Re:Read This Before You Build Uber for X
by wlesieutre on Friday September 01, 2017 @02:33PM
(#15151226)
The reason they left was Austin saying "You need to fingerprint all potential drivers and run them through an FBI fingerprint database."
They came back when legislature said "Actually you don't need to do that."
I'd hardly characterize it as a hissy fit.
Re:Read This Before You Build Uber for X
by fragmede on Friday September 01, 2017 @03:39PM
(#15151774)
City of Austin: "You need to fingerprint all potential drivers and run them through an FBI fingerprint database."
Uber: I don't wanna do that! Uber: stomps feet Uber: goes home Uber: Bribes Texas state into passing laws to force Austin to accept them.
Re:Read This Before You Build Uber for X
by jsjohnst on Friday September 01, 2017 @05:56PM
(#15152689)
While I am usually an outspoken critic of Uber, I feel this is an unfair portrayal of that situation. If I owned a ride hailing service, I would protest the same law.
Both services return were widely predicted here even before they left. It wasn't a hissy fit, it was a calculated move to reduce business costs, and it worked better than I think they even expected.
The telling thing to me is that Uber and Lyft came back to Austin with no concessions after throwing a hissy fit and leaving. That tells me that they saw something that scared them and they needed to squelch it before it escaped to other cities.
Edit: I stand corrected. The state legislature overrode the Austin laws. (Side: Wish I could put an overstrike through my comment.)
Make no mistake, this is 1990's Microsoft levels of predatory behavior. It is nothing to be praised.