Slashdot Mirror


How Uber Is Changing Life For Women In Saudi Arabia

An anonymous reader writes: Being unable to legally drive is hard for many women in Saudi Arabia, especially working women. With notoriously poor mass transit options, and the stigma attached to women riding the bus alone, Uber has changed the life of many Saudi women by giving them greater mobility and independence. While there are no official statistics on how many women use the service, anecdotal evidence suggest that 70% to 90% of Saudi riders are women. "A lot of them, I would say, are young women," says Saudi Arabia general manager Majed Abukhater. "We have some data to show that these women are starting to rely on Uber a lot more for their daily commutes; the proportion of trips that we see in Saudi during the weekday is actually very high relative to other locations. That's just kind of one indicator to tell us that women are really starting to rely on Uber for their daily commutes to work, or to school, or to university."

103 of 168 comments (clear)

  1. Uber is not the answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Eradicating blatant sexism is.

    1. Re:Uber is not the answer by plopez · · Score: 2

      That would be bad as it would reduce private sector profitability.

      (of course I am being sarcastic)

      --
      putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
    2. Re:Uber is not the answer by sims+2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah but I am sure the next step will be to ban uber in Saudi Arabia.

      --
      Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
    3. Re:Uber is not the answer by mykepredko · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Maybe it's the beginning of the answer.

      If Uber allows women to move more freely and work at jobs and go to school, something they weren't allowed before then I would think this is a first step.

    4. Re:Uber is not the answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If Uber allows women to move more freely and work at jobs and go to school, something they weren't allowed before then I would think this is a first step.

      A technology which facilitates women in Saudi Arabia to be in the presence of men who are not relatives.

      What could possibly go wrong?

      Sorry, but for the same reasons they aren't allowed to drive (Sharia law), or travel without the permission of their husband/father ... it will only lead to cracking down on women using the service.

      Saudi Arabia has no interest in allowing women more freedom of movement, and it will be the women who are punished as much as the men.

      In Saudi Arabia, women are effectively property, and not meant to be out in public without an escort.

      This isn't an answer, or an increase in freedom ... it's a way in which when they crack down women will be the ones who bear the brunt of Sharia law and a society who treats them like property.

      A man and a woman who are not married alone in a car is recipe for someone being charged for adultery or other ridiculous things.

      And Uber will claim they're championing freedom, but they might get someone into a world of trouble. Defy the law and convention in Saudi Arabia at your own peril.

    5. Re:Uber is not the answer by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

      How to load that "-1" comment? Did "Load All Comments" to include -1 ones, still no way to see the initial post above this one.

      --
      Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
    6. Re:Uber is not the answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Click "Parent" on the one you replied to.

    7. Re:Uber is not the answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Eradicating blatant sexism is.

      Why was this modded down ? It's the truth. Saudi Arabia is still in the 15th century when it comes to woman's rights.
      Want to improve woman's condition in that shitty hellhole of a country ? How about let woman legally drive instead of this "religious" nonsense. Man knows better, females know jack shit said good ol' mohamed.

    8. Re:Uber is not the answer by Zeio · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Agree here. Why is the headline stated like this ~ Uber makes things great for Saudi women. It should be ~ Women suffering under Islamic misogyny codified into a Islamofascist totalitarian state find respite and have a slight increase in quality of life with Uber.

      Nobody calls a spade a spade anymore.

      --
      Legalize the constitution. Think for yourself question authority.
    9. Re:Uber is not the answer by ClickOnThis · · Score: 4, Informative

      Treating women as property, denying them basic education, and encouraging their fathers to kill them if they misbehave is a protected cultural difference.

      I'm far from being an apologist for the mistreatments of women in Saudi Arabia, but I must point out that denying them basic education is not one of them. From TFA:

      While women comprise only 13% of the Saudi workforce, they make up a full 60% of the college student population

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    10. Re:Uber is not the answer by Jason+Levine · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Unfortunately, this first step will likely be followed by the (easier to implement) second step of "Uber is violating Islam by letting women go outside without a male escort! Shut it down!!!!" instead of the (better, but harder to implement) second step of "Hey, maybe we should treat women like they are actual people instead of things that we own."

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    11. Re:Uber is not the answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They will simply require that women riding in Uber be escorted by a male family member.

    12. Re:Uber is not the answer by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      +1 Uncomfortable truth.

    13. Re:Uber is not the answer by butchersong · · Score: 1

      That is like saying social media isn't a useful tool to combat abuse by authority because the real solution is for those in authority not to abuse anyone.. I don't find "the real solution is for the problem to not exist" a compelling argument.

    14. Re:Uber is not the answer by smooth+wombat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nobody calls a spade a spade anymore.

      Uber is a taxi service but is trying to claim it's not a taxi service even though people use them as a taxi to go from one place to another which is not along the route of the driver. The reason they claim they're not a taxi service, even though they are, is because they would have to abide by the rules all the other taxi services have to abide by, including additional insurance for their drivers and associated fees.

      Calling a spade a spade.

      --
      We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    15. Re:Uber is not the answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And amazingly, the rest of the world managed to solve this problem too, WITHOUT such insane gender-based discrimination. Give me a break.

    16. Re:Uber is not the answer by SeaFox · · Score: 2

      Funny that you're at -1 for being right.

      There's nothing odd about it. They posted as AC, and AC comments are automatically -1 when thy are posted. And since many people browse above -1 to avoid trolls and spam it will take longer for people with mod points to see the message and rate it up.

    17. Re:Uber is not the answer by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      Get back to me when you have that worked out.
      No it is not the answer but if it improves the lives of the women than it is a good thing.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    18. Re:Uber is not the answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      many actually treat them with great respect.

      ... like their cars? Getting washed every Sunday morning, serviced properly, never driven too hard even though it would be fun?

    19. Re:Uber is not the answer by tompaulco · · Score: 4, Informative

      Maybe it's the beginning of the answer.

      If Uber allows women to move more freely and work at jobs and go to school, something they weren't allowed before then I would think this is a first step.

      Uber is not doing it. Taxis are doing it. Uber does not contract drivers in SA, they just use existing taxi services. Uber has nothing to do with liberation of women in SA other than making a claim to be responsible.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    20. Re:Uber is not the answer by GlennC · · Score: 1

      Uber is a taxi service...

      +1, Informative.

      And in the case of Saudi Arabia, you can add another law they're breaking...that of not allowing women to travel without a male relative.

      If I were an Uber executive, I'd stay well clear of Saudi Arabia....I understand that they don't mess around with punishing those who violate the law there.

      --
      Go on, citizen, stamp the vote card. R or D, your choice.
    21. Re:Uber is not the answer by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      They will simply require that women riding in Uber be escorted by a male family member.

      That is already a legal requirement, that is (apparently) not being enforced.

    22. Re:Uber is not the answer by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      That would be bad as it would reduce private sector profitability.

      Not true. Using a significant percentage of the workforce to shuttle around women that are perfectly capable of driving themselves, is a big economic inefficiency. Furthermore, most of the drivers are foreign nationals, so the much of their income is repatriated to their home countries rather than circulating in the Saudi economy. From an economic/business perspective, this is insane.

    23. Re:Uber is not the answer by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

      If the problem is that the men can't stop themselves from harming the women then the solution isn't to treat the women as objects and force them to cover up. It's to get the men to change their behaviour and act civilized. Let the women dress however they want and if a man can't control the urges then they must be blindfolded. The problem is with them and not with the women. People are not property. You can say it was created for whatever noble cause you want to but it still is slavery and it needs to be stopped.

    24. Re:Uber is not the answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They will simply require that women riding in Uber be escorted by a male family member.

      That is already a legal requirement, that is (apparently) not being enforced.

      Don't worry, I'm certain they will get around to fixing that, and all it will probably take is 1 rich asshole + 1 wife/daughter riding unescorted complaining about it.

    25. Re:Uber is not the answer by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      Using a significant percentage of the workforce to shuttle around women that are perfectly capable of driving themselves, is a big economic inefficiency.

      Wait, what?!

      I thought that owning your own vehicle was one of those evil things that only Americans did, certainly not something we wanted to encourage in another country. Mass Transit is GOOD, personal autos are EVIL.

      Suggesting that encouraging Saudi women to own their own cars can't be a good thing, can it?

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    26. Re:Uber is not the answer by mister_playboy · · Score: 2

      ACs post at 0. Clicking on the -1 would reveal that this comment was marked down for Flamebait.

      No mod description is shown when only one up/down vote has been applied, for unknown reasons.

      Why am I having to explain this to a 6-digit UID, anyway? :P

      --
      Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law ::: Love is the law, love under will
    27. Re:Uber is not the answer by sims+2 · · Score: 1

      Human trafficking April 12, 2015 @11:50AM.
      Modern slavery December 14, 2011 @01:52PM.

      Also relevant Saudi Arabia Implements Electronic Tracking System For Women http://politics.slashdot.org/s... November 22, 2012 @05:11PM.

      And finally March 05, 2009 @06:50PM.

      --
      Minimum threshold fixed. Thanks!
    28. Re:Uber is not the answer by ClickOnThis · · Score: 1

      No mod description is shown when only one up/down vote has been applied, for unknown reasons.

      Whatever the number of mod-votes, you can view the breakdown of mod-scoring (including descriptions) by clicking on "Score" in the subject-line. This only works if you're logged in.

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    29. Re:Uber is not the answer by Grishnakh · · Score: 2

      Eradicating blatant sexism is.

      That's like saying that "encryption isn't the answer, eradicating computer misuse is."

      Please tell us how you plan to eradicate blatant sexism in Saudi Arabia. I'm really interested in how you think the culture there can be changed, and why women should sit at home and never travel until sexism has been eradicated, rather than just using Uber.

    30. Re:Uber is not the answer by tepples · · Score: 1

      Mass Transit is GOOD, personal autos are EVIL.

      Uber service resembles taxi service more than it does fixed-route bus service. So even under a mindset that mass transit is GOOD, I imagine Uber isn't quite as GOOD as mass transit. Right now, it's just filling a gap.

    31. Re:Uber is not the answer by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      At least you acknowledge the world has problems. Some people aren't willing to do even that, and prefer to maintain a hostile level of denial.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    32. Re:Uber is not the answer by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      For satire to work it must be an exaggeration. :-(

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
    33. Re:Uber is not the answer by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I thought the Saudis did away with slavery back when JFK gave them the evil eye? Are women technically property or is that just an exaggeration? I have not been to Saudi Arabia. I do not think they will even let me in the country as a tourist or the likes. I am pretty sure I can not go to Mecca at least. I had thought that I was not even allowed on their soil unless I was a Muslim. Anyhow, are they really owned (as in property) still? I understand they have fewer rights but that does not make them slaves. Is slaves hyperbole or?

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    34. Re:Uber is not the answer by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I can not fathom wanting to open a business, of any kind, in Saudi Arabia. I just can not think of a reason why I would expose myself or my employees to the region. Even if my business was selling veils and women-whips (I am only assuming that they whip them) I still would not want to open a business there. I might not even want to ship anything there from a mail order catalog. I have no idea if the regular citizens are online, it seems unlikely but they might have access. Other than the history of the Sauds I really do not know a whole lot about them. Wikipedia is so very far away.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    35. Re:Uber is not the answer by CanadianMacFan · · Score: 1

      Slaves is a bit of a hyperbole as the real slaves are the poor foreigners that they bring in to do labour and other jobs that they don't want to do themselves. Women are more property there and face severe restrictions on what they can do.

      You can go to Saudi Arabia if you are not a Muslim. There are many people from Europe, North America, Australia, etc that go there for work in IT, engineering, medical and other such jobs. They are limited from going to some areas if they are not Muslim. And the restrictions on women don't apply to them. I knew a woman who was there and she said that she always got stared at when she went out alone, especially at restaurants. It didn't click with her why until I pointed out to her that women there weren't allowed to do that.

    36. Re:Uber is not the answer by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Ah - okay. I was under the impression that the whole country was cut off except for certain exemptions such as employment. I still do not think I want to go there as a general rule. I enjoy going to new places and learning new things but some places just do not seem to be worth it.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    37. Re:Uber is not the answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You cannot open a business anyway. You need a Saudi sponsor who will take their percentage for being a sleeping partner. The large multi-nationals get round this often by using local agents who are invariably well-known local businesses. For example, IBM are represented by Juffali who also represent brands like Mercedes-Benz and Siemens. Even though it's a local agent these are serious companies so the backup, whilst not up to European standards for example and a bit slower, is good and with globalisation its more of a local sales force.

      The major differences compared to doing business in the Western World are:

      1) A lot of business is done on a more personal level. The company I worked for tended to use the Binzagr group of companies for some shipping and construction purely because the company owners had known each other for many years - very similar to the Western world in reality. Corporate Travel would go though one of their Travel Agents who also just happened to be the local agent for British Airways [which meant the owner and his family got treated like royalty by British Airways] but we did put a lot of business through them. It works well - when one of Binzagr's British expats tried to shaft us on a construction project, the company owner himself called Binzagr personally who then promptly hammered the expat and told him why was he trying to shaft his friend of some 30 years ?
      2) Whilst you have some legal protection the Sharia Law code means it's harder and more involved to get legal judgements on commercial matters.
      3) If the King wants your land etc tough - you will get paid out but there is nothing you can do to stop it.

      All of the major Global banks are represented so business and project finance is not an issue but the commercial repayment arrangements are a little different under Islamic Banking.

    38. Re:Uber is not the answer by radarskiy · · Score: 1

      Your forgot the part where sometimes it *does* claim to be a taxi service, when it wants to gain a benefit that is given to taxis.

    39. Re:Uber is not the answer by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I did not know that. I did some international work but never in the peninsula or, well, the Middle East for that matter. I was out of the military just before we got involved heavily there so I have only visited Israel and Egypt as a tourist.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    40. Re:Uber is not the answer by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Eradicating blatant sexism is.

      More precisely, eradicating Islam is

    41. Re:Uber is not the answer by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      Well shut my mouth wide open. Apparently I have a modifier on my displays.
      When I'm logged in AC's appear as -1. But if I log out their comments are scored 0.

      Still, the point still stands, the use of AC in posting had a detrimental effect on the original post being recognized in a positive light in moderation.

    42. Re:Uber is not the answer by ThatsMyNick · · Score: 1

      In Saudi Arabia they are claiming to be a taxi calling service, not a ride share service. They rely on existing licensed taxis. It is just their rating system and ease of use, that puts them at an advantage. They complete on a level playground with every other taxi service.

      I dont think you know what a spade is.

    43. Re:Uber is not the answer by ks9208661 · · Score: 1

      Saudi law, not Sharia law, prohibits women from driving in Saudi Arabia. No other Muslim-majority country prohibits women from driving.

    44. Re:Uber is not the answer by Lennie · · Score: 1

      They were already allowed these freedoms.

      Travel/transport was just very unreliable.

      --
      New things are always on the horizon
    45. Re:Uber is not the answer by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1

      Furthermore, most of the drivers are foreign nationals, so the much of their income is repatriated to their home countries rather than circulating in the Saudi economy. From an economic/business perspective, this is insane.

      Actually taking money out of the Saudi economy and sending it to somewhere that's probably more sane seems like a good thing to me.

      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    46. Re:Uber is not the answer by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 1

      Furthermore, most of the drivers are foreign nationals, so the much of their income is repatriated to their home countries rather than circulating in the Saudi economy. From an economic/business perspective, this is insane.

      So rich Saudis, busy following a particular ideological mania, are sending money they have plenty of to much poorer countries where it's desperately needed? Sounds like a win/win situation to me.

    47. Re:Uber is not the answer by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 1

      They will simply require that women riding in Uber be escorted by a male family member.

      Or enter into mut'ah marriages for the duration of the journey. So the woman gets into the Uber, enters into a mut'ah marriage, the dowry paid is the amount of the Uber fare, and when she exits the marriage is dissolved.

      Having said that, I'm not sure if wahhabism allows mut'ah marriages...

    48. Re:Uber is not the answer by NotDrWho · · Score: 2

      If Uber allows women to move more freely and work at jobs and go to school, something they weren't allowed before then I would think this is a first step.

      No it's not. It's a 3rd-party kludgy band-aid on a problem that only makes it even easier for the Saudi government to put off ever addressing it.

      Consider the possibility of this headline from Montgomery, AL in 1954:

      "Frustrated at Riding in Back of the Bus, Negroes Establish Their Own (Possibly Illegal) Bus Service"

      Would you consider that a "first step" to fixing the underlying problem of racism?

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    49. Re: Uber is not the answer by sys64764 · · Score: 1

      win much!

    50. Re:Uber is not the answer by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Sexism, racism, nationalism, ageism, etc. cannot be eradicated, as it is a mechanism by which people that are not very smart and not very capable try to elevate themselves above others. Unless that problem can be fixed, sexism, racism, etc. will remain with the human race.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    51. Re:Uber is not the answer by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Point to one. Seriously. I don't remember ever seeing one.

      You'll find posts claiming that there's a lot of sexism in video games. You'll find posts arguing that people should be hired for diversity as well as competence reasons. I'm fairly sure you won't find posts that fit GGP's descriptions.

      (As a tolerant liberal, I want the Saudi government removed from the face of the Earth, and replaced with some approach to democracy with more equal rights.)

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  2. Uber is "ride sharing" ? by jbengt · · Score: 5, Informative

    From TFA: "for regulatory reasons, Uber in Saudi Arabia does not work with contracted drivers using their own cars—all Uber rides go through existing companies"

    So Uber can follow local laws when they're forced to. Who would've guessed?

    1. Re:Uber is "ride sharing" ? by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      The penalty for not following local laws in most countries would be a petty fine. In Saudi Arabia . . . it would be a couple hundred lashes with the whip.

      If the offense was considered to be an insult to Islam . . . say bye-bye to your head.

      Oh, and being left-handed is considered to be an insult to Islam. You don't need to try very hard to insult Islam.

      That is why Über folks decided to abide by Saudi Arabian laws.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    2. Re:Uber is "ride sharing" ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not to be defending Saudi Arabia, Islam or anything in between, but let's be clear here...Saudi Arabia is a totalitarian feudalistic system. They use Wahabism, which is one of the strictest sects of puritan Islam, which gave us among other things: Al-Qaeda, Taliban, ISIS, etc. When you have a totalitarian system, you always need some sort of bullshit ideology to legitimize your total control. This has/is being used in many countries: Soviet Union, N-Koera, Nazi Germany, etc.

      The founder of the Saudi dynasty made a deal (about 100 years ago) with the Wahabi clerics to help him take over the place, and in exchange, they would split up the spoils. This is part of history (no conspiracy theory here). Today, the Saudi family is taking all the oil money it can and the clerics get to to enforce their bullshit puritanic beliefs. Saudi Arabia is just a product of an alliance where two parties get what they want and the people in the middle are paying for it. The beheading, flogging, hand cutting, etc...are a great tool for any totalitarian regime to keep people in-line (Hitler/Stalin got rid of a lot of people they didn't like because they were 'anti-regime', 'enemy of the state')...oh, but this came from the Koran, yeah sure...the Old Testament is full of craziness too but nobody's using for stoning people even through it's in there.

    3. Re:Uber is "ride sharing" ? by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      They're not being forced to.

      How so AC?
      Uber's business as they created it uses contracted drivers. You think they're just doing something different in Saudi Arabia for shits and grins?
      There's obviously something in that market that is making them alter their operations.

    4. Re:Uber is "ride sharing" ? by bsolar · · Score: 1

      Uber knows that it has very little chance to push for changes in legislations in Saudi Arabia, but it has actually chances in western countries. On top of that the consequences of losing such a battle are pretty different. It makes perfectly sense for them not to fight battles they are very unlikely to lose but still fight battles they believe they can win in the long term.

    5. Re:Uber is "ride sharing" ? by myowntrueself · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The penalty for not following local laws in most countries would be a petty fine. In Saudi Arabia . . . it would be a couple hundred lashes with the whip.

      If the offense was considered to be an insult to Islam . . . say bye-bye to your head.

      Oh, and being left-handed is considered to be an insult to Islam. You don't need to try very hard to insult Islam.

      That is why Über folks decided to abide by Saudi Arabian laws.

      My experience in life has been that people who are easily offended are usually insecure and have low self esteem.

      So this would probably apply to MOST of the worlds Muslims...

      Fuckin sad bunch.

      --
      In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
    6. Re:Uber is "ride sharing" ? by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      So Uber can follow local laws when they're forced to. Who would've guessed?

      How the fuck do you think UberBlack works? Oh, wait; you wouldn't know, as you haven't actually researched what you're running off at the mouth about. Imagine that. :p

    7. Re:Uber is "ride sharing" ? by TeknoHog · · Score: 2

      My experience in life has been that people who are easily offended are usually insecure and have low self esteem.

      So this would probably apply to MOST of the worlds Muslims...

      Fuckin sad bunch.

      On the bright side, if you steal a bike, you can show off your "riding with no hands".

      --
      Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
  3. By the curly beard of Mohammed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    We must repress this immediately. Women with freedom. Think of the Islam.

    1. Re:By the curly beard of Mohammed by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I am a Buddhist. I do not repress anyone and I know of no teachings that advocate repressing women. I guess you could say that Buddhism is not a major religion but there are quite a few of us. And no, I am a Buddhist, not a fucking monk.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    2. Re:By the curly beard of Mohammed by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I suspect that, if I tried hard enough, I could probably find someone trying to repress someone in the name of Buddhism. There are all types.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  4. Re:stopgap by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 2

    Many years ago, I worked with some Saudis who had brought their wives and kids over. They would be going to back when the work was done, but rather than spend a couple years away from the family, they brought them with them.

    At one point, I was talking to one of the wives and mentioned how they must be enjoying being able to drive themselves around. She replied that she was looking forward to having a driver (the husband could afford to hire a driver for his wife when in Saudi Arabia). LA Traffic is not all that much fun and she'd far rather have someone else deal with it.

    I wonder how well driverless cars will work over there? Of course, considering how badly they drive, a driverless car is definitely going to need some serious skills in accident avoidance...

  5. s/uber/taxi. by nimbius · · Score: 1, Insightful

    If they enjoy Uber then perhaps theyd really enjoy a taxi service. Taxis, offer all the benefits of Uber with the convenience of government controls like licensing, inspection, background checks, and safety standards for vehicles as well as passengers. Then again, theres nothing like taking an uber from the Khalid international airport and being forcibly driven to the middle of Highway 40, your new final destination.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:s/uber/taxi. by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 2, Informative

      Government Licensing does one thing, and one thing only. It increases barrier to entry by raising the cost of doing business.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    2. Re:s/uber/taxi. by DerekLyons · · Score: 2

      If they enjoy Uber then perhaps theyd really enjoy a taxi service. Taxis, offer all the benefits of Uber with the convenience of government controls like licensing, inspection, background checks, and safety standards for vehicles as well as passengers.

      From TFA; Before Uber came to the countryâ"it currently operates in Jeddah and Dammam, in addition to Riyadhâ"women relied on private drivers (if they could afford them) or the limo companies that Uber now works with (for regulatory reasons, Uber in Saudi Arabia does not work with contracted drivers using their own carsâ"all Uber rides go through existing companies).

      So that's exactly what they are getting - existing taxi services, only with Uber acting as a middleman and skimming of their cut.

    3. Re:s/uber/taxi. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Government Licensing does one thing, and one thing only. It increases barrier to entry by raising the cost of doing business.

      Not to mention the increased opportunity for graft and corruption by government officials.

    4. Re:s/uber/taxi. by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      So that's exactly what they are getting - existing taxi services, only with Uber acting as a middleman and skimming of their cut.

      So, basically Uber has completely changed their business model in Saudi Arabia to something that would be perfectly legal in other countries (a scheduling app for existing taxi/limo services). Wonder why that can't just do that in the rest of world?

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    5. Re:s/uber/taxi. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      with the convenience of government controls

      You actually said that. Amazing. You must be way over on the left to think that government controls are such a good thing.

      Yes, please, tell us how to live our lives, it's all so convenient.

    6. Re:s/uber/taxi. by gstoddart · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Where I live, they mandated that taxis have an on-board camera with a circular buffer of 24 hours. It had been done in response to allegations a cab driver had assaulted a women ... they later found other evidence for it from another source.

      They pushed through the law requiring this, against the objections of the cab drivers who though they were being spied on.

      When a cab driver was subsequently robbed, and the suspect caught on camera, the cab drivers were all in praise of it.

      It turns out, the mandated cameras made it safer for everybody.

      Imposing regulations on cab drivers can work, and despite claims to the contrary, isn't always about protecting the interests of cab drivers.

      The licensing, inspection, background checks and safety inspections aren't the only benefits to be had.

      Stop listening to Uber who keeps saying the lie that regulations the cab drivers have to follow are something the Uber drivers shouldn't be subjected to ... claims that cities are defending the interests of cab companies in enforcing their laws are complete bullshit.

      Uber never has been, and never will be the underdogs ... and this never has been, and never will be, about protecting entrenched players.

      It's about cities being able to regulate industry players to a minimum standard.

      So, if in my city Uber drivers are willing to get commercial licenses, hold the proper insurance and drivers license, and have the same video devices installed for the safety of everybody (you know, like an actual legal cab company) ... I'm sure people would say they're welcome. But Uber claiming they shouldn't have to is bullshit.

      As long as Uber insists that they aren't subject to laws, they continue to be lying bastards in my book. They're just a company whose business model is in trying to insist laws regarding taxi companies don't apply to them.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    7. Re:s/uber/taxi. by John+Bokma · · Score: 1

      Maybe in a first world country? I live in Xalapa, Veracruz (Mexico) and the quality (and hence safety) between cars differ hugely. As for security, in some places security writes down the taxi number and the destination because of how dangerous taking a taxi has become. Or: maybe a taxi service in Saudi Arabia doesn't add that much (if at all).

    8. Re:s/uber/taxi. by Burz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Uber was supposed to be a way to do IGT (intelligent grouping transportation) where the trips of different customers are automatically combined to save money/resources.

      Instead, it turned into another war over cheap labor and skirting regulation with no actual ride sharing. Uber are liars and cheats who conduct 99% of their business on public streets.

    9. Re:s/uber/taxi. by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      Profit. Their basic business model depends on an endless supply of drivers that will work cheap and who can be replaced at will, local exceptions don't change that.

    10. Re:s/uber/taxi. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Is it necessary to use the same cameras to make you happy, or would an equivalent device satisfy you?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    11. Re:s/uber/taxi. by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I pick up my car on Thursday. It is a new BMW, of course, and is the 640Li. I paid cash for it, it is "bespoke." I did not finance it as financing is a waste of money in many cases. Now, my car was around $135,000 with all the applicable fees, add-ons, sales tax, etc... I typically buy a new car every two years and sell the used car instead of trading it in.

      Could I ever, realistically, pay for my car by driving for Uber? I do not mean my time, maintaining it is free though they might be angry when they find out I am using it for commercial reasons but it is warrantied, or even my consumables - could I even pay for the car even if I drove for the Uber Black program? Assume that I am in the busiest area that they operate in. (I am not -- there is no such service here but we are pretending.)

      Do the drivers even gross above minimum wage on average? We can even ignore net income. I just want to know if I could pay off my car before it was too old to even qualify for them. I can not find statistics on this though it may be because I am not sure about Uber and which queries to use.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    12. Re:s/uber/taxi. by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I found stats that indicate that it was $19/hr in Boston a couple of years ago. I'd have to drive for something like 6750 hours just to pay for my car. I could get a cheaper car.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    13. Re:s/uber/taxi. by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Control is an illusion.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
  6. Law of unintended consequences by linear+a · · Score: 1

    Sometimes 'unintended consequences' are beneficial.

    1. Re:Law of unintended consequences by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Sometimes. Most of the time, the opposite happens.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
  7. Re:They already have taxis... by Pax681 · · Score: 1

    so Uber is adding nothing. Nothing. All Uber is doing is trashing society by pushing their temporary contractors that aren't really employees and using them to put hard working people with jobs out of work. They are taking benefits from people that have jobs. They are killing jobs. Families are starving because of Uber's Republican-style hate of working people. The women in SA can already ride in a taxi and support society rather than riding in Uber and supporting our own destruction.

    ... not only that bud , but you can bet your last fucking penny their P.R dept will be pushing this shit everywhere to show what a "vital" service they supply..... but we all know you are spot on

  8. Uber can't change the chaperoe/mahram law. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The shari-ah holds that women are not allowed to travel alone without a proper male relative acting as chaperone. It is known as maharam or honor law. Women caught in Saudi Arabia without a proper male relative in the company of an unrelated male can be prosecuted. Since all uber drivers are male, (women can't drive in Saudi Arabia) and likely to be unrelated, unless these women have a constant supply of "proper" male relatives, they would not have freedom of movement, uber or no uber. I am no islamic scholar, so not very sure of this: The relatives who can act as chaperones are husbands, brothers, fathers, sons. Not very sure who among the in-laws are allowed to be chaperones as per mahram.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:Uber can't change the chaperoe/mahram law. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Most of my knowledge of women and driving in Saudi comes from watching the movie Wadjda, so I may be totally wrong. But I think that it's common for women to be driven by an employee of the family (maybe that counts as a male relative?). The problem is that these drivers see their employers (the women) as beneath them, and realize that the women have no alternative, so are often late and rude. So, if Uber offers a viable alternative, it's an improvement.

    2. Re:Uber can't change the chaperoe/mahram law. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

      If I am trying to sugar coat Islam, you think I would even bring up the concept of mahram? And give a link to an Islamic site to back it up? Think before you shoot buddy.

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    3. Re:Uber can't change the chaperoe/mahram law. by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      FTFA:

      Because Uber drivers are working through established transportation companies, Abukhater says that the company's presence in the country hasn't raised any new concerns about women traveling alone with male drivers, which has been an issue in other regions (including the U.S.), where new ride sharing services, including Uber, rely on car owners who aren't licensed as transport providers.

      So I guess they found a way to fudge around the chaperone law. Families already hire personal drivers as part of their household servant staff. So maybe an Über driver is considered as part of the staff . . . ?

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    4. Re:Uber can't change the chaperoe/mahram law. by bsolar · · Score: 2

      The very article you cite is a dissertation about how Islamic law actually *doesn't* require such an escort in all cases.

    5. Re:Uber can't change the chaperoe/mahram law. by Blaskowicz · · Score: 1

      Eh, why not have a dog accompany her! That would be very injurious to say that to a muslim or arab, though.
      In 20th/21st century Western countries, we wouldn't give a shit about that - dogs are "educated" and well fed, and a companion, rather than wandering hungry beasts lookedat with a mix of fear, contempt and whatever feelings you would get for something impure, not unlike excrements.

      Islam seems to micromanage everything. If this woman thing is about safety from rape, abduction and "seduction" etc. and by reading some of the clauses in your link it would seem that strong rule of law would be enough, no relatives needed. But strong nation states didn't exist in 8th century (and non-muslim nation-state vs muslim realm or muslim nation-state is a funny issue on top of that).
      It's interesting that women's age may be a distinction : you wouldn't let a 14-year-old girl wander alone at night, usually, even with no Islam in your country. But what I've read from the link leaves a general "age limit" unresolved, me thinks they'll bother any woman under 50 or 60 or such..

      I am no islamic scholar, I only have that enlightened guess that only muslims can decide these things for themselves, well in the countries they run. Or to decide to make the politics secular, which doesn't have to change all social norms..
      If that holds, then the western media / websphere / blogosphere etc. attitude of telling them what they should do is out of touch. Christians and atheists telling them to fuck off, that they're from the Dark Ages, immoral etc. : well they've got our opinion but they don't like to hear such things lol.
      From an irreligious view, I believe that strong security and relative prosperity allow to ease on women's right issues. Too see what happens when you take away any semblance of both just look at the long list of countries ravaged by the carnivorous behaviour of US and allies in the last 13 years.

    6. Re:Uber can't change the chaperoe/mahram law. by Lost+Race · · Score: 1

      You misunderstood. The entire comment was predicated on "if you were an Islamic scholar." The antagonism is directed at Islam, not at you.

  9. Isn't this illegal? by undefinedreference · · Score: 3, Informative

    I haven't been in The Kingdom (KSA) in about 7 years, but back then women couldn't go anywhere without an adult male relative (father, brother, or husband) to protect them unless there were no men there. They had massive malls that were staffed and accessible only to women, where they could freely walk and talk with other women wearing western-style clothing if they so wished.

    Since only men can legally drive on public roads, how does this work?! Wouldn't they still need to bring an adult male guardian along?

    1. Re:Isn't this illegal? by cdrudge · · Score: 2

      It's largely unenforced. How does a Uber driver driving a woman in the back seat look different than a guardian brother/husband/father driving the same woman?

      It's like speeding 5 MPH over the speed limit. Everyone does it. Everyone gets away with it. And sometimes you have to lest you get run over by all the other traffic. But it's still illegal. And if a police officer wanted to pull you over he could and there's not much you could do if they really wanted to enforce the speed limit strictly.

  10. Not that I agree with the policy but wth? by shaitand · · Score: 1

    How is there a social stigma that applies to riding the bus alone where there are dozens of witnesses to your behavior that wouldn't apply to riding alone in a strangers car?

  11. Re:stopgap by undefinedreference · · Score: 3, Informative

    I can only imagine that the autonomous cars will be a hit, but the driving there is truly frighteningly-atrocious. I was very glad to have ex-military drivers with special training and armor-plated SUVs, not for fear of some attack (honestly, they like us more than you might imagine), but because going out on those roads is taking your life into your hands.

  12. Re:stopgap by undefinedreference · · Score: 2

    I can't imagine it being any worse than it already is. Drivers there are unbelievably scary.

  13. How come we've never "liberated" SA? by tekrat · · Score: 4, Insightful

    19 of the hijackers on 9/11 were Saudi. Osama Bin Laden was Saudi. We claimed to have "liberated" Iraq because Saddam's people were oppressed (after the WMD argument fell apart); so, why have we never "exported freedom" to Saudi Arabia?

    Exactly what stranglehold do they they have on us (other than having gobs of oil)? And not like that's never stopped us before... I assume they must have Child-Porn pictures with Bush and Cheney. I can't quite understand the thinking of Dubya, assuming he was thinking at all....

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
    1. Re:How come we've never "liberated" SA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      A. The Saudis were friends with the Bushes.

    2. Re:How come we've never "liberated" SA? by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 2

      Because the Bushes are cowards.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  14. Re:They already have taxis... by tompaulco · · Score: 1

    "relied on private drivers (if they could afford them) or the limo companies that Uber now works with (for regulatory reasons, Uber in Saudi Arabia does not work with contracted drivers using their own cars—all Uber rides go through existing companies"

    From the article, no change of labour is occurring in saudi, just a change in the access to it.

    Yes, so the headline would still be just as accurate if they put the word "Taxis" in instead of Uber.

    --
    If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
  15. Changing harmful practices is better by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    Half measures allow you to paper over the intolerance and sexism endemic to that society.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    1. Re:Changing harmful practices is better by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      Iraq is Iran. How naive you are. Everyone knows that. You probably think Turkey is attacking ISIL when they are actually attacking Kurdish rebels who have been attacking ISIL.

      The facts on the ground are not in favor of papering over sexist actions that go against human rights.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  16. Unaccompanied Women Trouble in Saudi Arabia by Ugmo · · Score: 1

    Even Uber lets women are who are not allowed to drive transportation, women not in the company of a husband, male relative or other man assumed to be such, are subject to prejudice and rude behavior from males. In other words, if you are a woman walking around with out a male protector you are considered to be a prostitute or someone who does not mind men thinking you are a prostitute.

    I don't think Uber is a cure-all for the oppression women suffer in Saudi Arabia.

  17. Re:stopgap by Khashishi · · Score: 1

    She can still hire a driver if she wants to when she has the right to drive.

    Drivers are cheap in Saudi Arabia because they are practically slaves.

  18. Bullshit by sociocapitalist · · Score: 1

    "Saudi Arabia general manager Majed Abukhater says that while his office doesn’t keep precise gender data, observation and anecdotal evidence suggest that 70% to 90% of Saudi Uber riders are women."

    This article is a pro-Uber bunch of marketing bullshit. Uber isn't changing anything for women in Saudi.

    --
    blindly antisocialist = antisocial
  19. Re:This isn't really Uber though. by xenotransplant · · Score: 1

    Thanks for the negative mod points. Troll? Pointing out how this article is talking about Uber like they're the new Messiah for Saudi women makes me a troll? I love you slashdot, for all the horrible idiots with mod points.