Speaker: Confessions of an Uber Driver II: How we doing?
615 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 15 16 17 18 19 … 25 Newer→ Last
-
BenWilson, in reply to
Internet connected smartphone/GPS technology has the potential to at least organize carpooling better. But you can't clip the ticket on carpooling anywhere near as massively as you can the way Uber does, since it's not supposed to be profitable, just cost covering. So the software to do it is not very well developed.
And of course carpooling is a PITA compared to getting your own taxi. Nothing a smartphone can do will alter that simple fact, that the more people in your vehicle, the more of a stuff around it's going to be for everyone. Particularly if the people are unknown random strangers. Then it's not only a stuff around, it could be scary and/or dangerous.
So, good idea, lots of issues to iron out. Is Uber ironing them out? In NZ, no, they don't even offer such a service. So this solution to transport woes is a red herring.
Possibly, with legislative changes, people could carpool for profit with less than a full P endorsement, COF and logbook (and they will be doing it without a PSL after the law review happens, but probably not without being under an ATO, however that gets set up). But there be dragons down any such path for legislators. Quite aside from the whole danger to the public aspect there is simply the issue of people gaining an income from a completely unregistered service, which would make it a total exception in employment and tax law. I can't see that happening at all. Which is why the review has made the recommendations that it has, and they retain many aspects of the current setup.
So yeah, circles. You can't really engineer a transport solution just through software and wage suppression alone. You actually have to use different technology that moves more people more efficiently. Sad part about that: It got invented hundreds of years ago, and the best time to put it in would have been decades ago. Still, never too late.
-
goforit, in reply to
With proper carpooling the proposed regs does cover the requirements. Carpooling that is when is done non commericly unlike with Uber overseas but just with friends or workmates travelling to or from a common place picking or dropping off on the way is done on a cost share basis only without the need of P endorsement, COF or log books. Done commericaly will be subject to the same rules as taxis, private hire, rideshare etc.
The tricks Uber has come up here and overseas to beat regulations have been taken into account with the new proposed regs and will be one step ahead of Uber.
Dispatch systems in most Taxi companies are being reengineered to take into account future needs in regard to the changing envrronments of receiving/dispatching. The taxi industry has not been sitting on there hands it only takes time to be more organised.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
Carpooling that is when is done non commericly unlike with Uber overseas but just with friends or workmates travelling to or from a common place picking or dropping off on the way is done on a cost share basis only without the need of P endorsement, COF or log books.
Yes, and I think this could be somewhat transformative if it were better organized by an app/server, but it's very hard to see how the cost of building the app could be funded. There are hundreds of thousands of commuter vehicles with single occupants all traveling in the same directions every work day. This could be much improved by a cost sharing model on a large scale.
But I haven't seen that model working anywhere yet. I don't know if it's fundamentally broken and people just don't want to carpool, or if it's just waiting for the killer app.
-
Sacha, in reply to
lets level the playing field by removing all regulations
or babyface can just go live in Somalia and save the rest of us from his nasty fantasies.
-
goforit, in reply to
people just don’t want to carpool
This is the main reason why, basicly people like to be independant.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
Yup, although I still hold out a hope that some combination of social media, ratings systems, and good map/gps algorithms could lead to a transformation in which the experience of being in the car with other people is not so onerous. It could be, for instance, that you generate a large friends list of people along your most common routes. Not so large that they're complete and utter strangers, but large enough that it gives much improved flexibility on the travel times, and turns the driving experience into a social interaction moment as well. It could transform commuting and going out in the evening. But I don't want to give away too many ideas for free here - this could be a big deal eventually.
-
Herald Editorial fails to acknowledge that the Small Passenger Services Review is already nearly complete and included submissions from Uber and all the other stakeholders, and that changes are coming, and that the government has essentially done their due diligence on this (unlike the writer). Furthermore, those changes are NOT reflective of what Uber had decided is OK.
And EVEN IF they were, you still don't just go around breaking the law of the land for profit. That never has been OK.
-
Sacha, in reply to
Herald Editorial
Credulous numpties.
If the service is making available to users the impressions, observations and experiences of previous passengers, these would be a far more searching and reliable measure of safety than the routine checks of departmental registers.
Not much help assessing new drivers though, is it.
-
goforit, in reply to
You have to decide if you want to be part of the noncommerical carpooling system or part of the commerical rideshare system, once that is estabished then systems can be put in place to promote such systems. You cannot be both systems thats where all this pie in the sky crap all falls down.
-
Moz, in reply to
people like to be independant
Then people should get on their bloody bicycles and be independent of the whole mess.
Remember that car-pooling and ride-sharing also fall flat where there's not the population density or the distances are too great. The overlap with "could be done on a (electric assist) bicycle" is huge.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
Remember that car-pooling and ride-sharing also fall flat where there’s not the population density or the distances are too great.
Well some of that applies to commuting, certainly, although that its only one of the uses of car pooling, and in the case of Uber, much less than half of the volume. The other use, low cost sober driving to a night out, does not predicate on density at all.
I don't follow why longer distances make carpooling less attractive. I'd think the exact opposite applies, since it's a cost-saving and driver-fatigue sharing measure. It's probably more common for people to see the point of carpooling for an intercity trip than for commuting.
I pretty much don't see electric bikes replacing Ubers when it comes to delivering groups of young girls to nights of partying in the city. Even less likely is for the homeward trips, drunk, vulnerable, in the small hours of the morning. Doing it as a true ride-share, in which the driver is also going out partying, very much predicates on the driver remaining sober.
But bikes, including electrics, are certainly a possible commuting alternative, and it's an academic discussion to bring Uber into it, since I do not believe Ubers are much used for commuting. We're comparing to the alternative of carpooling. Both are measures which can improve matters, each with advantages and disadvantages.
Biking has the advantage of independence (and cost, although this is less so with an electric), but at the cost of comfort. It's not hard to see why most people don't choose to jump on a bike when it's cold, raining, dark, or they want to look their best. I say this as a bike fan myself.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
You have to decide if you want to be part of the noncommerical carpooling system or part of the commerical rideshare system, once that is estabished then systems can be put in place to promote such systems. You cannot be both systems thats where all this pie in the sky crap all falls down.
I'm presuming that by "you" you mean companies such as Uber offering services, rather than drivers, or me in particular. But whichever one you mean, I don't think that choice is necessarily compulsory. I am both a commercial driver and a consumer of driving services, both commercial and non-commercial. I don't have to choose only one and stick with that. Sometimes I drive for money. Sometimes I drive my friends and family for free. Sometimes I drive people on a cost-reimbursement basis.
As such, there is nothing stopping companies offering technological aids to more than one of those. The problem I have with Uber over this is that they pretend to be doing one, but are in fact doing the other. Misinformation and misunderstanding are their allies here. People like Seymour are their perfect useful idiots.
I still think the world of carpooling has not yet had its killer app. They haven't managed to bundle up something that makes a unique, cool, useful service out of it. It's still too fraught with the inherent problems that are precisely what led to all of the regulation in the taxi industry.
-
goforit, in reply to
Misinformation and misunderstanding are their allies here
I meant companies/groups etc. I do like the bit on misinformation.
-
Moz, in reply to
I don't follow why longer distances make carpooling less attractive. I'd think the exact opposite applies
It's harder to find people to pool with, even with the app. The longer the distance the less often people drive it, and the more spread out the sources and sinks become. I'm guessing that once you get past easy biking distance (say 30km), carpooling becomes tricky. Trying to line up schedules in a world of insecure work and hence socialising is hard enough when it's friends you know and care about, trying to do that from the small pool of motorists going to the same place at the same time, is exponentially harder.
I've got some experience of this from a lifetime without a car and attending stuff like music festivals in the countryside. It can be done, but 99% of the time you can narrow the list of possibles down to "people going to the festival", the idea that some random local will be doing the trips is low. Many festivals run exactly the "internet based ride share" thing you're talking about, and every year 90% of the arranged rides work, and every year there's a few lonely souls left at the festival when their ride vanishes.
I pretty much don't see electric bikes replacing Ubers when it comes to delivering groups of young girls to nights of partying in the city. Even less likely is for the homeward trips
No, but that's where Uber is just blatantly breaking the law and daring the government to do something about it. As you say, carpooling which relies on a stranger staying off the drugs for an evening is even higher risk than when it's a friend. But the alternative is paying someone outright, which the law likes to call "a taxi service".
-
Lizzie Marvelly calls out Uber for it's stance.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11692795...and it is worth noting that Uber is an anagram of Rube.
-
goforit, in reply to
But the alternative is paying someone outright, which the law likes to call “a taxi service”.
This brings us back to the start of the circle. Uber is a taxi service and all the bull calling it something else is just crap.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
As you say, carpooling which relies on a stranger staying off the drugs for an evening is even higher risk than when it’s a friend. But the alternative is paying someone outright, which the law likes to call “a taxi service”.
Pretty much, although I don't know if the risks of drug taking are less likely when it's a friend driving. I'd venture to say they're a lot less with a professional driver, though, because they could literally lose their job, their license, and all future chance of driving for a living legally.
It’s harder to find people to pool with, even with the app. The longer the distance the less often people drive it, and the more spread out the sources and sinks become.
It's true enough that finding someone going from and to the exact same locations is harder the further apart they are. But there are very much traveled routes which could be used as two stage methods, if such a thing could be organized well. And my point still stands that the greater the distance, the more compelling sharing the cost becomes.
I'm not sure I'd agree that 30km is an easy biking distance, even on an electric. It's still an hour of riding, minimum, and around Auckland a lot more like 80 minutes. In fact, I don't consider the 10km I have to ride to the city to be "easy", in the sense of it replacing a car trip. It involves around 30mins on the vehicle and if timeliness is important you really do have to build in another 10 for adverse conditions. You have to be willing to get changed if necessary at the end, which involves carrying a change of clothes with you, and having somewhere you can do that.
I say this in response only to the concept of biking as an alternative to carpooling rather than as any cut down of the idea of biking, which is something I do myself, and think it serves the purpose very well at times.
Carpooling is really quite a different concept, a lot more like catching a bus. Get the convenience of a warm dry vehicle and no physical effort, and the ability to carry a load, and you lose the convenience of completely picking when you can do it. And I suggest that there is still a possibility that the killer app is yet to come that transforms carpooling into a much, much less irritating kind of service than it currently is. Especially at the busiest times, when vast numbers of people are traveling in the same directions. As you say, it's not that viable when your pool of drivers is only among friends and acquaintances, and the method of organization is messages sent to and fro. But if it's a mapping system that could automatically work out the deviation cost for thousands of potential rides, and possibly even a multistage routing search, a rating/friending system that gives you reasonable quality control over the drivers/other passengers, and reimbursement is automatic via an automatic conveyancing system, I can see that as very much transformative of transport during busy times. Lots of complications to iron out, and obviously a critical mass to make it truly viable.
-
What ever the IT geeks come up with will never work basicly for the following reasons.
The so called app developers, IT geeks, computor engineering nerds etc dont live in the real world.
Passengers are human and as such cannot get on the same page as to speck, how many times have you picked up passengers even from the same address and they cannot agree on the destination or one of them changes their minds part way there.
-
Give us some credit. App development professionals start (with or without the involvement of business analysts) by talking to everyone involved, working out a solution and then refining it, usually nowadays, using a defined process of looking at how people use the app, where they go wrong, etc.
Uber doesn't seem to have any technical problems for a passenger - indeed it removes the 'can't decide where to go issue' as the person paying has to enter a destination on their phone.
-
Moz, in reply to
The so called app developers, IT geeks, computor engineering nerds etc dont live in the real world.
I think you have the worlds flipped. Motorists live in this fantasy place where there's infinite oil that can be burned with no consequences, we can build infinite roads similarly without consequences, and everyone is naturally both capable and inclined to drive safely, so cars make perfect sense as the major form of transport for everyone.
Where I live, we've burned so much fossil fuel that it's an open question as to whether techological society can survive, and we definitely can't afford to have everyone driving a car the way we do now. Los Angeles is the nameplate example of the limits to building roads for transport, and we directly kill hundreds of people every year because we're unwilling to lose the "convenience" of being stuck in traffic.
Meanwhile some places are building or rebuilding their cities around public transport, walking and riding. One side effect they're finding is that the cities are much nicer for people. It appears you can't have both "nice for cars" and "nice for people", although you may not be able to have the former at all.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
Give us some credit.
Indeed. Some of us are even Uber drivers ourselves.
it removes the ‘can’t decide where to go issue’ as the person paying has to enter a destination on their phone.
That's not entirely true. They can enter a destination, but they don't have to, and the route can be anything that is agreeable to the driver and passengers. It needn't go to the destination entered at all. I would say around half of my trips in an evening are not a single point to point trip. The app does give the ability to set and change destinations too, although this works in a less than satisfactory way recently because the "back-to-back" requests we get base themselves upon the current destination, making you the choice of riders near there, but we have to refuse these requests as the app does not know that the current passengers actually want to go further on. Refusing requests impacts on a driver's rating and can lead to disconnection for the driver.
At least half of my destination requests are verbal, and every instruction after that is verbal, about preferred routes, driving style, airconditioning, windows, inquiries about places and goings on, requests for music or to get the aux, and anything else a sensible human could be reasonably asked and expected to understand and act on, if willing.
-
Ian Dalziel, in reply to
Carbon cop-outs…
Motorists live in this fantasy place where there’s infinite oil that can be burned with no consequences…
Just read this book about a very possible future with rationed water too…
…well worth a look.
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/18505844-memory-of-waterTwo taxi stories in The Press today – one with two men robbing a driver and one where it looks like taxi drivers took Ecan (and people with mobility issues ultimately) for a ride…
There’s no sense of fare play, or fare pay, it seems down here.
-
Moz, in reply to
Regrettably I have to concur with the utbe commenter who couldn't understand the lyrics other than the title line.
taxi drivers took Ecan (and people with mobility issues ultimately) for a ride…
Wholly sheet! It does seem to be a cunning fraud, in the sense that until very recently it would be extremely hard to show that it was taking place at a systematic level. I gather the mobility card holders weren't affected, so it's a classic white collar fraud "victimless crime" where the crime is against society in general rather than an identifiable person (am I still in the John Key on cannabis thread?).
I remain hopeful that a service merging electric cars, online routing and some kind of ride-sharing will prove to be profitable, even though the infrastructure costs will be significant. One of the things making that less likely is, of course, Uber.
My hope is that it will also help launch small electric vans/people-movers, not least because I want one :) Or at least access to one, coz the car-share programs generally don't work for my annual-ish use of cars, and actually driving scares me (I have a licence, but driving less than once a year means I'm not even close to being a safe driver. To further reassure you all, I normally rent decent size trucks because that's usually why I need a motor vehicle "ya can't move that on ya bike, mate").
-
Ian Dalziel, in reply to
who couldn’t understand the lyrics other than the title line.
-
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/83185838/uber-talks-with-christchurch-airport-about-access
Christchurch International Airport has denied "blocking" a computer application used by people seeking rides with cut price taxi service Uber.
The complaint was made by an Uber driver.
Airport spokeswoman Yvonne Densem said her company was in talks with Uber which she said "is not collecting passengers from the airport".
Uber confirmed it won't pick up passengers but said they could walk off the property and call a driver
Post your response…
This topic is closed.