Slashdot Mirror
Uber Forced Out of Kansas
mpicpp sends news that Uber has been forced to leave Kansas. The company says a bill pushed through the state legislature (SB117) makes it impossible for the company to operate there. The bill had been vetoed by Kansas governor Sam Brownback, but lawmakers secured enough votes to override it. "The measure requires drivers for ride-hailing companies to undergo background checks through the Kansas Bureau of Investigation and hold additional auto insurance coverage for the period in which they have turned on the mobile app that connects them to riders."
There aren't any taxi token requirements or anything unreasonable. Can't wait to see what the usual Uber shills have to say about why they can't abide by a couple basic rules.
They are a taxi comapny and should follow the law just like anybody else. ,A rose by any other name ...'
Just calling at something different does not make it so.
A blow job is still (oral) sex. Waterboarding is still torture. Uber is still a taxi-service. This thing of renaming is known by many people and is known for ages. The most well known is newspeak from 1984. Its older predecessor is
In Brussels an Uber driver has been convicted, which means that his car is confiscated. That said, the city is also working on re-writing the law of Taxi-services. That is TAXI services, not Uber.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
This headline is absolutely ridiculous. It's taking Uber's perspective as legitimate, and then the article links to Uber propaganda in the form of a press release.
Was this posting bought and paid for by Uber?
Uber operates by committing regulatory arbitrage and then hoping it doesn't get caught or stopped.
Uber could absolutely continue to operate but they simply choose not to comply with reasonable legislation. Carrying commercial insurance and submitting to a background check is hardly overbearing.
When Google pulled out of China, was it that Google was forced out? Of course not. They just didn't want to comply with Chinese law.
Same here.
Please reword this article, because right now its a bunch of bullshit.
Laws like this will be appearing everywhere, Massachusetts is up next, and in markets like NYC, its been the standard for years.
Here in the US, our insurance companies are not in business to pay for auto accidents. They are in business to collect our money. Hence the tiered pricing for different dollar amounts of coverage. Also why most insurance companies will cancel our policies if we have more than one accident in X number of months. Then the high risk insurance steps in for hundreds of dollars per month. Your system sounds better.
One important difference: in the US you get a license by memorizing a few signs and traffic laws. They will tell you "driving is a privilege, not a fundamental right" but in practice it's treated like a right unless you get multiple DUIs or something (even then, a few years later - or less - the irresponsible adult can re-apply). The result is lots of unskilled drivers on the road, including those with more than enough experience to know better.
It's regrettable but the more the USA continues down its current commercial and philosophical path, the more people tend to do the minimum even when the minimum (in this case, of skill) is grossly inadequate. It doesn't take much effort to gradually get just a little better at something day by day, but it does take an awareness that one should do so. Here driving is widely seen as nothing more than a means to an end, not something in which to invest any skill because the lives of oneself and others may depend on it. Actually almost everything is viewed that way. It's the same reason in computing, there are so many permanent newbies - they managed to avoid accidentally picking up any new knowledge day by day even when a computer is an important tool without which they can't earn a living.
So unsurprisingly, I see unsafe practices every day I drive. Also, stupid unnecessary shit like tailgating 2 inches from the other guy's bumper with two open passing lanes is unfathomably popular. On a related practice, I have no idea why it's so important to get beside somebody and carefully maintain the exact same speed, even though to appear there they had to initially move faster, but I simply cannot drive a few miles down an interstate without seeing it, even during low-traffic hours like 4am. I think it's just a mindless "go with the flow, do what everyone else is doing" herd mentality -- that's consistent with what I see elsewhere in this culture. It could also be some psychology of feeling powerless in one's own life, causing them to want to control others by blocking passing lanes and creating hazards. Also, during heavy rain, many don't seem to understand that visibility is vastly improved by not hanging out in the massive backwash from 18-wheelers; this is really not difficult to comprehend, but to do so, one would have to be aware enough to consider it.
As I entertain no delusions about controlling what other people do, my main goal while driving is to keep as much distance between myself and others as I can. They can drive in tightly clustered packs with no room to maneuver (and sometimes, terrible visibility) if that pleases them. Whether it means speeding up or slowing down, I'll be the guy between the nearest two packs.
Please educate me if I am wrong, but I understand that in most European nations, acquiring a license means you actually have to demonstrate skill with maneuvering the vehicle and it's not nearly so easy. The failure rate for license applicants is significantly higher, and since driving means we're talking life and limb, that sounds quite reasonable. If you have only driven in Europe you might even find my descriptions difficult to believe, but I promise you I see this and worse every day.
TL:DR right? I really think it boils down to culture. The USA once had a culture that promoted responsible adulthood but that was a long time ago. What's promoted now is convenience and the idea that nothing is ever one's own fault. The focus has shifted from responsibility to a childish concern about fault-and-blame that prevents so many from learning that cause precedes effect. It's rea
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
"People" aren't pushing back, entrenched "organizations" are pushing back. People don't give a shit and will use what's available. Let's keep some perspective, even while Uber is obviously circumventing laws, the laws themselves are out of place and incompatible with the future as they cling to the past.
This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Except for the fact that their insurance is only in effect when there is a passenger in the car.
You know that taxi, right? It's the one you're stuck with because there's no alternative now.
That taxi, the one who insulted me when I dared to insinuate he took a longer path? The taxi as nice as a prison gate? And yet expecting a tip? Oh yes, unfortunately, I know.
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
Wait, so background checks and insurance are incompatible with the future? I am not sure that is a good direction to be going just to save a few bucks in a race to the bottom.
Bullshit.
Municipalities and states which have passed laws around commercial for-hire vehicles are pushing back and saying "you don't get to tell us what our laws are". This has nothing to do with entrenched players pushing back other than them pointing out that if they're subject to those laws, Uber can't come along and claim to not be.
They're breaking the law, and throwing a whiny temper tantrum is irrelevant.
The laws exist to protect people from shady players without proper licensing and insurance looking to make a buck.
Uber is basically a dispatcher for illegal cabs. That's it.
You can claim it's some innovative noble thing to be assholes who ignore the law. But that doesn't make it true.
Criminal activity isn't a business model. It's a temper tantrum by greedy assholes who claim the law doesn't apply to them.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
This is hilariously dishonest.
Conventional taxis don't have to go out of business - that's a strawman/misnomer. Why don't they provide their own apps to provide service to riders? Oh, right. Uber is doing what taxi services refuse to in a lot of instances. Uber isn't the problem here, but old outdated legislation is.
Taxi services don't operate 24/7 with 100% coverage, that is and never can be the case anywhere. Meanwhile, uber is opening up to other competition and enabling better coverage than the taxi services themselves provide.