they do photo albums.
607 karma · joined August 18, 2010
Do tell.
These vehicles have far fewer negative externalities than cars. People don't die when they get hit by scooters and bikes. We can charge them with renewable energy. They don't take space from pedestrians as cars do.
These are a huge clear good for cities. (And yes, people should gtfo the sidewalk, companies should educate as such, and there should be tickets for people who make others less safe.)
But this announcement is about a rider side product.
(That would be an inexcusable and cynical deflection.)
How do you feel about that?
:)
You've suffered a large loss. You'll have to find some way to draw a line in between your present and your past, and to move on.
Make a decision about cutting your losses on this investment based on the understanding that anything you leave in could plausibly depreciate further.
Enumerate your opportunities. Focus on how you can use and build them in the long term.
That said, you've described the 'why not'. All of the attacks you've identified are targeted and require significant investment. This opening doesn't allow for economically profitable mass-collection and exploitation (like say, grabbing credit cards or hacking into email accounts).
Firesheep was a 2010 invention. Once that happened, anyone could chill in a coffeeshop and watch the http traffic whizz by.
... as much as we want to excoriate Tinder, it's been reasonable for most of their users to have 'i dgaf' as their threat model.
I'd love to know how different his reprints are the the originals. I've seen one from the original run, and they looked the same to me. (But it had been a while.)
I'm a simple man.
To the extent that you're asking about product differentiation: scale, eta, and price are reasons people choose one over the other.
To the extent that you're keen on punishing people who have behaved badly in order to disincentivize future bad behavior, good on you, that seems reasonable. I think it's hard to draw the line as to where this is actually useful/practical, and obviously it'll be a different line for different people. I'd guess that you're not boycotting every other startup that Benchmark has put early money into, for example.
I've been at the company for 2.5 years. I'm solidly within your firing range. I've seen a company with a behavioral distribution that was slightly shifted from the societal mean. My job has almost exclusively involved interacting with people whose behavior fell within societally normal. Nevertheless, the upper tail of Uber's behavioral distribution was, retrospectively, clearly in a bad place.
I believe that that behavioral distribution has shifted to being mundane.
Give some thought to what you'd expect to see over time if the company genuinely had changed internally. Hold Uber to it. I suspect it'll meet that bar.