furioussloth

i meant the exact same statement "It never fucking ends with this company" ..This same user puts this exact same response on every post. Uber deserves it or not is not even the question. I am just curious if there are bots on HN.

Is this a bot which comments exact same thing on every Uber story? Just an observation because of how most of your comments make sense but every uber story has exact same question.

Whether Lyft treats drivers better is very debatable. After 180 days of change campaign that Uber did many drivers believed Uber is better for them than Lyft. But Lyft also takes smaller cut of fare compared to Uber (Lyft also charges way less in my city so drivers get paid pretty much the same.) Both companies screw their drivers in one way or the other but Lyft does it with smiles and fist bumps. Source: I spend more time on uber/lyft drivers subreddits than i would like to admit.

There might be a reason for many of those not being H1B holders. If you are H1B holder your ability to stay in country is tightly bond to your employer. You are completely dependent on your employment to stay legally in US and hardly have any wiggle room where you can quit your job and try entrepreneurship for a while if nothing works out go back to applying for another job. The visa policies should be in place for both of the cases where deserving people from other countries get funding and deserving americans get jobs at fair compensations.

Yes .. this piece of article does not resound with my biases and beliefs . So the author must be paid shill. /s

If so then they should mentioned incidences which lead to this suspicion. Both mayor and uber has failed to make it clear what the reason of contention is between them. The rules which uber is not following should have been listed instead of arbitrary statements like Uber failed to report crimes by their drivers . This can happen only if victim decides to report to uber instead of police which sounds very unlikely scenario to me.

Can they thought ? The whole gig economy model depends on not treating service providers as employees. The reason for ban does not specifically say what regulations were not followed. It mentions uber did not report crimes . Well I don't get that argument as the victim reports the crime to police and not to uber. Secondly , there is no proof or suspicion of greyball ever Been used in London. It was like they just put that in there to make Uber look bad instead of giving actual reason to ban it . All the uber drivers in London are certified private hire drivers so I don't see exactly what regulations they are talking about . Maybe they want more background checks in that case uber should obey those requests.

There is no proof of that being used in London. Also all the drivers in London are certified drivers.

Since we don't have full disclosure of what tread secrets uber is being accused of but it is a general knowledge that it revolves around Grizzle bear 3 circuit board design. There had been two recent stories which tried to portray that the whole thing was of low-value to Waymo.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-09-06/alarm-bel...

and this ridiculous story of previous version of this circuit board was gifted to departing employee in the form of earrings:

https://spectrum.ieee.org/cars-that-think/transportation/sel...

Both of these stories points to waymo not being diligent in hiding their tread secret or simply did not value this information much. That's why Uber is probably trying to make this figure public to make them sound greedy.

From what I have read on driver subreddits Lyft takes far shorter time like 2 days to approve drivers as opposed to Uber which takes 2 weeks.

Except same people drive for both companies. There is a very tiny fraction of drivers driving for just one. And in general they make more money using Uber because of quests (bonus after finishing certain rides per day). The experience depends on your luck and which driver you end up getting.

This is such a click bait. The author provides no real proof for the title except for "a source close to Uber thinks the path still exists for Travis to come back." He is the founder the path is always going to exist. I do not doubt that Travis will want some control over decisions of the company and any founder would wish that. But let there be some real proof before these reporters jump on publishing such crap. Their new CEO does not even start till next week.

Also being cyclist in NYC these yellow cab drivers are your worst enemies. I have almost got ran over more than once. You can listen to them moan about cyclists if you have been in enough yellow cabs. Having biked around in city for a while I personally go out of my way to avoid them. I only use them if I am in manhattan and have absolutely no patience or sobriety to call uber.

This is the first down voted to absolute transparency comment I have ever seen. Although what he is saying is very extreme. There are certain scandals which I was pretty pissed off about but there were other "scandals" i felt were very unfair to them. For eg. the whole delete uber for providing service to JFK when people were protesting was absolute horse shit. They even cancelled the surge pricing, promised to help out drivers stuck abroad etc. The issue here was people were outraged without any logical reasoning behind it. Lyft did not stop the service but hell no one deleted lyft that day. Second one being when Travis being on Trump's board, come on every major tech CEO was on the board. Once people decide to hate a particular thing they seem to think little about what they are getting angry about. Having said that, they do or have done some shitty things as a company and I hope they work that shit out.

Being pro-Uber here is like being a downvote magnet so yes I do maintain an account for non-technical comments. Also I do not try to condone their bad behavior; I am very amazed by what they had achieved by disrupting the taxi industry. I sometimes feel people have such knee-jerk reaction to certain things which are not really that scandalous or incriminating.

I am only referring to this person's tone being unlike most of the people on this forum. "GROSS" "burn Uber down to ground". It is concerning how angry this person is. Also yes the car ran the signal, it was bad they should be fined and what not. This is not L5 autonomy so the driver is also responsible for not breaking at that signal . Stop making this sound like the car ran over someone or did not stop for pedestrian.

Your comments come off as if you are more bitter about some company you can just choose to ignore than benchamark is about Travis.

weren't they suspended? Also i doubt they coded it in their software to break the signal , can't believe you just implied that. It surely was a bug in software and I hope they got fined for it and took steps to fix it. Testing self-driving cars is not trivial, pretty much everyone who is testing them have screwed up here and there. That's the reason the person behind the wheel should be vigilant.

I think Uber's execution got them the market share they have (which btw is a huge achievement by any means) but lost them the time to build a decent culture.

As much as you and many on the HN like it. Ship is not sinking at least not any time soon. If all they wanted was a way out why tarnish their own image by filing this law suit and make benchmark look less founder-friendly and supposedly create leaks which make Uber look even worse. Making Uber look like a bad investment is possibly something they don't want to do if they want $$$ for their existing shares.

This story was published 8 months ago and yet there is not a single other country where Lyft has expanded. Also Uber already faces heavy competition oversees. I suspect most of the money they are losing is because of their desire for world domination. It is going to be very hard for Lyft to enter or retain those markets.

Your criticism of company is one thing but thinking that they are not lasting longer than 6 months is a complete oversight on your part of how dominant they are in market or how many new markets they are trying to enter. No one cares about their management troubles outside silicon valley and rightly so. Consumers care about product and convenience . I agree with the part that they should aim for competent candidate not female candidate but thinking they are not making it into 2019 is just laughable.

Why are the terms unfavorable? Financially the terms look very favorable in one of politically toughest marker outside US.

yes lets just trust the administration instead. I am sure current administration has our best interest at heart /s

"horrible things": oh summer child. I would categorize most of these as misdemeanor. Try to take a breath and really look at it. Except for susan fowler case other things aren't that bad, except for firing everyone responsible I don't see what else should have been done.

Well I for one am glad to have these services at my disposal earlier than later. There would be way less innovation if everyone insisted on doing things right. Which laws are broken if it is good or bad is a subjective matter. Some people though those laws were unnecessary and backward. Some people thought otherwise. IMO people got better service and drivers got income because of that brash behavior.Breaking those laws probably saved more lives than not breaking them.

You are ignoring the fact that regulations which protected taxis would not allow ride sharing companies like uber or lyft to exist. Uber made it possible to have those car sharing companies.Taxis are awful in so many cities. It is impossible to expect quick pick-up in cities like buffalo,NY. Many worse things happen in loads of companies . They get away with it because media is not interested. I totally believe the massive upheaval more than makes up for their mistakes.

Case in point http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2017/04/daily-c...