News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Uber vs. Lyft: From The Driver’s Seat by qq66 on Thursday December 04, 2014 @07:55PM (#8702584)
Lyft created that image because they thought they would need some cover story about "friends driving friends" in order to violate taxi licensing laws without repercussions. Uber demonstrated that such a cover story was unnecessary.
Re:Uber vs. Lyft: From The Driver’s Seat by Evolved on Thursday December 04, 2014 @09:23PM (#8702778)
Unless Lyft didn't charge for rides then regardless of how they describe it, fundamentally it is still a pay-per-ride service (i.e. taxi) and still subject to the taxi industry regulations (which I don't necessarily agree with but exist nonetheless).

I 'm curious if companies like these could legally operate by not charging by time or distance but instead operating as a private club wherein someone purchases a membership that grants them free time or mileage (up to a certain limit) or some system based on pricing sort of like how NYC MetroCards are set up).

Re:Uber vs. Lyft: From The Driver’s Seat by qq66 on Friday December 05, 2014 @03:22AM (#8703429)
They didn't "charge" for rides for a long time. They called them "donations" and you were perfectly entitled not to "donate" anything. Of course the driver would give you a bad rating if you "donated" anything less than the suggested "donation."
Re:Uber vs. Lyft: From The Driver’s Seat by jcampbell1 on Friday December 05, 2014 @12:22AM (#8703098)
Lyft even called the fares "donations" until roughly 6 months ago.
Re:Uber vs. Lyft: From The Driver’s Seat by differentView on Thursday December 04, 2014 @08:28PM (#8702671)
Source? Or is this conjecture on your part?