Slashdot Mirror


Uber Gives Up On New York Taxi Service

An anonymous reader writes "Uber, the startup behind a mobile app for connecting transportation services with people who need rides, has halted its efforts to partner with New York cab drivers. They've been fighting an uphill battle against regulators, who have warned drivers that they could face fines or loss of license if they worked with Uber. The company's CEO wrote, 'Demand far out-stripped supply, making you feel pretty lucky when you got a yellow from your iPhone. We did the best we could to get more yellows on the road but New York's TLC (Taxi and Limousine Commission) put up obstacles and roadblocks in order to squash the effort around e-hail, which they privately have said is legal under the rules. We'll bite our tongues and keep our frustration here to ourselves.'" Update: 10/17 00:48 GMT by S : Here's TLC's perspective, in the words of Commissioner David Yassky: "In recent months, as e-hail apps have emerged, TLC has undertaken serious diligence and is moving toward rule changes that will open the market to app developers and other innovators. Those changes cannot legally take place until our existing exclusive contracts expire in February. We are committed to making it as easy as possible to get a safe, legal ride in a New York City taxi, and are excited to see how emerging technology can improve that process. Our taxis have always been on the cutting edge of technological innovation, from GPS systems to credit card readers."

180 comments

  1. While I like the idea by desertfool · · Score: 1

    NYC is the one place where I think that this isn't needed. All you can in NYC is hail a taxi or ride the subway.

    --
    Just a dude. Stuck in IT.
    1. Re:While I like the idea by desertfool · · Score: 1

      all you *can* do....

      Dang, must read before submit.

      --
      Just a dude. Stuck in IT.
    2. Re:While I like the idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try doing that at 4 in the morning.

    3. Re:While I like the idea by alen · · Score: 1

      As long as you don't go out of manhattan

    4. Re:While I like the idea by StandardDeviant · · Score: 4, Informative

      Hahahaha. Have you ever visited NYC, let alone lived there? Getting a cab can be a pain in the ass even in mid-town. "Oh, look the 500th fuckin cab that's full or off duty! Might as well stand here with my arm in the air for another twenty minutes like a fucking tourist!"

      The MTA may get you where you want to go, but might take two hours to do it. JFK to BX w/out MNR, anyone?

      Seriously tell me hailing a cab is easy after you've tried to do it while standing in the snow an hour after bars close and you don't want to take three more God-forsaken hours to get home to an outer borough shithole apartment that costs $waytoofuckinmuch... Not that I'm bitter. :)

    5. Re:While I like the idea by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

      Yeah right NYC should back out of their existing contracts and pay damages to allow these "special" people to sidestep the whole process THAT ALL THE OTHER SERVICES MUST ENDURE.

    6. Re:While I like the idea by gewalker · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Thank the government / crony capitalism duo . Taxi medallions are now worth 1 million $ in NYC these days. Slate had a good article on the situation. If taxi prices were set by the market, you would save a bunch, and they would be likely to support Uber as they might see a competitive advantage in doing so.

    7. Re:While I like the idea by FranTaylor · · Score: 2

      "If taxi prices were set by the market"

      The entire island of manhattan would be covered in taxi cabs. There would be total gridlock 24 hours a day.

    8. Re:While I like the idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep, and ALL taxi operators would continue to work in such conditions rather then serve another market where they can actually get around.

    9. Re:While I like the idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Carjacking works except between the hours of 7-9 a.m.,11 a.m.- 1 p.m. and 4-6 p.m. when no ones going anywhere faster than a pedestrian, doorhandle to doorhandle. I recommend the piggyback for hire in Manhattan during rush. A burly Italian 20-something will carry you at lightning speed through and sometimes over the crowd for $4 a block , 2.50 flag. I saw one punch out a cab once, no not a cabbie,sweetie, a cab.After hours there is a great tankie cab, an actual Abrams tank, fully armed will get you from nightclub to doorstep ANYWHERE IN TOWN! Fare? Forget about it! Those fruits from the Village always have them tied up.

    10. Re:While I like the idea by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 5, Informative

      Nope. What we are asking for is to get rid of these stupid medallions (not right now, when the contracts or whatever expire). Create a real free market of taxi companies competing with each other. Atleast of them would ready embrace Uber.

    11. Re:While I like the idea by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 2

      Apply congestion surcharges, the traffic will move better than ever and it is not just the taxis that would be affected.

    12. Re:While I like the idea by flyneye · · Score: 1

      That's what happened to Horses!
      Damned cars came along and put a lot of people out of work.
      There were loads of saddle and buggy makers put out of business.
      I bet they and their families starved since no one ever does more than one thing in their lifetime.
      If we hadn't let cars take over we would have clean air and enough manure to fertilize EVERYTHING.
      Think of the ponies!
      Now the cabs. Well that's what they get for putting faith in cars!
      Now if they could just come up with an app to fix stupid.

      --
      *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
    13. Re:While I like the idea by thammoud · · Score: 2

      I wish I had mod points but alas. NYC, especially during rush hour , is almost impossible to get a cab. They apparently change shifts during that time. I feel blessed living in Chicago. Getting a cab at anytime is a breeze.

    14. Re:While I like the idea by englishknnigits · · Score: 2

      And then no one would use taxi's because they never move and the taxi drivers would go out of business...and there would be less taxis and things would start moving again. It's called a system with incentives and feedback mechanisms. Taxi drivers don't like sitting in gridlock just for fun just as people don't like sitting in taxi's that don't move and charge the money for the experience.

    15. Re:While I like the idea by jonwil · · Score: 1

      And if you allow these kinds of e-hail apps to continue to operate, it just increases the number of cabs that are unavailable to pick up street hails (since they are all heading to an e-hail)
      I can see where the TLC is coming from here...

    16. Re:While I like the idea by JustOK · · Score: 1

      They're not going to fix stupid while they can make a profit from it.

      --
      rewriting history since 2109
    17. Re:While I like the idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You remind me of people that say stuff like "I'm glad that the firemen were able to cut my legs off with a chainsaw and free me from under that leaking sewage truck..." Really? Wouldn't you be happier if, oh I don't know, none of that happened in the first place?

    18. Re:While I like the idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get rid of medallions? Yeah, because Manhattan doesn't have enough traffic! Perhaps next you'd like to get rid of the onerous requirement of having a hack license?

      dom

    19. Re:While I like the idea by jcr · · Score: 2

      The entire island of manhattan would be covered in taxi cabs.

      Nope. There would be a substantial increase, which would continue until the supply met the demand.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    20. Re:While I like the idea by chill · · Score: 1

      Then I suggest you invest in a rickshaw service. Maybe rent Segways. You'll make a killing.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    21. Re:While I like the idea by MindlessAutomata · · Score: 1

      Seriously, can you believe the shit progressives come up with? I bet he really believes what he said about taxi cabs over Manhattan.

    22. Re:While I like the idea by PrimaryConsult · · Score: 1

      Seriously tell me hailing a cab is easy after you've tried to do it while standing in the snow an hour after bars close and you don't want to take three more God-forsaken hours to get home to an outer borough shithole apartment that costs $waytoofuckinmuch... Not that I'm bitter. :)

      Most intelligent city residents bother to keep the number of a good car service... I can remember "four ones" from growing up there, I'm sure similar companies exist nowadays.

      And in pretty much any other city, the *only* way you're getting a cab when you need one is by calling the cab company, or walking to a bus terminal/train station/airport.

    23. Re:While I like the idea by jcr · · Score: 1

      "Progressives" all suffer from the fatal conceit.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    24. Re:While I like the idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except New Year's. Holy fuck - wear a warm coat!

    25. Re:While I like the idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since it's flat and much less spread out as other US cities, why doesn't the NYC authorities replace more car lanes with bike lanes?

      Less traffic, less noise, less pollution, better productivity, and healthier people.

    26. Re:While I like the idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amen. I live here and vouch for that. Plus, "car services" can't pick you and you can't call in advance to "taxi cabs". They have legislation that blocks them from doing so. Also, it costs about $40 for me just to get home... $60 to get to the airport. That's minus the tip.

    27. Re:While I like the idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If there were more taxis and they were cheaper, would there really be more cars on the road? Think about it.

    28. Re:While I like the idea by TheLink · · Score: 1

      What's the percentage of cabs in Manhattan traffic now?

      Would the cabs being cheaper and more plentiful cause actual traffic to go down since fewer people would use private cars?

      --
    29. Re:While I like the idea by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      Depends on where/when - some places there are piles of "town cars" with drivers loitering nearby who are more than willing to book a ride to the airport for, well, how about right now? They're not taxicabs, wink wink.

    30. Re:While I like the idea by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      Ever been to a free concert?

    31. Re:While I like the idea by russotto · · Score: 1

      Then I suggest you invest in a rickshaw service. Maybe rent Segways. You'll make a killing.

      All regulated to death in NYC.

    32. Re:While I like the idea by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1
    33. Re:While I like the idea by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 1

      Yes, the ones I went to were pretty much empty though.

    34. Re:While I like the idea by kenorland · · Score: 1

      Hailing a cab in NYC is still easier than just about anywhere in the world.

      And since the problem is an actual (artificial) scarcity of cabs, improving information with an app isn't going to help: you aren't getting a cab because the cab can't find you, you aren't getting a cab because there are too few licensed cabs.

    35. Re:While I like the idea by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I've been to NYC several times now, the most recent time being two days ago. In my experience, the MTA is absolutely great at getting you around very quickly, between most of the places it goes, especially between subway stops. The subways aren't the newest or cleanest in the world, but there's lots of them and they'll get you around pretty quickly. However, if you need to go someplace where the MTA doesn't go, or you need to go to Long Island, it's an absolute nightmare. Getting over to NJ, or to Long Island, or Staten Island, or to JFK airport, is a giant PITA and requires either a horribly expensive cab ride (esp. if you need to cross any bridges--holy shit, $20 to cross a bridge?) or a special bus or a light rail that only leaves every couple hours. Since I was staying in NJ, the only reason half my day wasn't spent just traveling to and from Manhattan was because I took a helicopter to the Wall Street helipad in the morning, but that's not exactly realistic for most people.

      Why on earth is there not a subway line straight to every airport in the area? When was the last time they built a new subway for that matter? The prices have gone WAY up since I was there last, but there's no increase in service at all. It doesn't seem like they've bothered investing in any new construction for 70 years. If they'd build more subways to link up with the existing systems, the whole thing would be much, much better, instead of using these shitty non-linked and non-frequent light rails.

    36. Re:While I like the idea by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      What's the contract? They must exclusively use some things? I'm confused why they'd go out of their way to block such apps. They didn't just ignore then and not work with them, but attacked them.

    37. Re:While I like the idea by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I just walk to the nearest hotel. Always a waiting taxi.

    38. Re:While I like the idea by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      His suggestion was in a mythical situation where NYC politicians allowed the free market to determine the pricing for taxi services (and who could actually offer such a service0. Of course, they will never do that because that would require the government (and progressives in particular) to stop helping certain favored companies from making a profit at the expense of the common man.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    39. Re:While I like the idea by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      Pretty much empty describes taxi business in Little Rock... I think NYC would more resemble this:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_la_Defense

      or this:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wall_%E2%80%93_Live_in_Berlin

    40. Re:While I like the idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're an idiot. I have proof: this is exactly what Panama City (Panama, not fucking Florida) is like. Tons of taxis, who cannot convey you more than a block due to gridlock.

      The thing is, you may go broke quickly in this circumstance. However, the capital requirements (and talent) to compete on this market are extremely minimal. You will rarely have a shortage of new market entrants. These will still get some amount of business because people need to get places.

    41. Re:While I like the idea by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      to JFK airport, is a giant PITA and requires either a horribly expensive cab ride (esp. if you need to cross any bridges--holy shit, $20 to cross a bridge?) or a special bus or a light rail that only leaves every couple hours.

      Seriously, the A train runs every 20 minutes (every 5 at peak) as does the LIRR to Jamaica, both of which get you to the Airtrain to JFK which runs every 5-10 minutes. The LIRR ends up costing about $15 and taking 30 minutes.

      Why on earth is there not a subway line straight to every airport in the area? When was the last time they built a new subway for that matter? The prices have gone WAY up since I was there last, but there's no increase in service at all. It doesn't seem like they've bothered investing in any new construction for 70 years

      Because the airports aren't actually a common destinition for commuters, and are better services by lower capacity but very frequent light rail options. The SAS is being built right now, so the last time they built a new subway was about 2 seconds ago.

      And the current $2.25 is *WAY* up since you were last there? Just how long ago was that?

    42. Re:While I like the idea by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Last time I was there was 2002. I remember being able to get a weeklong unlimited pass for less than $20. I went through nearly that much, per person, in a single day on my recent trip, and didn't see any options for unlimited passes except maybe for a monthly one which was quite expensive (considering I was only there for a day).

      What is the "SAS" line? And why did they name it after British and Australian special forces regiments?

      However, you're wrong about commuters and light rails: while airports might not be a common destination for commuters, nearby areas like New Jersey and Long Island definitely are, and those areas would be much better served by a more frequent and/or higher-capacity rail service. The light rail I took back to NJ had a ridiculous wait time, so it didn't seem they were running many trains.

    43. Re:While I like the idea by Holladon · · Score: 1

      Just like people are leaving Manhattan in droves because of the high cost of living and aforementioned gridlock.

    44. Re:While I like the idea by scot4875 · · Score: 1

      Wait, I thought that progressives were all lazy parasitic freeloaders who live off the government dole. Now you're telling me that they're successful business owners? Could you get your rhetoric consistent, at least? I need to know exactly who to demonize.

      --Jeremy

      --
      Jesus was a liberal
    45. Re:While I like the idea by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      The 7 day pass is now $29. 2002 was the tail of a price segment, the 7 day pass went up to $21 in 2003, so yes it was cheaper when you used it last. But not because it's gone *WAY* up now, it just had a few years of inflation baked in at that point.

        Second Avenue Subway.

      Sure there's a handful of silly light rails but the vast bulk of njtransit and LIRR lines are not light rail.

    46. Re:While I like the idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You CHOOSE to live in that cesspool you dumbass. go somewhere else to whine about it being to expensive.

    47. Re:While I like the idea by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      Progressives are people who believe that life will be better when government appointed experts make all of the important decisions. Many times they team up with business owners who don't think they should have to compete to get your money.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    48. Re:While I like the idea by shiftless · · Score: 1

      I wonder how long until NYC gets its own Mohammed Bouazizi?

    49. Re:While I like the idea by shiftless · · Score: 1

      I don't follow.

    50. Re:While I like the idea by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      And then no one would use taxi's

      I'm offtopic but have wondered for a long, long while: Why is that apostrophe there? I see it more and more. What is its purpose?

    51. Re:While I like the idea by englishknnigits · · Score: 1

      It is a combination of my fingers being trained to frequently type an apostrophe before a final 's' that is added onto a word and my lack of paying attention. In this case, it serves no purpose :P
      I could try and make a lame argument about how I was implying a "taxi's services" in that context but the lack of an 'a' before taxis means it was plural and the apostrophe would go after the 's'. So it is wrong in either case.

    52. Re:While I like the idea by Firethorn · · Score: 1

      Most intelligent city residents bother to keep the number of a good car service... I can remember "four ones" from growing up there, I'm sure similar companies exist nowadays.

      That reminds me - while medallion taxis are the only ones legally allowed to pick up a street hail(IE the hand), there's plenty of 'livery' car services that if you're willing to schedule they're perfectly willing to come out and pick you up.

      Often they're cheaper than the yellow taxis(though remember to negotiate price before the ride!). The Uber hailing system seems perfect for them. It's not, technically, a 'street hail', thus they can respond, avoiding that $1M capital expense in the form of the medallion* entirely.

      *costs ~$50k/year, probably as much as the driver himself

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    53. Re:While I like the idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope. There would be a substantial increase, which would continue until the supply met the demand.

      That is only the case if every supplier operates exactly one taxi. Companies that own a fleet of taxis will hit a Nash equilibrium of operating twice as many cabs as supply=demand would necessitate.

      This is because cabs can't compete on price, and most passengers will take the first one available. Therefore cab companies have to compete on density and by oversupplying the demand. You could get rid of the fixed pricing, but that would cause even more traffic problems and reduced efficiency if passengers start price shopping.

      The unregulated free market will not find the traffic-optimal solution to meeting taxi demand.

    54. Re:While I like the idea by Guspaz · · Score: 2

      tl;dr: it took me over an hour to hail a cab in Brooklyn. Hailing a cab is impossible in the vast majority of NYC.

      I was in NYC this past Sunday. I was in Brooklyn, and had an international flight out of LaGuardia two and a half hours later. Naturally, I assumed this was plenty of time, since it was a 20-30 minute cab ride to the airport. I started on a busy street corner (Nostrand and Fulton), and tried to hail a cab. Of all the many cars passing, virtually none were cabs, any cab that did pass was occupied. I tried calling 411 on my cellphone, and asked it for a taxi company, but that didn't give me anything useful. I tried calling the number of a taxi company a friend had given me, only to be told "We don't serve Brooklyn. Sorry, no, I don't know the number of a company who does." I tried walking into a deli and asking the cashier if he could give me the phone number for a cab, only to be told "No, no, just go and hail one, they will come."

      I spent over an hour wandering around the area trying to find ANY unoccupied cab to hail, during which time it got dark making it hard to even tell what vehicle was a cab at all. Finally, I managed to snag one a few blocks away, but only because the driver had just dropped somebody off. I was extremely lucky, he told me, because Taxis don't go to Brooklyn to pick people up unless they're called to do so. I was more lucky than that, though, since the guy was sympathetic to my plight, and drove a bit more aggressively than normal, getting me there two minutes before my flight's cutoff. I gave him a hefty tip, and learned my lesson: don't think you can hail a cab in NYC if you're under time pressure.

      PS: I was taking a cab rather than public transit because getting to LaGuardia from where I was would have taken an hour and a half on four separate vehicles including a bus, which is not something I was keen on doing in a foreign country where I had no data plan to help me figure out what to do if I missed a stop.

    55. Re:While I like the idea by mydn · · Score: 1

      Yeah. I always switch trains in Jamaica, Queens when I'm going down the street to see my Aunt Eileen.

    56. Re:While I like the idea by russotto · · Score: 1

      NYC would just chalk him up as another failed terrorist. And the people would accept that.

    57. Re:While I like the idea by jcr · · Score: 1

      cabs can't compete on price

      so there's not a free market for taxi service.

      The unregulated free market will not find the traffic-optimal solution to meeting taxi demand.

      on what do you base this assertion?

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  2. Just goes to show by Scutter · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There's no efficiency improvement or human betterment that can't be completely destroyed by bureaucracy and greed.

    --

    "Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
    1. Re:Just goes to show by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just goes to show you that people forget their history.

      Here's a clue about the history bureaucracy: Once upon a time it was considered to be the efficient way to better human society, the way that would remove obstructions yet prevent abuses.

      Perception changes, huh?

    2. Re:Just goes to show by girlintraining · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There's no efficiency improvement or human betterment that can't be completely destroyed by bureaucracy and greed.

      Of course, you forget that the reverse is true: Destroying bureaucracy and greed results in efficiency improvement and human betterment. So if the NY Taxi Commission is no longer serving the public interest the general public should tell them to take a long walk off a short pier. There is no law or police force that can contend with half a million angry New Yorkers surrounding the commissioners and telling them it's time for them to leave town. And of all the things that piss of New Yorkers, things that obstruct the free flow of traffic ranks right up there with the coffee machine breaking. So... where are the angry New Yorkers?

      Ah well, these are the same people that let a bunch of crooked cops and bureaucrats chase the Occupiers out, and happily let the government encase their entire downtown in giant walls with mounted machine guns... so I suppose thinking they'd actually organize to defend their own interests from a few dudes in suits is probably too much to ask. Unless those dudes are in an airplane and carrying boxcutters, New Yorkers just don't have the balls to say or do anything anymore.

      [Reverse psychology, bitches]

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    3. Re:Just goes to show by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So NYC should tell the company that already has an exclusive contract with the city to provide those services to go fuck themselves and hope that they don't sued? Or maybe it's actually fiscally prudent to maintain the contract until Feb 2013 when it expires and then rework the rules to open the market up. You know, like it said in TFA.

    4. Re:Just goes to show by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

      New Yorkers just don't have the balls to say or do anything anymore.

      JESUS FUCKING CHRIST

      You sit in your heated house with your computer and your internet and you think that IT ALL APPEARED OUT OF NOWHERE

      These things were FINANCED and PAID FOR by those VERY PEOPLE that you accuse of "not having any balls"

      Shit the reason you even WANT THEM IN THE FIRST PLACE is because of MADISON AVENUE MARKETERS

      They don't have any balls and yet THEY CONTROL YOUR LIFE

    5. Re:Just goes to show by girlintraining · · Score: 1

      You see? That's more like it! This is the kind of hate I wanna see around here! :D

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    6. Re:Just goes to show by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And of all the things that piss of New Yorkers, things that obstruct the free flow of traffic ranks right up there

      Because the one thing that would improve the free flow of traffic would be letting thousands of unregulated cabbies loose on the streets with no fucking clue where they're going but the voice says turn right so lanes be damned.

    7. Re:Just goes to show by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

      Welcome to Slashdot where truth and hate are indistinguishable

    8. Re:Just goes to show by rsmith-mac · · Score: 2, Informative
      Before calling it greed, it would be useful to get the story from the other side.

      Taxi officials say that Uber's service may not be legal since city rules do not allow for prearranged rides in yellow taxis. They also forbid cabbies from using electronic devices while driving and prohibit any unjustified refusal of fares. (Under Uber's policy, once a driver accepts a ride through the app, no other passenger can be picked up.)

      Councilman James Vacca, the chairman of the City Council's transportation committee, said that the spread of taxi apps had the potential to create a "two-tiered taxi system" in the city: one for people "with fancy smartphones" who are asked to pay a premium, and one for everybody else. "As a councilman from the Bronx," he said, "a disparity like that does concern me."

      http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/05/nyregion/as-ubers-taxi-hailing-app-comes-to-new-york-its-legality-is-questioned.html?_r=0

      The NYC TLC and the city councilors have significant concerns about this effectively siphoning off high paying customers, leaving few cabs for the lower classes. I'm not sure that's rational, but I also wouldn't call it greed.

    9. Re:Just goes to show by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ahem, I live in Brooklyn. The real New Yorkers are far out-numbered now by the out-of-staters (myself included) who have moved here for the "New York Experience" but don't want any of the crime or danger. Don't expect anything from them unless there's free booze involved.

    10. Re:Just goes to show by BlueStrat · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Just goes to show you that people forget their history.

      Here's a clue about the history bureaucracy: Once upon a time it was considered to be the efficient way to better human society, the way that would remove obstructions yet prevent abuses.

      Perception changes, huh?

      You'd better check history again. Bureaucracy has always been a necessary evil that needs to be kept heavily restricted and overseen in it's power and budget, as like with governments as a whole, they always grow and expand over time, eventually causing collapse/chaos/tyranny if left unchecked.

      The problem in the US is that we keep choosing to cede more and more power over ever more things and give larger and larger budgets to the bureaucracy to "fix it".

      This is typically followed up, after it's evident that things didn't get fixed but got worse, with cries to cede even more power and give even larger budgets, because the reason for the failure to fix things was that the previous increases were not quite enough, we'll fix it this time, promise! Rinse and repeat.

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    11. Re:Just goes to show by artor3 · · Score: 4, Informative

      The reason Uber isn't being allowed in NYC is because there are some pre-existing contracts that prohibit them. Those contracts will expire in a few months (February of next year), at which point we can negotiate new contracts that allow Uber in.

      Is your position that we should just tear up contracts whenever we no longer feel like they're benefiting us? Because that would spell the end of the civilization that you love to take for granted.

      According to a statement from TLC Commissioner David Yassky, existing "exclusive contracts" are the reason that Uber can’t use cabs in the city.

      Those contracts are part of the Taxicab Passengers Enhancement Project (TPEP), which provides various hardware including GPS data collection, credit card processing and two-way messaging with drivers. Under the TPEP system, Creative Mobile Technologies and VeriFone have an exclusive contract to provide such infrastructure and services to the TLC.

      But Yassky added that these contracts are set to expire in February 2013 and will help the agency move "towards rule changes that will open the market to app developers and other innovators."

    12. Re:Just goes to show by hawguy · · Score: 1

      New Yorkers just don't have the balls to say or do anything anymore.

      JESUS FUCKING CHRIST

      You sit in your heated house with your computer and your internet and you think that IT ALL APPEARED OUT OF NOWHERE

      My heat doesn't come from NYC, I'm not aware of any natural gas wells in NYC. Much of the development of computers internet sites that people use daily occurred on the West Coast of the USA, with most of the physical components coming from Asia.

      These things were FINANCED and PAID FOR by those VERY PEOPLE that you accuse of "not having any balls"

      Oh, you mean the banking executives in San Francisco? (not to mention the Asian banks that funded much of the industry that creates our computers and powers our internet.

      Shit the reason you even WANT THEM IN THE FIRST PLACE is because of MADISON AVENUE MARKETERS

      They don't have any balls and yet THEY CONTROL YOUR LIFE

      I won't deny that much of the best (meaning worst) marketing comes from NYC.

    13. Re:Just goes to show by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Welcome to Slashdot where truth and hate are indistinguishable

      There's truth here? I thought that wasn't going into Slashcode until Unicode support.

    14. Re:Just goes to show by girlintraining · · Score: 2

      The NYC TLC and the city councilors have significant concerns about this effectively siphoning off high paying customers, leaving few cabs for the lower classes. I'm not sure that's rational, but I also wouldn't call it greed.

      The greed would be charging over a hundred grand for "medallions" that are required to operate a taxi. If there's a shortage of taxicabs at affordable rates, it's not because of a lack of vehicles, manpower, or capital -- it's because the City Council controls the number of cabs on the road by making the cost of entry exceptionally high. If they're so worried about the poor having adequate access to taxi services, perhaps Ye Old Taxicab OPEC ought to think about increasing production.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    15. Re:Just goes to show by girlintraining · · Score: 2

      Is your position that we should just tear up contracts whenever we no longer feel like they're benefiting us? Because that would spell the end of the civilization that you love to take for granted.

      They are the only people responsible for being in this mess themselves. They screwed up, and now the public is suffering because of their incompetence. They should be removed from office, to ensure the next batch of contracts doesn't contain some similarly stupid language that will probably be in there for the same reason the current contracts have idiotic clauses in it: Kickbacks. Corrupt public officials? Remove them. It's simple. I'm not advocating "the end of civilization", I'm advocating the end of a select few people's careers as public officials because they were fucking stupid.

      Try not to confuse the two.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    16. Re:Just goes to show by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Point is, if a text a cab to pick me up, how is that different from a hail - F*ck the existing contracts.

    17. Re:Just goes to show by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      And of all the things that piss of New Yorkers, things that obstruct the free flow of traffic ranks right up there with the coffee machine breaking. So... where are the angry New Yorkers?

      Presumably not reading the hype about new startups. This is not something I would expect people to riot about. Was the city for some reason excited, convinced that this was going to solve all their traffic problems forever? Or are you personally just angry at this example of bad government and assuming other people aren't apathetic about it?

    18. Re:Just goes to show by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're missing something. In modern America, what we do is we enforce the mandatory attitude that government always does things wrong. Then, if you get areas where the government does things right, conservatives underfund them, staff them with idiots who do a "heck of a job", and do everything else they can to sabotage things--and then complain that government doesn't work. Ther motto might as well be 'government doesn't work, and if you don't believe it, put us in charge and we'll break it for you'.

      That said, there are two specific instances where government really doesn't work: the first is busybodies and their idiotic morality laws. Can't drink until you're 21, while walking around, on Sundays in some more backwards places, in a park, or when you're a passenger in a vehicle for some damned stupid reason. Can't do this, that or the other until you're 18 and now, can't order more than 16 oz of soda in New York. Can't smoke in a place of business that you own, EVEN IF you install air filters that make the indoor air cleaner than outside air.

      The other kind, which this is an awesome example of, is when government gets in bed with private industry to protect profits at the expense of the public good. It never works, it always causes trouble, and the people who engage in it should be discarded like the useless trash they are.

    19. Re:Just goes to show by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      "As a councilman from the Bronx," he said, "a disparity like that does concern me."

      But when I make it to senator, eh, not so much.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    20. Re:Just goes to show by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      the tlc was in no position legally to give legal monopoly to to those contracts(of ehailing, cc processing) things in the first place.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    21. Re:Just goes to show by sFurbo · · Score: 1

      Destroying bureaucracy and greed results in efficiency improvement and human betterment.

      Not necessarily. Bureaucracy is the way organisations make sure they follow certain rules, so without bureaucracy, no rules. That does not improve efficiency or the human condition. The same goes for greed: Without greed, people would not work to better their own situation, so human betterment is pretty much out of the question. The optimal amount of each is not 0, and not infinity, the trick is to find a situation close to the optimum.

      As for angry New Yorkers driving the commissioners out of town, that will do nothing to remove the contracts, so the City of New York will probably end up losing a lot of law suits to the taxi drivers. The New Yorkers might find it favorable to wait out the contracts before they do anything.

    22. Re:Just goes to show by sFurbo · · Score: 2

      Before calling it greed, it would be useful to get the story from the other side.

      Taxi officials say that Uber's service may not be legal since city rules do not allow for prearranged rides in yellow taxis. They also forbid cabbies from using electronic devices while driving and prohibit any unjustified refusal of fares. (Under Uber's policy, once a driver accepts a ride through the app, no other passenger can be picked up.)

      So you can't call the taxi company and order a cab? Or if you do, if it gets hailed on its way to you, you will not get a cab?

      Councilman James Vacca, the chairman of the City Council's transportation committee, said that the spread of taxi apps had the potential to create a "two-tiered taxi system" in the city: one for people "with fancy smartphones" who are asked to pay a premium, and one for everybody else.

      The NYC TLC and the city councilors have significant concerns about this effectively siphoning off high paying customers, leaving few cabs for the lower classes. I'm not sure that's rational, but I also wouldn't call it greed.

      If that was really the worry, the could make more medallions, or even scrap that system all together.

    23. Re:Just goes to show by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      There are still people who believe that. They are called progressives. Of course, they are just as wrong today as they were when they first started proposing that the answer to the inefficiencies in the world was for some government bureaucrat to decide who should be allowed to do what.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    24. Re:Just goes to show by nedlohs · · Score: 2

      The don't control the number of cabs by making the cost high. They make the cost high by controlling the number of cabs.

      In the 1930s when the system was introduced there were about 17000 medallions, now there are about 13000.

    25. Re:Just goes to show by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      So you can't call the taxi company and order a cab? Or if you do, if it gets hailed on its way to you, you will not get a cab?

      You can't order a cab in NYC.

      It's a "great" system, you can't book a taxi you have to hail one.

      And you can't hail hire car service, you have to book one.

    26. Re:Just goes to show by shiftless · · Score: 1

      Actually it's been delayed until after the Microsoft(R) Marketing Shill(tm) v2.73 rollout.

    27. Re:Just goes to show by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      The greed would be charging over a hundred grand for "medallions" that are required to operate a taxi.

      NYC doesn't charge anything for a taxi medallion - they're bought and sold on the open market.
       

      If they're so worried about the poor having adequate access to taxi services, perhaps Ye Old Taxicab OPEC ought to think about increasing production.

      Ah - if only it were that simple. But in reality, increasing the number of cabs decreases the amount of income available to all and increases the number of vehicles on already crowded streets.

    28. Re:Just goes to show by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Taxi fares are regulated and have nothing whatsoever to do with medallion costs. The city sets the tariff a taxi can charge (for a fairly obvious reason: if you don't know how much a cab is going to cost, why the fuck are you going to hail one?)

      The medallions themselves are generally bought by taxi companies, who in turn hire drivers and skim a percentage of their income. They can resell the medallions, which more than keep their values, so it's actually probably the case that the rising costs of medalions is helping drivers, not harming them - if the medallions are rising in value, the companies that own them do not have to skim as much money from their drivers as they'd have to do otherwise.

    29. Re:Just goes to show by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, there may be contracts, but you can certainly say unless to let us change to this now - you renewal is HISTORY.
      Their plan is to get no trials, and demand a renewal with nothing changed, or they stop working the next day, and yank payment systems to boot. If there was to be greasing and kickbacks, they usually start now.

      Notice how there is no strong statement like ' We envisage non-exclusivity our new providers'. Easy to guess outcome.

    30. Re:Just goes to show by sFurbo · · Score: 1

      Wow, I am stunned. What a great system.

  3. New York New York by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    Land of the free, until you want an app that hails a cab, a 20 oz Coke, or to smoke a cigarette.

    Ever notice its liberal havens that restrict your freedoms while telling you if you vote a non-liberal they will restrict your freedom?

    1. Re:New York New York by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 3, Informative

      What bullshit. It's two sides of the same coin. It's just a different group of items to ban or a different group to oppress.

    2. Re:New York New York by s.petry · · Score: 0

      Bah, you beat me to the bigot bashing. It's really a shame that so many people are too ignorant to realize that it's not "democrat" vs. "republican" and has not been for over thirty years.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    3. Re:New York New York by s.petry · · Score: 0

      Oh, and just in case there is confusion the "ignorant" comment was not directed at you, but the AC you replied to. Apologies for not being very clear in my first post.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    4. Re:New York New York by FranTaylor · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ever noticed that these "liberal outposts" are where the vast majority of our commerce and business are done?

    5. Re:New York New York by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

      Hi. The opposite side of the coin is that you get crooked cabbies, people who blow smoke in your face or well, I can't really defend the soda ban in a way that isnt fat shaming but...

      Still. You make it seem like there are no group net negatives to any of these activities.

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    6. Re:New York New York by artor3 · · Score: 1

      Uber isn't being allowed in because there are some pre-existing exclusive contracts that will last for a few more months. Are you proposing we just tear up any contract we don't like? Do you have the slightest goddamned inkling what that sort of precedent would do to business in this country?

      Fucking anarchists. Like everyone else, they've got the world "figured out" by the time they're a teenager. Unlike everyone else, they don't grow out of it.

    7. Re:New York New York by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 1

      You wanna bet Uber will be part of the next round of contracts? If so I hear a New York bridge is for sale, I think you would be very interested in it.

    8. Re:New York New York by Baloroth · · Score: 2

      Bah, you beat me to the bigot bashing. It's really a shame that so many people are too ignorant to realize that it's not "democrat" vs. "republican" and has not been for over thirty years.

      The AC OP didn't say "democrat" or "republican". And denigrating a political stance isn't bigotry in any case.

      --
      "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
    9. Re:New York New York by wierd_w · · Score: 1

      I could provide a number of theories as to why this is.

      For instance, people cede more power to those they feel will provide better for them. (Like it or not, this is exactly what voting is.)

      A skilled confidence man (aka, a "con artist") can supply services, and silently obstruct competition so as to artificially inflate the apparent need for his services, while simultaneously degrading the quality of his service rendered.

      He can do this, and people will adore him for it. (Just look at the fearless leadership of N. Korea.)

      Flagrant liberalism is just a form of reverse lobbying. The government provides subsidized services and products to the public, who then becomes dependent upon them. The government does this through exclusivitiy deals with private enterprises and contractors, creating graft.

      Ask yourself this: why is the stock exchange ONLY in new york? Given the global nature of stock trading, wouldn't a more decentralized ntwork, with trade centers clustered around other population centers make more logistical sense?

      You know, like how Akamai manages to handle so much data, by having servers fucking everywhere.

      It couldn't be because of exclusivity deals, and long lsting "partnerships" (graft) between wallstreet and NewYork, and the fed could it? No. Certainly not. The stock exchange people had absolutely no part in the rapid removal of Occupy. None whatsoever.

      Here it is in a nut shell for you:

      1) government wants people to stop detracting from their policies, and to blindly vote for them year after year.
      2) they reverse-lobby through public programs, to offer vital services waaaaaaaay below market price.
      3) they get industry on board, with twisted backroom deals that exclude the competition that would prevent the plan from working.
      4) the government subsidizes their chosen partners, and legally bars competition from the market. They spend taxpayer money on maintaining this relationship, while their partners still charge for services. The suppliers still get paid as if they were charging fair market price, and often, way better through the other perks of the subsidy, like tax exemption.
      5) people think they get a good deal, as since the government is supplying (financing) the services, they will surely be highly reliable. (Cough.)
      6) in reality, removed from competative pressures, infrastructue deteriorates or languishes compared to real competition based systems.
      7) big industries collect lots of money from these liberal spending policies in government, and aggregate there.

      The NYC taxi system is a very clearcut example of graft in action, as is the subway system.

      Want to see NYC shine again? Remove exclusivity from contracts. Watch unions shit gold bricks, and watch industries quake with fear as the gravy train derails for them, and they have to earn their money.

      Even though the taxi contract is due for renewal/renegotiation, this guy's business plan goes against the symbiotic relationship between city and enterprise. It will *never* work.

    10. Re:New York New York by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As the original AC poster, here I sit in my own house with a gun collection that would be illegal in DC, NY, Chicago, and the ENTIRE state of California (the gun collection isn't that big even). Able to put on an ad supporting my favourite candidate for president ONLY because the Supreme Court decided as it did on Citizens United, until then it would have been ILLEGAL for me to do so as a private individual. Also looking forward to fines and threatened jail sentences if I fail to comply with Obamacare and provide the federal government proof of medical insurance.

      At the same time I'm pondering what the "other side of the coin" as you say has banned for me. Nothing is coming to mind, but I have listed at least TWO clearly stated freedoms guaranteed in the Constitution that have been banned by liberals to some degree or other.

      If all you can point to is gay marriage, I think I have won this argument to the point that you are an imbecile.

      Thank you, I'll be here all week.

    11. Re:New York New York by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ask yourself this: why is the stock exchange ONLY in new york? Given the global nature of stock trading, wouldn't a more decentralized ntwork, with trade centers clustered around other population centers make more logistical sense?

      Apparently you don't know there's more than one Stock Exchange, even in New York.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_stock_exchanges

      There's a lot you can find to complain about with the world's financial systems, but your criticism is based on an entirely false premise.

    12. Re:New York New York by MindlessAutomata · · Score: 1

      It's clear he was speaking in general terms and you actually bolster his argument by pointing out that not one, but several, appear there.

    13. Re:New York New York by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At the same time I'm pondering what the "other side of the coin" as you say has banned for me.

      Well, drugs for one. Thanks to your wonderful Supreme Court, my back yard is now in another state. Go ahead, rant about regulations making medicine expensive, the Republicans won't touch the FDA because Schedule I is the only thing standing between you and an army of stoned zombies.

      Pornography for another. Romney's made his position pretty clear. Oh that's right, the First Amendment "doesn't include obscenity"... wait, which amendment gave the federal government the power to decide something is obscene and not worthy of the 1st's protection?

      Best part: banning drugs and porn because they are bad for you is exactly the same as banning large sodas because they are bad for you and banning smoggy trucks because they are bad for you. The exact same unconstitutional process in every case, except that when New York bans Big Gulps, they're not beholden to the US Constitution in the same way when the federal government does it.

      If all you can point to is gay marriage

      Read: "Banning things I don't like is ok. Banning things I like is wrong!" See also sodas and CAFE standards.

      Also, you forgot to mention abortion, sodomy in general (both hetero- and homosexual, my theory is that Republicans can't get a blow job so they don't want anyone else to either, my guess is that Anthony Kennedy was getting some good lovin' in the privacy of his own home), protests, and so on.

      Did I mention that Texas Republicans want to do away with your first amendment right to petition the government for redress of grievances by appealing violations of your rights to the Supreme Court? It's right there on Page 4-5:

      Further, we urge Congress to withhold Supreme Court jurisdiction in cases involving abortion, religious freedom, and the Bill of Rights

      It's a fully Constitutional power, that hasn't been used since the president every Republican loves to hate, Abraham Lincoln, had Congress use it in order to prevent people he was detaining from being able to appeal to the courts for habeas corpus. But hey, you weren't planning on to trying to appeal any gun laws on 2nd amendment grounds anyway, amirite?

    14. Re:New York New York by alexmin · · Score: 1

      Technically you both are incorrect since there are no exchanges in NYC left. All US stock exchanges have primary locations in New Jersey (NYSE, Arca, NYSE MKT(ex AMEX) in Mahwah, BATS in Wheehawken, DirectEdge in Secaucus, Nasdaq in Carteret.) There are few not worth mentioning in Chicago. Option exchanges also all moved to New Jersey, last being CBOE this month. The only big player outside of NJ is CME in Aurora, IL.
      As a side note, NYC and NY state sucks for exchange business because of state tax laws, expensive real estate leases, unionised workforce, and also by virtue of being fsking prime target for assorted nutjobs.

      Morale: do not come with your guns blazing if you do not know the facts.

    15. Re:New York New York by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I missed the federal laws banning your precious pornography, abortion, or sodomy. I am also missing the point where Obamacare made Canadian drugs legal.

      So in effect you are saying, I have valid points where things are ACTUALLY banned, and you have talking points where things were not banned.

      You are completely full of fail. Debating liberals is so boring because they just can't debate using facts or truth.

    16. Re:New York New York by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I missed the federal laws

      Yes, yes you did. Given that you didn't bring up federal laws until just now, I'd say your attempt to move the goalposts was a complete fail. I already pointed out that cities and states like New York banning things aren't beholden to the Constitution like the federal government is. In fact, I even left you a gaping hole by bringing up federal laws (like CAFE) first, and you totally flaked with:

      I am also missing the point where Obamacare made Canadian drugs legal.

      So what you're saying isn't that Republicans don't violate the Constitution, it's that liberals violate the Constitution too. And that makes it OK (but only when Republicans do it). I wonder if there's a term for "Argument by Hypocrisy".

      I have valid points where things are ACTUALLY banned

      You had points where STATES (or are California, DC, and New York now entire nations?) actually banned things (like your "illegal" gun collection). Then I brought up points where STATES (like Texas) and the US (through CAFE and the FDA) banned things and you started whining about how I'm only allowed to cite federal laws (except for drugs because you have an arbitrary double standard that you've erected in order to protect your feelings about banning things you don't like) in a discussion about state laws in an article about New York city banning an app.

    17. Re:New York New York by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

      I bet the next round of contract negotiations will be full of political wrangling, some corruption but is it possible Uber's going to be part of the next round of contracts? Maybe, if they don't whither and die on the vine between now and then.

      Life's way more complicated than just saying that the status quo is the way it's always going to be. A lot of people, even people in power, aren't happy with the status quo. Yellow Cab's fucked up here and there and if the city of NY thinks it can get a better deal, sure, Uber's on the table.

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    18. Re:New York New York by evanism · · Score: 1

      Your country is circling the drain now. It won't be anarchists that implode it, it will be the bankers.

      You will need the anarchists to reboot from the ashes, for those same bankers, lawyers and bureaucrats will be swinging from the lampposts.

      --
      Just bought a new quantum computer, but I'm uncertain how it works.
    19. Re:New York New York by antifoidulus · · Score: 1

      Ask yourself this: why is the stock exchange ONLY in new york? Given the global nature of stock trading, wouldn't a more decentralized ntwork, with trade centers clustered around other population centers make more logistical sense? You know, like how Akamai manages to handle so much data, by having servers fucking everywhere.

      AND.....you're a fucking idiot. Do you know the first thing about distributed systems, or do you just enjoy mouthing off and feeling self-righteous? There are large issues in spreading systems out like that, that might not matter when you are distributing cat videos, but do matter when you are dealing with information that is highly volatile, latency matters, and even more than that, consistency matters. There isn't some magic genie that updates all of Akamai's server the microsecond something changes. There are latencies and it takes a while for servers to get in sync meaning 2 different people may not be acting on the same data. You can tighten the consistency requirements, but then your latency and performance go to shit.... And those are just the absolute basics of distributed systems. But yeah LIBERULS STEALLING MY STUFFS!

  4. Message from the free market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Missing me yet?

    1. Re:Message from the free market by fche · · Score: 1

      Yes.

    2. Re:Message from the free market by sjames · · Score: 2

      According to a statement from TLC Commissioner David Yassky, existing "exclusive contracts" are the reason that Uber can’t use cabs in the city. Those contracts are part of the Taxicab Passengers Enhancement Project (TPEP), which provides various hardware including GPS data collection, credit card processing and two-way messaging with drivers. Under the TPEP system, Creative Mobile Technologies and VeriFone have an exclusive contract to provide such infrastructure and services to the TLC.

      So, your position is that the free market would support tearing those contracts up now rather than waiting untin Feb. 2013 to negotiate something that would include Uber?

    3. Re:Message from the free market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No the free market solution will be to not having to license Taxi cab operators. This way there would several Tax Cab companies competing against each other, and at least one of them will welcome the additional traffic you send them.

    4. Re:Message from the free market by FranTaylor · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The "free market" neglects to take account of the SHEER NUMBER OF VEHICLES in NYC

      More taxis will SLOW THINGS DOWN FOR EVERYONE

      Have you DRIVEN in NYC? Do you REALLY assert that things would go smoother with MORE CARS?

    5. Re:Message from the free market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      acutally I HAVE DRIVEN IN NYC you fucking idiot. and yes more cabs would make things go smoother. instead of having to wait 6 FUCKING HOURS to get a cab early in the morning i would have to wait 6 FUCKING MINUTES and spend 2 HOURS in traffic instead of 1 HOUR.
      That means SAVINGS of FOUR HOURS on the entire fucking trip.

    6. Re:Message from the free market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same AC. There are many reasons why I would support Taxi company regulations, but controlling the number of taxis/vehicles isnt one of them. There are so many better way to directly control traffic, like congestion surcharges, one way roads, limited access roads.

    7. Re:Message from the free market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those are some wonderful numbers you pulled out of your ass. Did your colon perform the study?

    8. Re:Message from the free market by artor3 · · Score: 1

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons

      Read that page. Then read it again. Repeat until it sinks in.

      The free market is not some kind and loving god. It doesn't have the answers to all our problems. It doesn't work. It never has, it never will. Markets need regulation.

    9. Re:Message from the free market by artor3 · · Score: 1

      Based on those numbers, I now know for certain that you have never tried to hail a cab in NYC.

    10. Re:Message from the free market by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 1

      It is all relative. Compared to the present medallions, I would rather take the free market anyday. Regulations that foster competition in stagnated market is good, many forms of regulations are good, but compared to what currently exists, free market is heaven.

    11. Re:Message from the free market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you increase the number of taxis further, you are likely to make traveling more convenient by taxi than by private vehicle, reducing the number of private vehicles.

    12. Re:Message from the free market by sjames · · Score: 2

      They tried that, but there was too much fraud, various rip-offs, and drivers who had no idea how to get to anywhere in the city. No matter how hard they ignored the problem, the free market just wouldn't seem to step up.

      They finally went to a licensing system and things are a lot better, especially now that the fare meter is connected directly to the credit card terminal in the back.

      It may not be the best approach, but it is better than the others they trried, including the 'free market'.

    13. Re:Message from the free market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Existing contracts don't cover Uber model, wait until Feb is saying, we have to re-write our contracts to exclude you - give us time and f*** off.

    14. Re:Message from the free market by sjames · · Score: 1

      Existing contracts DO grant an exclusive on non-cash payment. Uber's model would bypass that.

  5. In (app)Stores Soon... by bjwest · · Score: 1

    An officially sanctioned cab hailing app. For only $19.99/month you get unlimited cab hailing plus a 3% discount on all fares.

    Small print: 5% surcharge for cabs hailed with our app.

    Mother fuck you if you think we'll allow you to do something that may be perfectly legal if we can do the same and stuff our pockets.

    --

    --- Keep the choice with the user..
    1. Re:In (app)Stores Soon... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Man, Slashdot's a great place. I mean, where else are you encouraged to get mad at a company/organization for something that you and only extrapolated/made up just to get yourself mad?

  6. New York TLC - Official Statement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You wanna do business in my territory, buddy? You gotta give me a piece of da action, see?

  7. At least it's working elsewhere... by Nemyst · · Score: 2

    I saw this on TV a few days ago:
    http://tag-taxi.com/

    The app seems rather cool. It's the same basic principle of using an app to get a taxi, except you also get integration with the taxi's own GPS so you know precisely where the taxi is while it's on its way. The entire process looks rather streamlined and I'll be curious to see whether this one will work. Response from Taxi Diamond (one of the largest taxi companies in Montreal) certainly sounds a lot more positive than NYC's taxi companies.

    1. Re:At least it's working elsewhere... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is exactly what Uber does. You're tied into the drivers iPhone/Android device GPS and know exactly where your black car/suv or cab is in relation to picking you up. It works well, NYC just has some bad contracts.

  8. SF is fighting it too. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Another city with vested interests in the status quo.

  9. Please explain by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

    How adding more vehicles to overcrowded streets is an "efficiency improvement"

    1. Re:Please explain by BlueStrat · · Score: 2

      How adding more vehicles to overcrowded streets is an "efficiency improvement"

      Why do you assume there would be significantly more cabs, to the point of becoming a problem, than there are currently?

      See, there are these things involved with operating a taxi called costs and expenses. If there are too many taxis competing for riders, some of those taxis won't generate enough income to cover these costs and expenses and will stop operating.

      Other large cities that don't restrict taxi licensing like NYC are not flooded with cabs. Service is generally much cheaper and better as well for the passengers compared to NYC taxis.

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    2. Re:Please explain by girlintraining · · Score: 1

      How adding more vehicles to overcrowded streets is an "efficiency improvement"

      With the slightest amount of mental effort, I was able to discern that many people in New York don't own cars due to having access to an extensive public transportation network, of which taxi cabs are a part of. For every taxi cab on the road, perhaps a dozen personal vehicles aren't. So... restricting the number of taxis on the road would mean there'd be some multiple of that in personal vehicles clogging the streets instead.

      It seems to be that adding more taxis to overcrowded streets would reduce the overload. Not all vehicles are created equal. But, I can understand how, if you had really bad luck with thinking, you might make that assertion... :\

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    3. Re:Please explain by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      I don't know about your city, but I live in Phoenix and have used cabs in both here and in NYC. They're no cheaper here (they cover a little more distance for the price maybe, but that's because the city isn't nearly as dense, and you need to go much farther here anyway because of the lower density so it's a wash). And I definitely wouldn't call the service "better"; the cabs here are just as stinky, and here, unlike NYC, the cabbies don't know where anything is, so you have to give them directions as they drive.

  10. Love Uber (a lot)...pity, it would have been... by rootrot · · Score: 1

    Nice in NYC. I have used Uber the last 3-4 times I've been in NYC to call a driver when I couldn't get a cab in short order (and/or it was raining). I was curious to see if this 'taxi' service worked...not surprised about the pushback. It is *far and away* the best thing out there if you travel a good deal. You get a nice car, a pleasant (typically charming) driver, and no money changes hands. Absolutely essential in SanFran.

  11. Sorry, but your history is wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You really need to look up a person named Max Weber.

    His perspective was not at all like yours.

    Here's what really happens, people try to utilize bureaucracy, in order to protect their special interests, defeating the purpose of it. Of course, since destroying bureaucracy is also a tool for special interests, that's not exactly a guaranteed improvement.

    This is true of everything though, there is no work of man so pure that somebody won't corrupt it, or exploit its existence as a scapegoat.

    Sorry, but there's no path to take that doesn't have perils.

    1. Re:Sorry, but your history is wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You really need to look up a person named Max Weber.

      You cite Weber!?!?

      Really?

      Really?

      There may not be any hope left for you.

    2. Re:Sorry, but your history is wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, wild empty hyperbole.

      Such a hopeful thing.

  12. Uh, they have a reason to protect the status quo by Virtucon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Taxi Commissions everywhere don't like Uber. In DC recently, Uber has had to defend its practices because the DC Taxi Commission who is out to get rid of them. Why? You have to get a license to operate in DC and that means revenue for them.

    So that's just in DC, where most of the "regulated" cabs are broken down piles of crap that usually don't have A/C in the summer and have tons of other issues.

    Now, New York? well New York allows a monopoly on hired car services whether it be hired cars (limos) or Taxis. New York says it's to "regulate" theses business so they don't overcharge and so that the streets are not overrun by cabs, of course that would mean competition and drive down prices. What the city really wants to do is keep getting all those fees and regulations to keep coming at you. Let's see you apply, have to take a test then 80 hours of training then a medical test, then pee in a cup. All of that generates jobs and it's considered necessary to be allowed to drive in a New York Taxi with a hack license. Now if you want to own your own cab, that's more fun. If you want a medallion be prepared to pony up big time and all it does is make cab fares higher and squeeze the guy who's trying to make a living. Try a million dollars for a medallion. What that does is create a monopoly on service and New York likes that...

    Oh and you have to have a medallion if you want to be able to pick up passengers in response to a street hail. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxicabs_of_New_York_City

    So, Uber comes along and wants to shake things up and make it easier for suppliers and consumers to link up? Do you think New York is going to allow this when it's so lucrative and bureaucratic all at the same time? Not in this life pal.

    --
    Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
  13. Am I mising something? by Zakabog · · Score: 2

    Can't you just as easily call a car service? I live in Brooklyn and work in Manhattan. I never take a yellow cab anywhere in Manhattan, I always ride the subway (or drive if I need a car for work.) If I'm in Brooklyn and I'm feeling lazy or just tired I call a car service. The other option would be to allow this app to contact a car service for you. Why does it need to hail a yellow cab?

    1. Re:Am I mising something? by happylight · · Score: 1

      Because people don't want to walk 5 blocks to a subway station, wait 10 minutes for a train, take it for one stop, then walk another 5 blocks to where you want to go.

    2. Re:Am I mising something? by Webz · · Score: 1

      Car service costs way more than a yellow cab.

  14. One company? by __aazsst3756 · · Score: 2

    The bigger question is, how the hell did one company get to create a monopoly on taxi service in a major city?

    1. Re:One company? by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

      Because they TRIED the other way and the result is cab drivers who don't know their way around the city, costing people MORE money in longer trips.

      The closed system ensures that your cab driver will have sufficient knowledge of the city to get you to your destination quickly.

    2. Re:One company? by dkf · · Score: 1

      Because they TRIED the other way and the result is cab drivers who don't know their way around the city, costing people MORE money in longer trips.

      In-car navigation systems stop working as soon as they cross the NYC city limits?

      --
      "Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
    3. Re:One company? by tgd · · Score: 1

      Because they TRIED the other way and the result is cab drivers who don't know their way around the city, costing people MORE money in longer trips.

      In-car navigation systems stop working as soon as they cross the NYC city limits?

      The universe didn't snap into being ten years ago when GPS navigation systems started showing up in cars.

      Oh, and all the cab drivers looking at their GPS all the time in NYC traffic would lead to a lot of dead pedestrians.

    4. Re:One company? by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      Everything is easy to argue if you are willing to revise history to match your fantasy.

      In actual fact the medallions were introduced in the great depression in order to restrict the number of taxis since supply was dwarfing demand resulting in drivers not making enough money and hence working stupidly long hours and skipping maintenance and so on. You know, the opposite problem to costing passengers more money.

    5. Re:One company? by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      The universe didn't snap into being ten years ago when GPS navigation systems started showing up in cars.

      In which case the argument that it was "TRIED the other way" is invalid since there are some large differences since it was tried.

      Oh, and all the cab drivers looking at their GPS all the time in NYC traffic would lead to a lot of dead pedestrians.

      Usable GPS units use sound to tell the driver where to go - just like a passenger giving directions does. They only have to look at the GPS when entering the destinition - you know when they are stopped because someone just got into the car. And of course the areas with large numbers of pedestrians are the very areas that a 5 year can navigate because it's a numbered grid (and it's 5 year olds instead of 4 year olds because you do have to remember that the one way streets alternate direction).

    6. Re:One company? by jonadab · · Score: 1

      > how the hell did one company get to create a
      > monopoly on taxi service in a major city?

      We're talking about New York here. Absolutely everything in the city is run by ridiculously out-of-control uberpowerful closed-shop unions. It's not just driving a taxi. You can't get work as a garbage collector in New York without paying a huge annual fee to the garbage collector's union. You can't work at a gas station without joining a union. You can't bag groceries without joining a union. I'm pretty sure Pratchett studied New York before writing about Ankh Morpork. If having a muggers' union didn't violate so many federal and state laws, New York City would probably do it.

      Why anybody trying to start a nationwide business would think it was a good idea to kick things off in New York is totally beyond me, unless they just plain Did Not Do The Homework.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
  15. Lets hear it for the "free" market by GPierce · · Score: 2

    The free market doesn't work that way. What would happen is that some private equity firm would start a deal to sell new taxicabs to any schmuck who thinks he can make a living driving a cab. Once the contract is signed, the new owner/entrepreneur is locked in. If the market shows less demand for cabs, he can't quit. Well actually he can, but the payments continue. Then they foreclose on his cab, drive him nuts for the next few years with a deficiency judgment, and sell the cab to the next schmuck who didn't hear what happened to the first guy.

    The free market is a great system as long as you keep your gonads out of the hands of the kleptcrats.

    --

    When you are dancing with wolves, never limp
  16. medallions look like a "bubble" waiting to burst.. by NotQuiteReal · · Score: 4, Interesting

    First off, people need to know that being a legit cab in NYC costs a million bucks.

    The referenced article argues that "hey it is a decent 5% return on your investment"... sounds like a typical wall street tout pumping a stock. A "5% return" on an investment wouldn't require you to work 8 hours a day to get it.

    Based on complaints of availability, the denial to use modern apps, the spike in that graph of medallion licenses... something is going to "pop".

    I have no idea what I am talking about. I live in California and get pissed off if the driveways to the acres-large parking lots I use are not conveniently aligned for my use...

    --
    This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
  17. NY has way too many regulations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm waiting until the follow Michigan and California, it's going to happen if they keep screwing the corporations around.

  18. Seems to me the real problem is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...there's too many people living in NYC? Who the hell decides that packing people like sardines would be a good idea?

    Free vasectomies and tubal ligations. Population reduction is key.

    1. Re:Seems to me the real problem is... by CptNerd · · Score: 1

      Environmentalists who want to limit the amount of Earth that people take up and "waste". Better to live cheek-by-jowl in tiny apartments connected by "mass transit" than to allow free-range humans to wander the world in their SUVs, dropping babies and plastic grocery bags at random, while spewing greenhouse gasses and burning Mother Gaia's black blood.

      Or some such.

      --
      By the taping of my glasses, something geeky this way passes
  19. Obviously the problem isn't "hail-apps" by Guru80 · · Score: 1
    The problem is that the companies themselves didn't develop them. The update might as well as read as such:

    Update: 10/17 00:48 GMT by S : Here's TLC's perspective, in the words of Commissioner David Yassky: "In recent months, as e-hail apps have emerged, TLC has undertaken serious diligence and is moving toward rule changes that will open the market to app developers and other innovators. Those changes cannot legally take place until our developers get a system in place and we control all the profits, in February.

  20. Land of... by Voogru · · Score: 1

    Land of the free, home of the brave.

    Wow, that's a really nice business idea. Let's regulate it out of possibility.

  21. Fuck them. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fuck New York, Fuck the Morons that choose to live there, and Fuck idiots they vote into office.

    Much like California, New York is an embarasement to anyone living in the US with even a minimal amount of intelligence.

  22. Cheap Nike Free Shoes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cheap Nike Free series for the first time to introduce dynamic fit design, vamps like a second skin thin, analog barefoot movement feel also provides great flexibility; When you exercise, the unique structural design of the shoes can conform with enoughMinistry of action and operation. Classic Nike Free Shoes series is unique from the color, shape, and functionality, it really is a natural movement and freedom running. Nike Free Run technology by restoring the foot's natural movement (NATURAL MOTION) analog barefoot training, to strengthen foot tenacity, flexibility and balance, the muscles become more robust. The launch of the new series of shoes covers a dynamic fit design vamp structure improvement in the bottom of the three different flexibility, and Cheap Nike Free Run iD personal customization and other technology and services, for the different levels of runners more comprehensive selection. Nike Free Run Womens soles cutting is the most iconic, I imagine wearing it does not matter where, what the texture of the surface can be nothing like a barefoot-like shackles.

  23. Works in Singapore by Guiness17 · · Score: 1

    Two years ago in Singapore, a text + address will get you a response with an accurate ETA and a cab number within a minute. I've never tried in New York, but hopefully they at least have something like this working?

    --
    Imagine for a moment a world without hypothetical situations...
  24. You are free to be a stupid git in a free market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can sign away your labor at what you believe is a good deal. We have cushions to protect you in case you were tragically stupid so technically it's not a fully free market. NYC takes the less free market to an extreme in the case of taxis.

    Indianapolis broke a taxi monopoly and opened the floodgates on taxis. This resulted in a crippling but satisfying blow to the entrenched monopoly and a bewildering number of taxis. The party that supported the monopoly of course drew out snot spewing sob stories of Joe Dumbass who hocked his kids, sold the dog, mortgaged the house to buy 20 taxis which he expected to fill instantly with drivers all making minimum wage and filling his pockets. We yawned and will hail a cab to the bureaucrats force all cabs to have the same pricing which that same party keeps trying to implement.

  25. DUH by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

    Taxis make the return trip empty, DOUBLING the traffic load for one ride

    1. Re:DUH by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In NYC? nope. What's a return trip anyways? Cabs just pick up people where they left the previous people off. Only exceptions would be $60+ cab rides to the 'burbs which are rare.

    2. Re:DUH by TheLink · · Score: 1

      Taxi drivers try not to make too many empty trips. They make more money that way.

      With more intelligent systems the proportion of empty trips should go down.

      --
    3. Re:DUH by TheLink · · Score: 1

      You are right, taxis alone would tend to increase traffic load assuming mostly "single passenger" customers, not all trips being full, and all customers being able to get a taxi promptly.

      However if you view taxis as part of the whole public transportation system then taxis can help reduce traffic load. How it works is if most people use the train/subway/bus to travel about because they know that if they need to go to some place where the train/bus doesn't go to, a taxi can get them there in reasonable time and cost.

      If taxis are too expensive and buses/subways inadequate then more people will resort to using private cars.

      --
  26. Take the Subway by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

    Thousands of Irish immigrants died so you could get an easy ride

  27. WOW by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

    Why don't you tell us why they moved to New Jersey: because it's NEXT DOOR to NYC.

  28. Re:medallions look like a "bubble" waiting to burs by FranTaylor · · Score: 1

    I LOVE it that a medallion costs a MILLION DOLLARS

    It means that the cab driver is a SERIOUS BUSINESS PERSON and he will treat me in a professional manner.

  29. Re:medallions look like a "bubble" waiting to burs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You will never meet the SERIOUS BUSINESS PERSON who owns the medallion. No matter how many cabs you ride.

  30. Works in London by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I use Hailo all the time. It's a five minute wait most of the time, but a car tracker shows me progress. Since I'm in a side street, still better than running around. "Land of the free", hu?

  31. The Cutting Edge by biochozo · · Score: 1

    "Our taxis have always been on the cutting edge of technological innovation, from GPS systems to credit card readers." The cutting edge is what that used to be... If you were to be always on the cutting edge you'd have at least one example from the last decade perhaps?

  32. Re:medallions look like a "bubble" waiting to burs by Shirley+Marquez · · Score: 1

    Sadly, it doesn't. What it means is that the taxi driver is a sharecropper who struggles to make a living while most of the profits go to the rich medallion owner.

  33. If we do it, we approve it.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's just about control and monitor.....a mafia like behaviour...if the TLC do it, it's ok...and of course, they will have an extra piece of the cake..... Same ol' story.....money money money....

  34. Medallion holder = Plantation Holder by Firethorn · · Score: 1

    Bingo. Well, there's actually 3 types of medallions:
    1: Standard Medallion. The right to use one of these is rented out to the drivers for their shift. The owner also owns the taxi company - car, servicing facilities, etc... Cost is over $1M at this point to purchase one at auction. It's basically an artificial good created by NYC
    2: Owner/Operator Medallion: This is the 'for the small guy!!!' medallion. If I remember right, it's closer to $400k because under most circumstances the owner has to be the operator under this medallion(AND own the car, etc...). It's not allowed to be rented out. Very limited numbers compared to #1.
    3: Green Medallion: Instead of driving a crown victorian*, you drive an escape hybrid. As these were the last increase in medallion numbers, the price difference quickly became the difference in price between a Escape and a Crown Vic. Given that it's the renter who pays for the gas, the owner doesn't care. Though I understand once they go 'green' they don't like going back - $4-5/gallon gas in a 30mpg vehicle vs a 10mpg one puts a lot of money in their pocket.

    *Might of changed recently, don't know.

    --
    I don't read AC A human right
  35. Surcharges... What about an alternate transport by Firethorn · · Score: 1

    You know, I'm seeing artificial restrictions and make it more expensive restrictions.

    If we're going to apply surcharges, how about we put the money towards a system to make NYC even more friendly to alternative transport? The subway system is a good start, but still too limited. It's good at moving relatively massive numbers of people to limited destinations.

    Cabs, when they work right, are more or less direct A to B, when A or B might not be near(enough) to a subway station, or there might not be a train going relatively straight enough between the two, or the schedules don't match up, etc... Time is money, remember?

    We either need to go old school and like a couple scifi books start putting moving walkways in(so walkers can get twice as far in a given amount of time), or PRT.

    One idea I had was to have most/all buildings in the central area hooked up on the 3rd floor(or so) with moving walkways. If you figure that the average walking speed is 3mph and make the walkway operate at 3mph, then figure that an individual traveling will be on one 50% of the time, that's still a 50% increase in distance traveled within whatever distance/time they're willing to walk for.

    If you figure that getting a NYC taxi will take an average of 5 minutes to catch/pay and it'll average 20 mph, in a half hour trip:
    Plain walking: 1.5 miles.
    Walkway assisted: 2.3 miles
    Taxi: 6.7 miles(but it costs money)

    Like anything, you don't have to get rid of Taxis, but if you reduce edge calls for them, like a 3 mile trip, they'll be happy because longer calls equal more money(on average) while still avoiding high amounts of congestion.

    PRT, Personal Rapid Transit, would address the long way more - the idea is extremely light electrified elevated* rail, with off-line stations, that uses individually guided and propelled cars that hold 3-4 people.

    The idea is that you get in, specify your destination, and it guides you there using the most direct/fastest route possible. Because it's electronically controlled and on a rail, the cars can be closer together than is safe for humans on pavement. Because it's non-stop, even if the route doesn't take you 'to the door' or has to travel a bit more to get there it's still going to 'tend' to be faster. It's independent of the road system, so it can take pressure off of there.

    *Well it can also be ground level or even buried.

    --
    I don't read AC A human right
  36. Taxis help other public transport options by Firethorn · · Score: 1

    How it works is if most people use the train/subway/bus to travel about because they know that if they need to go to some place where the train/bus doesn't go to, a taxi can get them there in reasonable time and cost.

    That's a very good observation, even if it's my understanding that a Taxi ride runs 10X as much as one on a train/bus. One can also observe that it can help reduce the perceived need for a personal vehicle because they tend to have huge trunks if somebody goes on a shopping trip and decides 'oops, too much to want to bother with on the subway/bus', or some such. Or the trip to the airport with luggage. It doesn't really matter.

    --
    I don't read AC A human right
    1. Re:Taxis help other public transport options by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Singapore taxis are cheaper than in NYC. There are very many of them too.

      http://www.taxisingapore.com/taxi-fare/
      http://www.nyc.gov/html/tlc/html/passenger/taxicab_rate.shtml

      So if you've done a lot of shopping, paying SGD10 for cab fare isn't such a big deal. Once you factor in the cost of private vehicle ownership it doesn't look so bad - parking rates in some areas can be very high (higher than cab fare) and spaces can be rather limited.