I think this article conflates two different things: the concept of app-based ride-hail services like Uber, for which there is clearly a huge amount of demand even without VCs juicing it; and the actual implementation of it by Uber, which is a hugely bloated and unsustainable company that's proven primarily to be an unparalleled bonfire of VC money.

> That is, rather than having to wait longer because drivers tapped "accept," realized they'd lose money on your business, and tapped "cancel," you would now wait longer because drivers just didn't accept your run.

The blog is implying this is a bad thing, but this seems preferable both from the driver and rider's POV?

> Today, Uber offers the same poor service as traditional taxis, but must charge enormously higher fares because of its much higher cost structure.

No, Uber's model of being able to order a car from anywhere to anywhere with transparent location tracking, routing and pricing (as in, you know what you'll pay) has always been and remains superior to "traditional" taxis. In some markets taxi companies have finally followed suit, down to fares fixed in advance, but by doing so they've also shown the superiority of the Uber model.