News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Uber, losing billions, freezes engineering hires by ZhuanXia on Saturday August 10, 2019 @09:19PM (#20665597)
I don't know what Uber thinks its end game is. Uber's "lets burn money to capture the market and own self driving" stratagem is economically absurd. In the limit of driverless cars, capital can be turned directly into labor so anyone with capital will deploy a fleet so long as it is profitable. Talk about a red ocean. The self-driving dream investors pin their hopes on is a siren. Ironically, Uber will only be able to maintain value in those futures where driverless cars don't work out.

Commodities do not have network effects. In general, if you are replacing labor with capital (in the form of automation) you will not get the network effects of a two-sided market - which is basically a market failure caused by our previous inability to convert capital into labor in a manner that scales. If you are replacing a two-sided market with automation you are going to need another moat.

Re:Uber, losing billions, freezes engineering hires by JumpCrisscross on Saturday August 10, 2019 @09:24PM (#20665622)
> I don't know what Uber thinks its end game is

There is a massive, profitable courier business in most cities that Uber hasn't touched. And food delivery is already being explored.

Beyond that, Uber's electronic-dispatch technology has the ability to optimize garbage pick-up and drop-off; police, fire and medical resource routing; small-vehicle fleet management for sundry specialized logistics companies; and all manner of other logistical processes presently centrally dispatched like taxis were a decade ago.

Uber is burning too much cash. But real-time electronic dispatch of variously-placed resources to randomly-distributed tasks is nothing to sneeze at. It's a difficult problem due to its myriad of edge cases, and Uber seems to have reasonably solved it.

Re:Uber, losing billions, freezes engineering hires by untog on Saturday August 10, 2019 @10:03PM (#20665748)
> Beyond that, Uber's electronic-dispatch technology has the ability to optimize garbage pick-up and drop-off; police, fire and medical resource routing; small-vehicle fleet management for sundry specialized logistics companies; and all manner of other logistical processes presently centrally dispatched like taxis were a decade ago.

But why is it going to be Uber providing those services? What's their moat? Google has an absurd amount of live data from shivers using Google Maps or Waze as they drive around a city, if they launch a "medical resource routing" service tomorrow it'll blow Uber out of the water.

Re:Uber, losing billions, freezes engineering hires by JumpCrisscross on Saturday August 10, 2019 @10:10PM (#20665770)
> What's their moat?

They’re actually doing it. At scale, practically everywhere.

> if [Google] launch a "medical resource routing" service tomorrow it'll blow Uber out of the water

I’m doubtful. One, it’s Google. Logistics requires lots of customer interaction. Uber isn’t great at this, but it’s better than Google.

Also, being able to theoretically do something is different from actually doing it. The problem isn’t routing. It’s knowing which tasks to bundle in what order. It’s knowing where tasks which haven’t been ordered yet are likely to emerge. It’s knowing how long a task might take. It’s knowing which tasks require what, and who is best placed to accept it. It’s mediating disputes between the various parties involved, and properly incentivising them.

Re:Uber, losing billions, freezes engineering hires by untog on Saturday August 10, 2019 @10:12PM (#20665782)
> One, it’s Google. Logistics requires lots of customer interaction. Uber isn’t great at this, but it’s better than Google.

That's usually said when talking about Google's free services. In my experience when you're paying them money they're very responsive.

And I'm still not sure what makes Uber's tech all that notable. They simply have more drivers than their competitors do, it stands to reason the customer experience is better.

Re:Uber, losing billions, freezes engineering hires by JumpCrisscross on Saturday August 10, 2019 @10:32PM (#20665852)
> In my experience when you're paying them money they're very responsive

In my experience, they're 50/50. They're also totally unreliable as a commercial partner. You don't want to outsource your logistics to Google only to learn about the service being cancelled in a press release.

Re:Uber, losing billions, freezes engineering hires by cameronbrown on Saturday August 10, 2019 @11:30PM (#20666040)
Problem is Google's never deprecated a logistics network before. We really have no idea how the company would try and operate in that area. They've certainly been careful not to deprecate services in Cloud. But yes, you're right about customer service. Google Play/YouTube springs to mind on the developer/creator side.
Re:Uber, losing billions, freezes engineering hires by untog on Saturday August 10, 2019 @11:04PM (#20665957)
In my experience Uber is also 50/50 with regard to customer service, so again I'm not sure what the persuasive argument is.
Re:Uber, losing billions, freezes engineering hires by toast0 on Sunday August 11, 2019 @02:10AM (#20666592)
> That's usually said when talking about Google's free services. In my experience when you're paying them money they're very responsive.

I'm the admin for a company gsuite. We can certainly get a google representative on the phone, but when they can't do anything for us, it doesn't qualify as responsive.

It took like 4 meetings to get invoiced billing. They wouldn't consider disabling links on email. They like to redesign the admin UI to make things take more clicks. There is no way to merge two G Suite accounts. I don't remember my other complaint, but they told me I had a good idea, but please post it in the customer forum to see if it would get done --- I've seen what happens to ideas in the customer forum, nothing, since I frequently end up there looking for how to do reasonable things that are impossible.

Re:Uber, losing billions, freezes engineering hires by muzani on Saturday August 10, 2019 @10:58PM (#20665933)
Uber doesn't need a moat. They built their fortress on an inaccessible mountain of thin profit margins. Every competitor bleeds lots of money to get there, and nobody is going to pump a few billions for an Uber competitor. If anything, headlines like this give competitive advantage by scaring potential competing founders and investors.
Re:Uber, losing billions, freezes engineering hires by leannekim on Saturday August 10, 2019 @11:51PM (#20666126)
Uber doesn’t HAVE a moat. I use a different ride share service in each European city I travel to, and they each do pretty well.

If all your product does is get you from point A to point B then I don’t care if it’s Uber or BobsRideShare.

Re:Uber, losing billions, freezes engineering hires by untog on Saturday August 10, 2019 @11:04PM (#20665961)
But... They're losing money. They can't do that indefinitely.
Re:Uber, losing billions, freezes engineering hires by muzani on Sunday August 11, 2019 @04:45AM (#20667129)
They don't have to. They just have to do it longer than the competition.

Remember, Facebook and YouTube made big losses for a while, especially after the 'exit'. YouTube outlived Vine and started putting in more intrusive ads. Facebook IPO seemed like a flop, but it went very well and they acquired all their competitors instead of outwaiting them.

Re:Uber, losing billions, freezes engineering hires by untog on Sunday August 11, 2019 @08:28AM (#20667853)
Uber isn't Facebook or Google, though. Plenty of Uber drivers work for more than one company, and there's nothing to stop a new arrival from poaching a ton of Uber drivers, as long as they give the right incentives. Facebook was protected by network effects, YouTube by the large video library. From the end user's point of view Uber has no such protection.
Re:Uber, losing billions, freezes engineering hires by dougabug on Sunday August 11, 2019 @08:39AM (#20667902)
Lyft doesn't seem to be going away anytime soon in the US. If anything, Lyft is much larger than it was a few years ago. In China and a number of markets where Uber invested heavily, the competition won the war of attrition.
Re:Uber, losing billions, freezes engineering hires by Marazan on Sunday August 11, 2019 @05:00AM (#20667185)
Really a reply to muzani

Facebook lost money for 2 years, right at the start. That's it.

Re:Uber, losing billions, freezes engineering hires by yyyk on Sunday August 11, 2019 @05:30PM (#20670657)
It would cost billions to be a global competitor to Uber. But nearly all rideshares are local. A local company can compete at a much more acceptable price, and use its local knowledge and connections to gain an edge. There isn't much advantage to being global in Uber's market.
Re:Uber, losing billions, freezes engineering hires by soup10 on Sunday August 11, 2019 @05:27PM (#20670643)
Things that don't support the ad business are never going to be very high priorities for google. Is a medical resource routing system going to pop out of someone's 20% time? Doubt.
Re:Uber, losing billions, freezes engineering hires by spac on Saturday August 10, 2019 @09:33PM (#20665654)
For a while, in NYC at least, they tried the courier model, but that was a few years ago. Not really sure why it did not continue.
Re:Uber, losing billions, freezes engineering hires by JumpCrisscross on Saturday August 10, 2019 @09:35PM (#20665659)
> For a while, in NYC at least, they tried the courier model, but that was a few years ago

Courier services are high-risk operations sensitive to reliability.

My guess is Uber's network wasn't optimized for reliability then. Food delivery has similar reliability requirements, but the stakes are lower. (Failed food deliveries produce complaints. Failed courier runs produce litigation.)

Re:Uber, losing billions, freezes engineering hires by sowbug on Saturday August 10, 2019 @09:37PM (#20665663)
Which history are we seeing all over again? Amazon in 1997 losing money selling $5 books for $4, or pets.com losing money selling $50 bags of kibble for $40?
Re:Uber, losing billions, freezes engineering hires by shaklee3 on Sunday August 11, 2019 @11:43AM (#20668629)
Except most of Amazon's money is made off AWS, and not retail. Amazon today would be very different if AWS didn't exist.
Re:Uber, losing billions, freezes engineering hires by sowbug on Sunday August 11, 2019 @01:02PM (#20669083)
Yes, that was the point of the question: whether today's Uber is the first chapter of a larger plan to build a profitable business on top of a much simpler and possibly even inherently money-losing set of transactions, or whether it's already in its final form and is just a bad idea.
Re:Uber, losing billions, freezes engineering hires by jessedhillon on Saturday August 10, 2019 @10:29PM (#20665839)
I'm constantly amazed at the number of upvoted, top-level comments on HN (on any topic) where the underlying premise is first, thousands of people with actual skin in this game are wrong, whereas I, a drive-by commentator, posess True Understanding. I'm not suggesting that a large number of personally invested people is proof of correctness -- but certainly it reeks of arrogance if your argument assumes without proof that an uninterested commentator is better informed than all of them. More so if your only comment, given such a grand assumption, is to reiterate basic economics.

At least you could try to explain how you think it is that so many are mistaken about something so elementary that it fits in two short paragraphs.

Re:Uber, losing billions, freezes engineering hires by GVIrish on Sunday August 11, 2019 @08:24AM (#20667831)
Investors have been massively wrong before on all kinds of things which has led to market crashes. So the fact that some investors believe Uber will become a strong, profitable business in the foreseeable future doesn't count for much.

The market is not perfectly rational. It's vulnerable to hype and there's a lot of money to be made by exploiting that hype and selling before the bubble bursts.

Re:Uber, losing billions, freezes engineering hires by mhermher on Sunday August 11, 2019 @01:54AM (#20666508)
Those investors just need to find greater fools.
Re:Uber, losing billions, freezes engineering hires by tootie on Saturday August 10, 2019 @09:59PM (#20665735)
The success of Lyft just shows how little moat they have. The core of their business is so simple and so easy to copycat.
Re:Uber, losing billions, freezes engineering hires by threeseed on Saturday August 10, 2019 @10:26PM (#20665831)
Driverless cars are a very long way away.

And even longer for Uber style use cases where you need to either be able to read street signs or know the parking rules in every street around the world. Not to mention that Uber drivers rely on breaking the law eg. Stopping in non stopping areas like bus lanes. Self driving cars going to do that ?

And confused how the economics are so better for self driving cars given that they are likely to be far more expensive.

Re:Uber, losing billions, freezes engineering hires by xmprt on Sunday August 11, 2019 @01:56AM (#20666516)
I'm also super confused about how the first company to develop self driving cars will win everything. Firstly, it's hard to say when a car is truly self driving and even once regulators say it passes the tests, I'm sure companies will continue investing money into improving the experience so R&D isn't going to get any cheaper. Also, self driving cars cost a ton to operate and manufacture. Probably more than the amount Uber and Lyft are paying drivers right now. Considering all these factors, it probably won't be another 10 years until the economics of driverless cars works out. In this sense, I think Uber's biggest competitor isn't Lyft or Waymo. It's Tesla since Uber is trying to shift people away from car ownership.