ganitarashid

Interesting. But I have personally witnessed poverty and people dying of hunger in front of my very eyes. I’d rather help those people than invest in failed moon missions.

Being from India myself, I always believed these funds would be better spent on helping the less fortunate.

Exactly

Just because it’s easy doesn’t mean users are clamoring for it. I can think of hundreds of things that are easy that apple hasn’t done

All easy software implementations. This is not a hardware story.

Yep it’s just the settings, hardware is basically the same and can achieve the same result.

This is a marketing blog post.

As long as you manually control the exposure and exposure time, the same can be achieved with an iPhone camera. This is not specific to Pixel.

We are currently in the AI winter. What we have now is not AI it’s curve fitting. Don’t be fooled, the computer does not “understand” it’s doing blind curve fitting.

Funny thing is I know of of at least two other women that currently call themselves Crypto Queen, or a variation of that, who are doing the TED circuit and similar.

I know Uber shareholders do not like to hear this.

Title assumes that Alan did in fact get anything wrong, which is incorrect

This is not Uber's real problem. The much bigger problem is that Uber's business model by definition cannot be profitable, and here is why:

Let's start with the costs of the business model.

What are the two costs involved in transporting a customer from point A to point B? They are: - The car’s time - The (human) driver’s time

Operating or leasing a car for a certain amount of time (maintenance/insurance/gasoline) has not become significantly cheaper since Uber was created, so there is no cost reduction here.

Hiring a human's dedicated time (at least minimum wage) has also not become significantly cheaper since Uber, so here too there is no cost reduction.

Therefore the cost to transport something from point A to B has stayed exactly the same, before Uber and after Uber.

To transport something from point A to point B, someone must still carry this unavoidable cost. If the customer is not carrying this cost, then Uber must be carrying it. Uber can do so for now because investor money has subsidized the cost. But Uber can’t do this forever because investors will lose patience and stop the subsidy.

Uber can only be profitable once the unavoidable cost transport is passed on entirely to the customer. At that point, Uber will have to charge the same price as any taxi. Stated differently, Uber can never be more profitable than a taxi company on a per-ride basis.

Given that customers have no loyalty to a ride-share service, because every ride is virtually identical, any taxi company can build a similar service, removing any "walled garden" or "network effect" Uber may have hoped for. In fact, Uber clones are doing well in other countries and are creating significant headwinds for Uber.

Uber therefore has no hope of ever delivering its promises unless it can deliver driverless cars. Even if it can do that, the technology will quickly become commoditized and ubiquitous, meaning that any other ride-share service could offer it as well, once again removing any advantage, and driving margins for all ride-share services to near zero.

There’s always bitcoin

Artificial diamonds are more flawless than natural diamonds. And natural diamonds are not rare. And they’re not forever because they burn easily.

These are all things you’re not supposed to know.

I hope he doesn’t trigger a Phobos Anomalie

I stopped reading once I saw it has a way to show advertisements

Wars are started by rich old men and fought mostly by poor young men

You do not seem to understand SQL

Slightly up from the open but still down majorly from yesterday. Are you in marketing?

It’s funny how Uber simultaneously says it’s all about supporting drivers and treating them like family, and at the same time they want to fire them all so that robots can do the driving.

So which way is it?

Yes it is. If you had invested in the stock market at the height of the “””bubble””” in 2000 you would be off well now. In hindsight it was not a bubble. You may disagree but sadly you probably didn’t have that perspective at the time.

There was no bitcoin bubble. Bitcoin is currently 50% down from the high mark. That is not a bubble. After actual bubbles, the low mark is may be 90% or more below peak.

Now that trades are free everywhere, nothing sets apart Robinhood anymore. Robinhood may yet become the next WeWork.

There's another thing that needs to be said. Uber is receiving a lot of criticism here, but whether they eventually make it as a company or not, Uber is doing one important thing: Showing that a business model and profits matter. This has been neglected in the last decade or so. If bringing back that awareness is Uber's only contribution, then no matter the company's outcome, it will have done a good thing.

It’s not that you want to switch. It’s that you wouldn’t care if you did.

Apparently the decrease hasn’t been enough to have a positive impact on Uber financials

Once we have robo drivers everyone will have them. If Uber survives until that day, it will have no advantage over a localized competitor like Bobs Taxis with robo drivers.

Those are all great things. And all of them are done by the competitors. In Europe I use MyTaxi, same thing as Uber but much nicer cars

A low price is not loyalty