News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:FCC slaps Lyft with citation for calling and texting cust... by ejcx on Sunday September 13, 2015 @03:59AM (#10210669)
Why? If Uber and lyft did this from the beginning, they would have never lasted a week.

"Turns out we can't operate like a Taxi". "Turns out we are actually supposed to be treating the drivers as employees". "Turns out we are supposed to be vetting these drivers more extensively".

If uber and lyft asked permission they simply wouldn't exist.

Re:FCC slaps Lyft with citation for calling and texting cust... by yifanlu on Sunday September 13, 2015 @05:59AM (#10210840)
And why should they last for more than a week if they break rules? Sure, you can argue that the rules are pointless but it would be arrogant for you and I to decide which rules we want to follow and which ones we can ignore. Maybe treating drivers as employees and vetting them would cost more but benefit both parties more. Maybe not. But not doing either definitely benefits the company. And maybe certain rules exist to protect us from companies; even if we don't know it because we haven't lived without such protection.
Re:FCC slaps Lyft with citation for calling and texting cust... by bryanbuckley on Sunday September 13, 2015 @11:53PM (#10213576)
It's probably healthy for a system's rules to occasionally be tested. The important rules are probably more efficiently/effectively enforced than the others.
Re:FCC slaps Lyft with citation for calling and texting cust... by raverbashing on Sunday September 13, 2015 @04:16AM (#10210689)
Correct

Still, you want to limit your liability.

Not following FCC rules seems a stupid and pointless transgression

Re:FCC slaps Lyft with citation for calling and texting cust... by geobmx540 on Sunday September 13, 2015 @04:23AM (#10210699)
Seems like an oversight
Re:FCC slaps Lyft with citation for calling and texting cust... by HiYaBarbie on Sunday September 13, 2015 @04:25AM (#10210704)
> Not following FCC rules seems a stupid and pointless transgression

Perhaps unless the FCC rules themselves are pointless?

The reason why Uber and Lyft are given a hard time is that they're a serious threat to state-maintained taxi-cartels all over the world.

Re:FCC slaps Lyft with citation for calling and texting cust... by DanBC on Sunday September 13, 2015 @06:02AM (#10210848)
> The reason why Uber and Lyft are given a hard time is that they're a serious threat to state-maintained taxi-cartels all over the world.

No, they're given a hard time because they ignore regulation like driver background checks or insurance or calibrated tamper proof meters.

Re:FCC slaps Lyft with citation for calling and texting cust... by HiYaBarbie on Sunday September 13, 2015 @07:57AM (#10211078)
> No, they're given a hard time because they ignore regulation like driver background checks or insurance or calibrated tamper proof meters.

"Ignoring regulations" in this context basically boils down to "competing with taxi cartels". That's obviously upsetting to the cartels, and unhappy noises are made about background checks and meters, as if those potential problems could only be solved with a cartel.

We both know that Uber & Lyft drivers give better service overall than taxi drivers overall. That's because Uber and Lyft are not part of a cartel, and have to therefore please their customers lest they lose them.

Re:FCC slaps Lyft with citation for calling and texting cust... by myhf on Sunday September 13, 2015 @05:35AM (#10210806)
Perhaps the Pure Food and Drug Act is pointless, too.
Re:FCC slaps Lyft with citation for calling and texting cust... by HiYaBarbie on Sunday September 13, 2015 @09:00AM (#10211235)
Perhaps the safety-related government agencies aren't really doing their purported job?
Re:FCC slaps Lyft with citation for calling and texting cust... by gnopgnip on Sunday September 13, 2015 @04:44AM (#10210741)
Or they just forgot to include the opt out options.