills 40 million [1] rides per month. At that scale, even the rarest and most egregious incidents are going to be a regular occurrence, which enables individuals and organizations to be incredible misleading when discussing the issues at hand.

So for instance in the US the average traffic fatality rate is about 1.5 per hundred million miles. With Uber servicing 40 million rides per month, you'd expect to see numerous Uber passengers/drivers killed in traffic accidents each and every month. It can lead to yellow journalism like "Dozens were killed in accidents with unsafe Uber drivers last year. How can we fix this?" The quantity of values is in no way evidence that there's anything to fix nor does it justify calling the drivers unsafe. You need context and relative comparison. It could well be that you get your sensationalistic headline even when the drivers are well above the average in terms of safety - just thanks to the scale of their operation.

Arguments should be decided on logic, not emotion. And that is impossible when you present numbers without any context.

[1] - http://www.businessofapps.com/data/uber-statistics/

>What is it with the rampant "whataboutism" defending Uber?

Even worse is the implicit dismissal of sexual assault!

It's about fair treatment.

If you get a parking ticket for going 5 over the limit, but sheriff's friend gets away free while going 30 over and drunk, is it "whataboutism"?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com