Slashdot Mirror
Uber Accused of Cashing In On Bomb Explosion By Jacking Rates (thesun.co.uk)
After a bomb exploded in Manhattan, leaving 29 injured, people leaving the scene discovered Uber had doubled their fares. An anonymous Slashdot reader quotes The Sun:
Traumatized families caught up in the New York bomb blast have accused Uber of cashing in on the tragedy by charging almost double to take them home. Furious passengers have taken to social media to slam the taxi firm in the wake of the blast... Uber reportedly charged between 1.4 and 3 times the standard fare with one city worker saying he had to pay twice as much as usual. Mortgage broker Nick Lalli said: "Just trying to get home from the city and Uber f****** doubled the surge price."
"Demand is off the charts!" the app informed its users, adding "Fares have increased to get more Ubers on the road." Uber soon tweeted that they'd deactivated their surge pricing algorithm for the affected area in Chelsea, "but passengers in other areas of Manhattan said they were still being charged higher than normal fares." One of the affected passengers was Michael Cohen, who is Donald Trump's lawyer, who tweeted that Uber was "taking total advantage of chaos and surcharging passengers 1.4 to 1.8 times." And another Uber user tweeted "I'm disgusted. People are trying to get home safe. Shame on you #DeleteApp."
"Demand is off the charts!" the app informed its users, adding "Fares have increased to get more Ubers on the road." Uber soon tweeted that they'd deactivated their surge pricing algorithm for the affected area in Chelsea, "but passengers in other areas of Manhattan said they were still being charged higher than normal fares." One of the affected passengers was Michael Cohen, who is Donald Trump's lawyer, who tweeted that Uber was "taking total advantage of chaos and surcharging passengers 1.4 to 1.8 times." And another Uber user tweeted "I'm disgusted. People are trying to get home safe. Shame on you #DeleteApp."
how many times will the press run this identical story after an incident?
When demand increases the rates increase. This is done by software, not some evil Mr. Burns figure at Uber.
It's an algorithm. The more in demand the product is, the higher the price.
One of the affected passengers was Michael Cohen, who is Donald Trump's lawyer, who tweeted that Uber was "taking total advantage of chaos and surcharging passengers 1.4 to 1.8 times."
A lawyer complaining about being shafted? How ironic...
Take a taxi?
My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
On twitter.
Uber NYC @Uber_NYC 18h18 hours ago
Surge pricing has been turned off in the #Chelsea #explosion area. Allow extra time for drivers to navigate due to road closures. Stay safe.
Supply and demand. Market is efficiently allocating scarce resources. Price increase will increase supply providing consumers with more of the scarce resource. It's a thing of beauty really.
After a bomb exploded in Manhattan, leaving 29 injured, people leaving the scene discovered Uber had doubled their fares.
People called an Uber driver *into* a disaster area and/or potential terror/war zone for a ride home and are pissed that the rates went up? Hazard pay people. And private companies w/o public supervision can do whatever they want. If you don't like it, take a taxi or the subway, or fucking walk. First-world problems for sure.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Shouldn't he have been cheering Uber on, since what they were doing is pretty much following Trump's business playbook?
#DeleteChrome
... the actual value of a cab ride increases considerably. That's not manipulation, it's actually more valuable to have a car take you the same distance when you don't have the alternate choice.
Meanwhile, any Uber driver that had a bit of flexibility and could jump and make a bit of cash. And in the process, help relieve the crush of people that are stranded by shutting down a system used by more than 50% of commuters.
The wisdom of shutting down our world for each boo-boo remains undecided ...
Demand = Supply.
It's magic, as long as you have some way to keep it balanced.
Stupid headline driven sensationalist journalism.
--Q
If I were there I would evaluate other options for a millisecond, and then pay. Who gives a fuck?
I don't understand the mentality of a person who after a bombing, would "shame" someone who did not set off the bomb!!
Uber is exploiting people by using them as cheap labor. They need to be forced to pay them a living wage......... except when I need a cheap ride.
Late Stage Capitalism!!!
There were multiple bombs. If there were multiple bombs in MY city, I wouldn't be driving downtown back and forth in it, one or more of the other bombs might blow up. Even if there had just been ONE bomb, it isn't like you know that.
It seems reasonable that the contractors would want extra compensation for the risks they were taking to their life and property. Even soldiers get combat pay, and they have a full time job, not a series of gigs.
Not to mention Uber artificially lowers the price increases during high demand, so if the algorithm was allowed to work properly match the demand and supply curves those people would be looking at 20-30x increases... minimum... not 1.4-1.8x.
- These characters were randomly selected.
well that's how it works - first make the business harder for old, "regular" taxis, and then driving up the price when you're dominating the market. capitalism, baby. let's see, how that develops, looks like more and more people are getting fed up with it.
Repeat after me: Uber is NOT run by the government... that's both what makes it good... AND what leads to scenarios like this. You can't have the good (low fares, clean cars, drivers that give a shit) without allowing them to work with the free market (supply / demand).
That's a false dilemma. It's not an either/or situation with no middle ground. That is why we regulate most businesses to at least some degree. There is no such thing as a completely free market in any civilized country. Uber is no exception to that. You can have good quality service without allowing all the excesses of a completely unregulated market. Free markets are great until market failures occur. When pure self interest leads to situations where allocation of goods and services is no longer efficient or beneficial to society. If Uber is profiteering from terrorism then that is something that almost demands regulation since it clearly is not in the best interest of society at large.
so what's the problem?
Hey Cohen, tell that cheap bastard Trump you want fantastic, amazing limousine service
Pain is merely failure leaving the body
Supply and demand. Market is efficiently allocating scarce resources. Price increase will increase supply providing consumers with more of the scarce resource. It's a thing of beauty really.
That's the argument that war profiteers make. When there has been an act of terrorism or war that is NOT the time to increase prices to maximize profit. The market wasn't efficiently allocating scarce resources. What happen here was a market failure which is economic self interest resulting in outcomes that are actually negative to society. Uber was maximizing profit and there are times when that is unacceptable behavior.
Apparently, people would rather wait a long time for a ride home from some horrific event, than let market forces solve the problem of the sudden surge in demand. The problem is people viewing their needs in isolation, instead of in the greater context. If someone didn't like the price, they should forego the ride and let someone who wants it more than them to have it.
People called an Uber driver *into* a disaster area and/or potential terror/war zone for a ride home and are pissed that the rates went up?
Of course they are. You were expecting a different reaction? When was the last time you saw someone who was grateful for an act of war profiteering?
Aww poor little Mikey... Unbridaled capitalism isn't quite as nice when you're the one negatively affected, is it?
Why are they "accused" of jacking the price? "Described as" jacking the price would be a statement made in a moral society. In case any one forgot, Communism is the immoral social order. It's based on a lie that those who don't contribute, but "organize", are more competent at figuring out what is the appropriate cost of things. So when they don't understand why demand is surging (as it is in crisis), shortages are universal because those who can contribute cannot recoup their costs by increasing the prices. In Capitalism, a surge in demand creates a bubble of supply by willing contributors and the price quickly collapses when the demand is met. And the reason this happens is because prices increase. If there were more people in need of rides than willing drivers, a price could be increased until everyone able to give a ride would be willing to give rides (even those who would never consider doing so otherwise).
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
Last night when this happened the news was pretty much silent, or at least "understated" to put it mildly.
As for the "surge pricing" people are dumb and don't understand economics. What kind of dumb shit thinks you should pay the same rate during a time of high demand? I'm actually embarrassed for those whining about this. It's pathetic.
Where there's human suffering there's a profit
And just how do you suggest the algorithm could be improved to determine the difference between people leaving the area after a bombing and people leaving the area after SantaCon or a pillow fight flash mob or a BLM protest?
So far as I can imagine, it would have to be capable of monitoring and interpreting the news media in order to know, in real time, if people are leaving the area because of an attack, or some benign reason. That's a much more difficult AI problem than supply vs. demand in an area; especially considering that you must also to prevent false positives ID-ing hoaxes, false alarms, or other such trolling as real emergencies.
Imagine all the people...
Price is information about where demand meets supply. If an emergency arises and prices are not raised, it doesn't driver the extra suppliers to resolve the problem. If prices are raised, those who would not consider giving rides otherwise, would do so for profit. This resolves emergencies faster. Forbidding to increases prices in emergencies is immoral. It prevents the aftermath of the emergency from being alleviated as soon as possible.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
You keep saying that, and each time it's just as silly. Why would an Uber driver work in a more dangerous/chaotic situation if there isn't extra money in it? They'll just stay home, to avoid "profiteering" lol, and you can walk your ass home or wait for a taxi. Good luck.
I fail to see the down side to this kind of "profiteering". That's how markets worked. If they quadrupled their prices or more I can see a problem. But this is a case of price rising to create supply. If the price doesn't rise supply won't rise to meet it and then there won't be any available taxi's out of town. Higher prices are the lesser of the two evils.
If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
You wanted capitalism, you gotta take the good with the bad. So fucking deal with it.
How do they write an algorithm to predict whiny moralizing?
Here's a prediction: giving in or otherwise rewarding whiny moralizers will cause more people to whine and moralize about everything, all the time. The algorithm can then predict it to happen 100% of the time.
As far as I understood things, Uber's system automatically raises prices based on surges in demand. There's no human intervention involved.
So getting all upset at Uber for this is pointless. Yes, most companies like to give people some financial breaks in times of disaster, like cellphone companies waiving fees for residents in flooded area or areas hit by tornadoes. But Uber can't really do anything about the computerized system working as designed and re-calculating rates based on usage, as soon as an event happens like the bombs going off.
Maybe they'll decide to issue those people credits in the coming weeks? Who knows? But people getting all angry and deleting the app seems stupid to me.
people leaving the scene discovered Uber had doubled their fares
Typical rape culture.
Terrorism? We heard immediately after the incident that it wasn't terrorism, and every AP story thereafter seems to be reinforcing that angle.
Besides, Uber would probably only have to hire just a few extra people to monitor the news worldwide and enter a command to temporarily prevent rating spikes in emergency situations in a localized area. No need to figure out some complicated automated algorithm to do this.
Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
Uber most certainly didn't gouge. The surge algorithm is just that -- a surge algorithm. The same price would have been in effect after a major sporting event. The "just trying to get home safe" story doesn't flush either -- the bomb already went off. If you were that scared that another one was about to go off in the vicinity, you should have stayed inside vs. being out on the street in traffic.
But you've completely mischaracterized what happened. Uber didn't raise prices to take advantage of a terrible situation. Rather, a terrible situation triggered a surge in demand, to which Uber's algorithms correctly responded.
Uber's algorithms responded but I would argue there was nothing correct about their response. At MINIMUM Uber should donate any extra profit generated to help offset the costs to the victims and/or refund the extra charges to those who sought out their service.
A lot of people suddenly wanted rides, and Uber used it's algorithm to activate more drivers. That's not a market failure, That's the market "magically" solving the problem, efficiently and effectively.
WRONG. That absolutely is a market failure because it permitted self interested profiteering at a completely inappropriate time. It is no different than people who drive into hurricane disaster areas and charge obscene markups on vital supplies like water. That isn't efficient allocation of goods and services, that is a breakdown of efficient allocation.
Right...so forcing all taxpayers to shoulder the costs of deploying the national guard is more reasonable than expecting those who want a ride somewhere to pay for their ride. Got it.
Supply and demand, plain and simple. When demand goes up and supply remains constant, the price equilibrium shifts. That's about as basic as economics can get.
These whiny assholes could have also called a traditional taxi, waited three or more hours, and still paid 4x as much.
That's just showing a complete lack of understanding how Uber works. In case of emergency like this one, would you rather pay more for your fare, or wait indefinitely because there are not enough drivers? Those are the only two options. I personally would prefer pay more.
The way of getting more Uber drivers is to pay them more to incentivize them to come to work. If there is a sudden rise in demand, there will be a sudden increase in price.
This whole discussion is absurd for someone who has lived in a socialist country. If you keep the prices constant no matter what is the demand, it only results in empty shops. You can't cheat the market forces.
Why is quadrupling all of a sudden a problem? If that's what it takes to drive sufficient supply, then that's what it should do.
Regular taxis do this also but just lie about it and claim that they don't. I was stuck right after the aftermath of the Boston Marathon Bombing and the taxis were charging $100 to $200 for what was normally a $15-$20 ride. The only major difference is that Uber is open that they do this, and the direct impact is clear: more drivers get on the roads as the prices will bear it. Pretending that regular cabs don't do this in emergencies is just silly.
This is simply capitalism at it's finest.
Just like increasing the prices of other "must have" items.
Epi-Pens, Insulin, diabetes testing strips, etc.
Nestle has it right, water is not a human right. Pay for it.
Want a socialist paradise? Move to Canada, and donate all your organs when the state needs them.
Pretty obviously the surge pricing is needed, just as the message says to get more cars to an area - but also in addition as another poster noted, these drivers are driving into a potentially hazardous area...
Yet people are rightfully irked that in times of crisis the private car they hired is all out of Grey Poupon and a little more expensive than normal.
So what can Uber do to make everyone happier about this?
Since these events are hopefully somewhat rare, what Uber could do is to recognize times of crisis after the fact, and refund people's money to non-surge level pricing. But even more importantly, the drivers would get not just surge pricing, but 1.5x the surge pricing in payment.
This would make people happy because they wouldn't be paying a ton to leave a crisis area. Also this would REALLY mean more cars would head to the area as drivers knew they would collect a bonus on top of the surge so they'd have some motivation to head into a potentially risky area. It would cost Uber very little and provide a ton of great PR.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
There's a lot of hate directed at a company who has yet to actually displace Taxi services in a given area. Maybe next time Uber should take a stand and decide to completely shut down in an affected area out of respect for their drivers who have to drive around in the chaos and as a reminder to the general population that Uber is a choice. Don't like it, don't use it.
18/September: FUCK UBER. Price gouging bastards. #boycot #deleteapp #neverusingagain.
19/September: Wow taxis are really expensive! I wish there was less regulation and a free market alternative.
Kind of ridiculous for drivers who are scraping by to be offering charity to riders who might be much better off. I guess you could also ask the riders to "donate" but this is getting needlessly complicated. No one criticizes the police for collecting large sums of overtime off of tragedy, despite it being their job to prevent it
"Mortgage broker Nick Lalli"
was unharmed.
Uber didn't increase the rates because there was a bomb. Uber doubled the rate because nobody was traveling to the city, only away, so to get more drivers to make the one-way unpaid trip into the city to get a fair, they were paid for the empty portion by the person who wanted the ride.
The Uber rates aren't driven by disaster, but ride requests. This wasn't an evil plot, it was effective capitalism. If we can't tell the difference between capitalism and evil, that says something about both.
Learn to love Alaska
Year in, year out you tell me how much taxis are overpriced (which they need to be for overcommiting and having a fixed price), and after ruining Taxi companies while singing hymns to the free market about demand and supply, you complain that rates go up when the demand peaks?
It's not like Uber said "we will make money from these bombs" it's more like "demand goes up, since people like to get away from bombs and price goes up".
during terrorist attacks.
(I don't know about uber)
With apologies to Ernest Lawrence Thayer
The outlook wasn't brilliant for the student march that night;
The quads were filled with rent-a-cops and not a picket sign in sight;
With Cooney busted for possession, and Barrows, the riot laws;
A sickly silence fell upon the supporters of The Cause.
A straggling few got up to go, in deep despair. The rest
Clung to that hope which "springs eternal in the human breast;"
They thought, If only Ratzo could be rallying that mob,
We'd put up even money now, with Pope Ratzo at the quads.
But Flynn preceded Ratzo, as did also Jimmy Blake,
And the former was a no-good and the latter was a fake;
Forlorn, that stricken multitude discouraged by the odds,
For there seemed but little chance of Pope Ratzo's getting to the quads.
But Flynn let fly a bottle, to the wonderment of all,
And Blake, the much despised, set a bomb off in the hall,
And when the dust had lifted and men saw what had occurred,
Jimmy beaned the Dean of Students, while the bombed out library burned.
Then from five thousand throats and more there rose a lusty yell,
It rumbled through the valley, it rattled in the dell,
A Harley roared up from the street, and was tearing up the sod,
And Ratzo, Pope Ratzo, was advancing through the quads.
There was ease in Ratzo's manner as he wheeled into his place;
There was pride in Ratzo's bearing and a smile on Ratzo's face,
And when, responding to the cheers, he lightly gave a nod,
No stranger in the crowd could doubt `twas Pope Ratzo at the quads.
Ten thousand eyes were on him as he gunned the throttle loud;
Five thousand tongues applauded as he signaled to the crowd.
And while the nervous officers grabbed the night sticks from their hips,
Defiance gleamed in Ratzo's eye, a sneer curled Ratzo's lip.
And now a can of tear gas came hurtling through the air,
And Pope Ratzo stood a-watching it in haughty grandeur there,
Close by the haughty Ratzo , the can unheeded sped --
"That ain't my style," said Ratzo. "Break it up!" the coppers said.
From the streets, black with people, there went up a muffled roar,
Like the beating of the storm waves on a stern and distant shore.
"Kill them; kill the pigs!" shouted someone from the mob;--
And Pope Ratzo guns his engine, and wipes-out on the lawn.
With a fist of protest shaking, Pope Ratzo's visage shone;
He jumped back on his Harley; he bade the march go on;
The Harley takes off through the quads, 'till it hits a vicious bump;
And Pope Ratzo sails through the air, landing smack upon his rump.
"Fascists!" he screeched, "Capitalist, Imperialist, Racist, Sexist pigs!"
"If I must I'll ride a tricycle, but we'll have this march - you dig?"
They saw his face grow stern and cold; they saw his muscles strain,
And they knew that Pope Ratzo wouldn't lose that bike again!
The sneer is gone from Ratzo's lip; his teeth are clenched in hate;
He sniffs with cruel derision as he lets go of the brake.
And now he throws it into first, the clutch he now he lets go,
And now the air is shattered as the bike takes off - alone.
Oh! somewhere there's a campus town where they drum and chant all night.
They protest for the rain forest, and demand the carribou’s rights.
And somewhere bongs are being passed, and somewhere radicals shout;
But there is no joy at Old State U -- Pope Ratzo has Wiped Out!
Color me surprised. Not!
> And just how do you suggest the algorithm could be improved
There is an implicit assumption in your question.
Namely that an algorithm is the appropriate tool for the job.
Roombas spreading dogshit over every square inch of floorspace is a near perfect illustration of the problem with this mindset. And it is a lot more common than you might expect.
Not everything that counts can be counted and not everything that can be counted counts.
Define "terrorism" and define the entity to make the call whether an "incident" is terrorism or not. Was the OKC bombing "terrorism"? It was generally not described as such. How about a riot? Civil unrest, or terrorism? Seems like a vague and self-serving criteria to base things on. Being able to figure it out later is not the same as knowing it at the time. 9/11 was a "horrible event" that was even thought an accident at the time, so what do you do in such situations?
There is no algorithm that can evaluate that in real-time. So to require that would be unreasonable.
Learn to love Alaska
According to their promotional materials this is a feature of the app, they charge more during peak demand. Algorithms are fun.
No, they don't. The point of surge pricing is to motivate more drivers to appear; that is, to help riders. If they keep prices low, it just means that fewer people will get rides and drivers get less.
So, why do you hate drivers and passengers?
In times of serious emergency, Uber could gain considerable goodwill if they'd offer rides for no/heavily reduced fares. The driver would receive bonus pay and the passenger would get a reduced-fare lift. I mean, these events are rare, it's an opportunity to not fuck people over. They'd gain customers and make the drivers proud.
Act like the US healthcare system, but in reverse.
Cable news, security companies, the military industrial complex, politicians, etc. They'll all be cashing in on it.
The "free" in "free market" does not mean free of regulation, it means "open to all". eg: all markets, (free or otherwise), assume that property law exists and is enforced.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
I think that Uber is making the wrong decisions in these disaster scenarios. At least if you have an algorithm that responds to demand, you can stand behind it and say "this works as it is supposed to, and is designed to get the most number of people rides as quickly as possible". Once they start turning it on and off (when people complain), it starts to feel a lot more arbitrary and less fair.
Uber drivers are starving.. therefore bombings shall continue.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
So is the internet used to make their business possible. And the public airwaves (Cell Phones). Oh, and most if not all of the actual tech (e.g. the Expensive "Basic Science" that companies don't like paying for) was done on the public dime in Universities.
Screw Uber. They didn't build it. The only reason they exists is trillions of tax payer dollars paying for the infrastructure they use. Hell, I'll bet most if not all of their engineers were educated in public schools and Universities. They can make plenty of money providing a public service without gouging people. If they don't like that, let 'em build their own roads, their own Internet, stop using the public airwaves and stop hiring Engineers my tax dollars paid to educate.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
The problem was a lot of innocent people in a potentially dangerous area. The market didn't fix that. If anything it caused it (terrorists aren't terrorists for the sheer giddy joy of it. They're either loons who lack medical help or desperate people who've given up on life).
The "market" managed to airlift a few well off people out of harms way while ditching the poors. When socialists talk about market failures this is exactly what we mean. And don't give me some B.S. about limited resources. It's 2016 and a major metropolis lacks usable and safe public transportation for it's working class. That's not a resource problem, that's a human one.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
that there wasn't a safe way out of the Hazard zone outside of calling an Uber driver. A city like New York ought to have enough public transit to get people out and enough cops to respond to something like this to keep that public transit safe.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
But who gives a fuck if people are leaving an area due to a disaster unless they're actually in danger or injured? Are you saying that the handful of injured pushed up uber prices? Or that it was actually rational to think that if you were 4 blocks away, there will be another bomb where you are? If there's a mugging in the bar district in my city at 1:45am, should I get a 1x ride at bar close?
> resulting in outcomes that are actually negative to society
How exactly is denying people the option of getting a ride better than giving them the option to get a ride for $40? Those are the two choices - you either have a bunch of additional drivers work due to the higher pay, or you have them not work. Or would you FORCE people to drive toward the dangerous area, if you were king of world?
Let's consider what riders would prefer. Would riders prefer to not have a ride at all (because drivers stay home or drive in safer places), or would they rather pay a rate high enough to get a driver to come? We know that riders would prefer a higher rate than no ride at all, because they did in fact choose pay that rate, when they could have chosen to not get the ride.
> you find other means to deal with the situation up to and including the national guard.
The National Guard was ordered deployed to Louisiana on Friday, August 26, 2005. On September 1st, five days later, they arrived at the Super Dome. On September 3rd and 4th, they evacuated the people waiting in the Super Dome.
Personally, I'd rather pay an extra $20 than wait five to seven days for a ride out.
The US government is designed to be *fair*. It is not designed to be *fast*. Uber is fast.
Surprise surprise the secret-SJW Trump supporters of slashdot are trying to shut me down for giving his con away.
Does it really matter if an explosion, fire or other disaster was terrorism or caused by something else? People still need to get home.
Seriously, how stupid do you have to be to not understand this?
There's not some sitting in Uber HQ with his hand on a knob that controls the surge amount. Surge pricing is based on an algorithm which is based on the ride data. It has no idea about terror attacks or other disasters.
for Trump's lawyer. Seriously fuck that guy and his fascist demagogue of a client.
"Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my Presidency. I'm fucked."; ~ Donald J. Trump
Could go to the fare, ask him to cancel and then charge the fare 75% of what uber wants
Buy a fucking car and quit bitching. This is what you get when you rely on the market.. You are squeezed. Own your shit and quit bitching. Welcome to the real world...
I see a lot of claims of "surge" pricing creating extra cabs.
No, you don't. You just can't read. Or I should say, cannot understand what you are reading...
Uber raises prices when cars are in high demands to create a lure to get more drivers to an area. It's never a guarantee but statistically if you raise the price you pay drivers (all of whom are independent people driving on whatever schedule they like) more of them will come to take advantage of the extra money they can earn for the same work...
I mean, you CAN understand why someone might drive across town to earn $50 when they wouldn't for $20, right? Right?
Then again, you probably have never worked a low end job and actually can't understand that... sigh.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
How would you make the uber drivers go into an area they don't want to go into, if it isn't by offering them more money?? Armed police?
You ask for volunteers just like we do for most disasters.
Are all the cops volunteers who work for free?
Are all the doctors volunteers who work for free?
Are all the funeral homes going to work for free?
Are all the people who clean up and fix things working for free?
Are there ever enough volunteers?
So why are you picking on Uber?
Correction. It's an INSUFFICIENTLY SOPHISTICATED algorithm. Fixed that for you.
Correction. It's an algorithm that DOESN'T DO WHAT YOU WANT IT TO DO. Fixed that for you.
Would riders prefer to not have a ride at all or would they rather pay a rate high enough to get a driver to come
That presumes a false dilemma of exorbitance or nothing. They would prefer the lower rates.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
Where said windfall precedes them going out of business due to unchecked gouging.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
Simple. There is a direct correlation between the number of Muslims in an area, and the probability of a violent terrorist attack.
So here we have a situation in which supply and demand are balanced by a computer program and in a so-called capitalist nation, it is somehow considered an unfair advantage. Could this be an admission that we really are living in a socialist society.
Then less drivers that would have been on the rd, are.
And the consumer, who would have otherwise PAID the raised price, is without a ride.
Thanks to the all knowing benevolence of a bureaucrat.
But most humans cannot relate to algorithms as algorithms, we can only relate to them as we relate to humans. And if a human did this thing, we would see that human as evil.
This cannot be changed. The algorithm can however either be programmed with "humanity", or tweaked by a human when the human sees that it is acting "evil".
Let the Invisible Hands shrug the Atlases. Trust me, the results will be like... farting unicorns.
This is BASIC economic theory - too little supply + too much demand = higher prices.
Don't like it? Use some other method of transportation., Oh none is available? Tough. Pay or walk.
Why people get to whine about this is beyond me. The drivers and company still have costs - despite the fact that some schmuck decided to blow something up. What a 3rd party did of their own volition is irrelevant to the price Uber charges.
When they act like scumbags, they're called a taxi firm. The are usually referred to on slashdot as angelic entrepreneurs smashing the system - an app may be revolutionary but they have always been a taxi firm.
... is how you run a business (in this day and age, anyway).
Can't find much trace of it, but the optimal solution in this case would probably be surge pricing, but only in the immediate area of the hazard. Drivers who are willing to face the hazard would get the hazard pay, and they could maximize the hazard pay by getting as many people as possible outside of the risk zone as quickly as possible, taking them to the edge of the safe zone and turning around to pick up more.
Actually, they should have an evacuation mode beyond surge mode to pack the cars as much as possible. The surge pricing would also help pay for extra computing power to help plot optimized evacuation routes as the drivers in the hazard zones pick up full loads of passengers on their ways to the border.
Outside the high risk area, hazard fares might or might not be in effect. Probably yes, but that is just the normal market mechanism and it is justified in the usual way, by the need to attract more drivers into the area that has a flood of customers.
Anyway, it seems as usual to be intuitively obvious to the most casual observer, but none of the "insightful" comments offered a natural hook. More disappointing, there weren't any "funny" comments. At least not visible and modded that way.
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
When demand increases faster than supply, prices increase. That's Econ 101. Sure, it's kind of shitty to do in response to a disaster, but Uber did reverse the automated price increase in the area, which de-shittifies the situation. It still makes sense that drivers, who are generally human and humane, would need to be offered extra money to go pick up someone on the other side of the city instead of helping those who are trying to get away from an explosion.
Really? Do you have the source code ?
Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
Seriously, how stupid do you have to be to not understand this?
There's not some sitting in Uber HQ with his hand on a knob that controls the surge amount. Surge pricing is based on an algorithm which is based on the ride data. It has no idea about terror attacks or other disasters.
Then perhaps the whole basis of Uber is flawed?
The fact that you can make money from something does not necessarily make it acceptable. Slavery made lots of people lots of profit until the "evil government" stepped in with anti-free market laws making it illegal.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
If only travellers had access to some form of transit that had well-regulated fare structures in place to avoid the supply-and-demand effects of Uber's surge pricing.
What a world it would be if people had another option!
"How would you make the uber drivers go into an area they don't want to go into, if it isn't by offering them more money?? Armed police?"
In germany taxi can be driven by anyone there is no medaillon, insurance is special but open to eve4rybody havign a taxi driving license. But you have to answer yes to all taxi call, even if it means going to an area you don't want to AND failure to comply can lead to license removal.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Market value also represent the earning potential future. Which is why despite being very profitable a company which announce less profit for the future despite still being positive will drop in value, and a company which lose money but has a potential gigantic future market will still be highly valued. Heck look at amazon. So aprt of the action value is representing the value of its assets but aprt of it is a gamble on nwhat it will earn in the future.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Really? Do you have the source code ?
I have to agree with GP on this. No one needs a source code to understand this but rather observe the behavior of the app in different situations (unless you have no programming concept). It is an algorithm. Uber set up an arbitrary number of requests within an area. If the request number goes up and passes the setup number, a surcharge is applied. There would be different level (e.g. multiplier) for request numbers.
If Uber intended to jack the price up because of the event, they would have to hire some people watching news on all places and adjust the ride price accordingly. Why would they need to pay extra to those people while they could simply quantify the requests within their program?
Anyway, if anyone doesn't know, Lyft have exactly the similar algorithm as well. And I believe all other share riding apps have the similar algorithm too.
I don't care for Uber, Lyft, or any share riding apps. I feel that their business model is ethically wrong. It is similar to a class action where the money actually goes to corporations and their drivers get something which is just enough to keep them going (or a bit more if they work very hard).
Take a CAB if you think Uber's pricing structure is unfair.
Isn't that the whole point of Uber? To give people a broader *choice* in what service they use to get from A to B?
Uber has a notion of surge pricing that comes into effect anytime that a demand for its services exceeds some threshold, and that is just part of how Uber operates. Because of the nature of how demand for such services works, it is characteristically more likely that such surge pricing will occur at times when it might appear exploitative due to the pressing need for travel services that is inherently part of why demand is exceeding supply in the first.
I could understand being upset about this if some evil mastermind in the company were sitting behind a desk waiting for these kinds of crises to come up and then going and adding insult to injury by raising prices at these inconvenient times, but that is not how surge pricing works, as far as I understand it. It is, to the best of my knowledge, just determined by an algorithm that only takes into consideration the demand rates for its services.
But hey.... I'm sure that people would rather think that somehow the raised prices is about them personally.
Honestly, it just makes a whole lot more sense to take a taxi if you think Uber's fluctuating pricing structure is unfair.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
You comment will make SJW's heads implode, thank you good sir!
Uber needs a new 'no surge' option.
You can opt for not paying the price but drivers can choose to pick up surge fares before normal fares.
That way you can be a cheap prick and wait for the fares to die down or you can pay the extra 30-50% to get out of the area immediately.
A smart company would spin this in such a way that prices across the board gradually rise 50%, and then this would be the 'uberCheap' option that is as cheap as the old ass uber. That way there is no PR hit for 'paying more to leave earlier' it's instead 'pay less and wait a little longer' - even though it's the same fucking thing, people are dumb.
Besides Uber rants, wasn't there a time when ***only*** yellow cabs were allowed for taxis? I remember in 1990s traveling to NYC particularly at airport there were signs that only yellow cabs are allowed taxis, everyone else is forbidden so don't jump into those cabs.
Was it back in 1970s that cabbies were able to make a lot of money? Kind of like waitresses back then when they didn't have to declare tips as taxable income? Though the movie is fiction, watching Taxi Driver few months ago what stood out was the character was making a lot of money spending all his awake time on the road. In reality was it like that back in the days? Few other items that caught my interest was in beginning where Robert DeNiro character interviews for a cab driver job, manager asks for a chauffeur license which he has (I'm wonder that is something just don't simply get at a moments notice but maybe thats too much to explain in the movie). Another was the manager was reluctant to hire DeNiro but when asked about military service, DeNiro replied Marines Corps. Manager, "yeah, I was also in the Marines." (in other words, "You're hired!")
there is also this "cab medallions" worth big bucks. I could never figure this out, it seems everyone has strong opinions but little knowledge (typical of internet posts). It seems it has mythical aspects like what is said back in the days of tax rates at 94% but nobody ever paid that amount because in reality there were loopholes.
mfwright@batnet.com
The quoted complainers are a mortgage broker and a Trump attorney. Two people who's profession is fucking people for imagined dollars. Talk about pots calling kettles black.
....how do you ration one ride?
How are you going to force drivers out there⦠if I were a driver if have gone in there and done fares for $200 minimum
Because the staffers you mention don't RAISE THEIR RATES upon disasters.
They may work overtime, but do not raise their rates. Plus local governments (city, county, state, tribal) are eleigible for reimbursement on such staff via emergency grants. A commercial ride service raising their rates during community duress is, by definition, NOT volunteering but ARE preying on & capitalizing on folks being impacted by the emergency.
In otherwords, the people are serviceing the company's needs for steady business, not the company serviceing/volunteering towards the community- which the other staff are.
You know the difference...
.. would that be ok? Bottled water prices by law can only be raised so much during a crisis before it is considered price gouging. How is critical transportation any different?
Gosh - didn't an article run in /. last week about having a Computer as a Manager? I know I read it somewhere.
This idea that "Uber" raised rates is false - who is "Uber?" The Computer Algorithm did it - there was unlikely any humans (initially) involved. Uber did it -- "they" are automated. This idea that people believe there's some person in a dark room controlling fares with a click of the mouse is humorous.
But hey - the algorithm did it's job. Raised rates to get more drivers on the job (although wasn't that also disproven a few months ago?). Anyhow- supply and demand in action. People could walk. Or take a regular (regulated) taxi. I'd suggest the metro but understand that might feel unsafe in a trying time like this.
Higher prices for such critical goods are a good thing. People who can avoid taking a uber will do so, leaving more for those who need them. At the same time, this will cause even more drivers to move towards the area / keep working in the area. One might argue that moral people would already do these things, but getting amoral people to contribute is still a good thing.
unless people who really needed it were priced out of a uber ride, this seems like an all-round win to me.
I wonder how many folks demanding free rides would ever themselves be willing to give a free ride to a stranger... ever, let alone during a disaster.
Whenever Uber cancels surge pricing, it should give a 'badge' to drivers who picked up fares in the area. Customers could see that 'High Speed Steve' was also a driver who picked up people in Manhattan during the 9/17 bombing. 'High Speed Steve' would get more business in the future (or some other benefit).
And this bad because.....?????
Besides, Uber would probably only have to hire just a few extra people to monitor the news worldwide and enter a command to temporarily prevent rating spikes in emergency situations in a localized area.
You mean like:
Uber soon tweeted that they'd deactivated their surge pricing algorithm for the affected area
Guess they already did that.
Just because people are stupid doesn't mean capitalism is bad. By analogy, let's say your dad has stage 4 cancer and has an operation to extend his life. The operation is going well by then he dies on the operating table. You might, under the same stupid and misguided logic of your own assumptions listed above, declare that the medical profession is evil. It doesn't make it so, but I am sure you could convince a bunch of people to follow you in this idea if you put it on the Internet with the proper heart string pulling emotional appeals. There's even a ready-made fertile audience of recently discredited anti-vaccers just itching to support you in your unfounded attacks on the medical profession. Regardless of the level of support, it doesn't mean that calling something evil makes it so.
When the only tool you have is a claw hammer every problem starts to look like the back of someone's skull.
OKC bombing was then and has since been routinely referred to as "domestic terrorism".
But thank you for playing!
First: It's fucking Uber, they can do what they like to. We know they are doing shit.
Second: If you rely on Uber, you're left alone if anything happens. Don't rely on Uber alone.
Third: When everyone wants to get away, there IS surge and many people will be happy to pay twice the price, just to get a ride before somebody else gets it. If Uber limits the price, there will not be more rides available.
*Designed*. Where the Constitution is the design document. Laws made by representatives of the citizens, open, fair trials, etc.
Since then, various administrations have stretched the Constitutional language considerably. The current administration declared that *because* the elected Congress declined to pass the change to immigration law that the executive wanted, that therefore authorized the executive to rewrite the law.
Still, the government has public hearings, open bidding for contracts, etc. Uber doesn't hold public hearings before they adjust their policies.
Overtime is raised rates, by definition.
You are giving them surge pricing for paying them outside of normal contract hours.
You wouldn't pay them outside those hours unless there was an event that required them.
Surge pricing is like overtime for uber drivers. The algorithm decides to give every driver overtime pay to come work.
I don't see why you can't get this?
Check out the numbers. A rate increase of 60%-80% in the required areas during highest demand does in fact increase the number of drivers willing to serve that area. That makes perfect sense - I have a full time job, so I wouldn't normally drive for Uber, but I thought about driving just a few hours per week during peak demand.
Since a higher rate gets more drivers offering rides in an area with lots of people wanting rides, it means more people get rides. When there are more people wanting rides than there are drivers, fewer drivers actually means some people aren't served. That may not play well with the ideology you wish for, but it's fact. It's not a "false dilemma", it's a very factual one. Not a fiction imagined by Marx, but real numbers.
"exorbitance" you say. We're not talking about rates going up 10X. Not even doubling. If the typical market-negotiated value of a certain trip is $20 during a time of low demand, I'd say that $35 is about what I'd expect if I wanted a part-time driver to drop what they are doing and drive toward danger to come get me. It seems quite reasonable to me.
You believe this. You don't have much evidence - except some rudimentary black box testing, but you believe.
Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
Interesting. I've read down this far. This isn't the only posting that's questioned this, but it seems that no-one is willing to answer it appropriately.
His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
I don't like the way you painted whiny moralizers with such a broad stroke. Its not fare.
His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
"a few extra people to monitor the news worldwide and enter a command to temporarily prevent rating spikes in emergency situations"
What is your plan to provision enough drivers for the load?
His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
So why are you picking on Uber?
Perhaps because, among all the groups you just listed, they're the only ones who suddenly raised their price.
If the price suddenly quadruples the economy is no longer serving the people and the government should step in to assure the service will continue to be available. In this case by tasking national guard or army transport units to help.