The article's essential claim is that the workers do not own the means of production in any meaningful sense, despite the careful legal fictions to the contrary.

The claim is that Uber et al have developed a way to own the upsides (aka positive cash flows) associated with the means of production, while externalizing the downsides (repair bills, depreciation, insurance, bodily harm from accidents, etc) onto the workers. And even in a strictly limited literal sense, the cars are bought on credit, so the bank owns them.

Owning a car and being available to drive doesn't "produce" a fare, though. Only Uber's app can do that.

They don't, as the app is the magic sauce. It's where all the bookings will be, if things turn out the way Uber and Lyft valutations are based on.

Owning your own time, money, resources, and equipment is very capitalist. There's nothing about capitalism that requires centralized control of anything. It's just classical liberal philosophy applied to economics... individual rights should include property rights.

The workers very much do not control production.