Ditto.

I took 2 uber rides this morning; I just uninstalled Uber and installed Lyft. They have the same amount of cars down in here in San Jose.

Lyft only exists because Uber cleared the way and they continue to benefit from Uber doing the hard work of fighting the taxi industry and regulators. If you don't want to be a hypocrite you will need to walk.

It just so happens that in almost every possible industry, there are some who clear the way and others who benefit from them clearing the way.

Some of them even manage to do it without threatening reporters.

I just downloaded it to support them. The more absurd the PC bullshit gets, the more the rest of us will push back just to spite you. I can't wait for my new shirt to arrive.

Well, its not PC is it? It is holding oneself to a standard. It is clear that this man - and Uber it would seem - are not behaving to a standard that people would support.

A concept so simple that is lost on so many.

>Well, its not PC is it?

Really? Then why is it so notable that the person is a "female journalist"? Why are people deliberately distorting "journalists are dragging our private affairs out to use against us, we should do it to them" as "he's threatening to reveal the locations of people's children"?

>are not behaving to a standard that people would support.

Many people do support, that's precisely what I said. I am supporting them, lots of people are supporting them.

It would be quite hard to judge how many people 'kept Uber installed despite this incident'. A simple scan over HN and the comments under the stories about this do not support your stance that many do support Uber in this.

The simple idea of "journalists are dragging our private affairs out to use against us, we should do it to them" is where these people fell down. Sure, some people are distorting it and it could therefore give the appearance of being pc, but in reality this is a moral problem.

Had they (he) held themselves to a higher standard, behaving in a morally responsible way, none of these things would happen and indeed they could be a leader in more ways than they originally intended to be (transportation).

>A simple scan over HN and the comments under the stories about this do not support your stance that many do support Uber in this.

HN posters are not a random sample.

You are correct. I figure that HN and the commenters on the articles about the issue are the people who know about this issue, the general public perhaps not so much.

Going by those assumptions, rule out the general public, and while I still don't have a random sample, I have something. Pretty much the only thing around without actually polling. And that only thing concludes the opposite of "lots of people are supporting them." But whatever, that's all smoke.

It's not PC it's called the free market? If I don't like Uber I have the choice not to use them.

Anyway, watch this :-D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmsV1TuESrc

I didn't say you had to use them. I said that when you come out and say "I'm boycotting X because they violated SOCJUS law" you help them more than you hurt them. Because the number of people who think the PC/SJW nonsense has gotten absurd is much higher than the number of people who think it is cool.

I think far, far more people will find Emil Michael's statements unacceptable than not. Including, I think, Uber itself.

I think if the majority of people would find his statements unacceptable, then people would not feel the need to deliberately misrepresent his statements to make them seem less acceptable.