But no, you were not punished for it. Uber offered you better weekly incentives if you were found to be working for Lyft. It was a way for them to undercut Lyft since they were bigger and had more funding than Lyft.
And since Lyft usually has less drivers, it's Lyft that looks bad to potential customers when Uber gives a fare to a driver who does both Lyft and Uber.
On a Chromebook with Crouton on it, the crapware is the OS verification that comes up in developer mode.
It is so bad. I hide my Chromebook when anyone visits my place. Because if I don't and they open the screen. They'll just follow the instruction on the screen which says to press the spacebar and that will wipe my own custom version of linux and reinstall ChromeOS on it.
Yes, BMW is worse than Harley Davidson in terms of maintenance and cost of ownership, but both are actually pretty bad. LAPD should just have gone with a Japanese brand like Yamaha instead.
the job is tough and high stress, perks like this improve working conditions and make for better officers as long as it is not abused
You wanna bet that the people using those cars are the high ranking officers or the administrative staff of those high ranking officers (and not the stressed frontline police officers that you're talking about). Because that's what happens when you have a limited amount of perks to give out, they tend to percolate up to the top.
You're assuming that the CEO is truly interested in autonomous vehicles, and not just chasing the latest trend just to get some free publicity for his brand.
The chip readers work differently in the US. Before the transaction is authorized, the amount is verified through a centralized database. Plus all the handshake protocols are done synchronously and no information is allowed to be cached.
This is why the chip readers in the US at times seem to be taking forever to process transactions and the chip readers in Europe are actually quicker than their European magnetic strip reader counterparts.
So in the US, I really doubt that it's the chip readers are even broken. It is more likely that a store owner decided not to use that feature until the business could switch to a more reliable and blazing fast internet connection, or until the business could get more cashier staff to deal with the extra wait time and queue time this created during peak business rush hours.
Literally, the guy who phoned it in has deliberately obstructed justice
What the article says may have been true years ago, but it's not true now (at least not in my area). The way Uber HQ maintains security now is actually much more sophisticated than that. The thin client. That part is still true, but there is no pager, no number, nothing like that.
Uber HQ knows what's going on in the local offices simply because they're constantly listening in through real-time audio conferencing (for all I know they could be using constant video-conferencing too) in addition to the real-time screen-sharing as well.
I've witnessed this first hand this multiple times as an Uber driver. Ask a question the frontline employee doesn't know how to answer and you'll see that the front line employee puts his headset on and starts having a conversation with a remote supervisor who already knows the answer and who is already looking at the same remote screen as he does. And if there is a commotion in the office, you can bet the remote supervisor will hear it (if not see it) himself in real-time. No one needs to tell him about it.
Are you sure that queue was for people buying an iPhone X, and not people who got too shitfaced during New Years and who broke their iPhone?
PS: This is not a dig at Apple specifically. Samsung has the same problem. The Samsung S8 is also made of glass and will break the first time you drop it (for people who were too stubborn not to get a case for it right away). This is not to say that having highly breakable phones is not a commercial success. It is to some degree. But it does hurt those brands in the long run. After all, it's not like Apple and Samsung are the only two smartphone makers to choose from.
I, for one, am betting on AI being the best hope. Let AI watch conversations on games (where it is a private affair, mind you, not a constitutional issue), and start cracking down on overly-aggressive players before they can turn into hazards.
Modded 5 insightful. Seriously? AI is already moderating Youtube comments. How well do you think that's going?
And in games only? How do you plan on training the AI anyway? I can just imagine an AI sending a SWAT team to my place just because I said "Fred, Shoot that guy! Finish him off!" during a Call of Duty game.
The claims are so over the top that it would be expected no reasonable person would believe they actually had scientists applying scientific methods to the match-making algorithm. This should have been a clear and obvious case of mere puffery.
It didn't need to be.
eHarmony could have said. At eHarmony, we apply the scientific method. By paying for this service, you accept the possibility that you may be part of our double-blind control group, where we assign candidates semi-randomly. By semi-randomly, we mean we'll still try to find someone who fulfills your most basic criteria and who lives near your area, but some of those criteria will be chosen by a random algorithm instead of using our match-making algorithms. This is so that we're able to improve the success rate of our match-making algorithms over time.
Why shouldn't Spotify work like Netflix? If Netflix can't negotiate to buy a particular series, it doesn't show it to its customers. It is as simple as that. For instance, the last time I checked (six months ago, for all I know things may have changed by now), but Game of Thrones or South Park wouldn't stream on Netflix. So that left users forced to watch either show on HBO/Comedy Central (or if they're not in the right world region, forced to watch illegal streams).
Doesn't Spotify obey DMCA requests? What about if you're Howard Stern or Dave Chappelle? What if you negotiate an exclusive deal with satellite radio or HBO? What gives Spotify the right to break those agreements? If Spotify refuses to follow the law, why can't a judge just give their domain name away to the rights owners (like they did with AllOfMP3.com)?
The ones at CES won't have any defects. That's how it works. Make a batch of 10,000, send the one or two that don't have any defect to CES. Not that this matters much, it's not like we have any movie filmed at that resolution anyway.
But the parent you're replying to is suggesting to increase the expense of a security glitch.
We need a security commitment from the whole industry vs just one brave little company who would go out of business rather quickly.
But that's his point, isn't it? By targeting the C-level executives and making them liable for security breaches, then you're effectively solving the problem for everyone involved, from the small companies to the huge companies.
Taxis have the ability to stop to pick up someone, when they're already on the way to pick up someone else. Hence, they're unreliable (even if they're not supposed to do that, they still do it). In the most populated American cities, their total numbers were/are artificially limited, which means they were almost impossible to hail during peak hours (unless you're waiting for one at a very nice hotel, where the doorman has some leverage with taxi drivers because he can blacklist them if they do not show up).
Uber has an elastic workforce, elastic pricing, elastic capacity (if you know about UberPool), which adapts itself well to the peaks and valleys of market demand. The taxi industry, on the other hand, has a static workforce that doesn't adapt itself very well the ebbs and flows of the market.
Also, if you're having an emergency, you might as well order an Uber, a taxi, and a Lyft, all at the same time, and only get into the first one that arrives, but you'll find that if you cancel on the taxi, the taxi dispatcher will most likely blacklist your phone number for cancelling on them.
I can give you more reasons if you want.
In any case, you're correct that Uber is an awful company, for the workers, for the drivers, and for the investors, and I can give you a dozen reasons of why that is so, but from the perspective of the customer, the system works pretty well.
If you don't believe me, talk to any veteran policeman, or talk to any veteran bartender, where Uber (or Lyft) is strong, and they'll tell you that Uber/Lyft has saved thousands of people from getting DUIs in their city.
I'd rather pay to ride public transit or drive my own car instead of living in that dystopian hell.
Why would it be a dystopian hell? UberPool is opt-in only. People who want to pay full price just pick UberX. I assume it would be the same for this UberFree idea.
If you think that's a realistic view of the future...
This idea already exists anyway, but with shuttles. In the San Francisco Bay Area, there are free shuttles that take people from the Bart station to different malls and there are free shuttles that take people from the airport to particular hotels.
Slashdot Mirror
I can't believe that I'm defending the scum.
But no, you were not punished for it. Uber offered you better weekly incentives if you were found to be working for Lyft. It was a way for them to undercut Lyft since they were bigger and had more funding than Lyft.
And since Lyft usually has less drivers, it's Lyft that looks bad to potential customers when Uber gives a fare to a driver who does both Lyft and Uber.
call them part times jobs, thatâ(TM)s what they are
Part-time? I work between 32 and 55 hours a week driving for Lyft.
Windows Phone.
Does Siri allow you to access and delete your voice recordings like Google does on its privacy dashboard?
That's right. I didn't think so.
I can't believe you read that far.
This isn't 2020. Someone is just trolling Slashdot to see if they could get past the Slashdot editors, and of course, they succeeded.
I have the Pixel, the hardware it has is overkill for a Chromebook and it sucks the battery dry like no other Chromebook.
For guests, I keep an older Chromebook around. That one is great for that purpose. The thing never shuts down.
On a Chromebook with Crouton on it, the crapware is the OS verification that comes up in developer mode.
It is so bad. I hide my Chromebook when anyone visits my place. Because if I don't and they open the screen. They'll just follow the instruction on the screen which says to press the spacebar and that will wipe my own custom version of linux and reinstall ChromeOS on it.
Please read the article. He's using his own server/VPN as a proxy for the same video streams for comparison.
Yes, BMW is worse than Harley Davidson in terms of maintenance and cost of ownership, but both are actually pretty bad. LAPD should just have gone with a Japanese brand like Yamaha instead.
the job is tough and high stress, perks like this improve working conditions and make for better officers as long as it is not abused
You wanna bet that the people using those cars are the high ranking officers or the administrative staff of those high ranking officers (and not the stressed frontline police officers that you're talking about). Because that's what happens when you have a limited amount of perks to give out, they tend to percolate up to the top.
You're assuming that the CEO is truly interested in autonomous vehicles, and not just chasing the latest trend just to get some free publicity for his brand.
The chip readers work differently in the US. Before the transaction is authorized, the amount is verified through a centralized database. Plus all the handshake protocols are done synchronously and no information is allowed to be cached.
This is why the chip readers in the US at times seem to be taking forever to process transactions and the chip readers in Europe are actually quicker than their European magnetic strip reader counterparts.
So in the US, I really doubt that it's the chip readers are even broken. It is more likely that a store owner decided not to use that feature until the business could switch to a more reliable and blazing fast internet connection, or until the business could get more cashier staff to deal with the extra wait time and queue time this created during peak business rush hours.
Literally, the guy who phoned it in has deliberately obstructed justice
What the article says may have been true years ago, but it's not true now (at least not in my area). The way Uber HQ maintains security now is actually much more sophisticated than that. The thin client. That part is still true, but there is no pager, no number, nothing like that.
Uber HQ knows what's going on in the local offices simply because they're constantly listening in through real-time audio conferencing (for all I know they could be using constant video-conferencing too) in addition to the real-time screen-sharing as well.
I've witnessed this first hand this multiple times as an Uber driver. Ask a question the frontline employee doesn't know how to answer and you'll see that the front line employee puts his headset on and starts having a conversation with a remote supervisor who already knows the answer and who is already looking at the same remote screen as he does. And if there is a commotion in the office, you can bet the remote supervisor will hear it (if not see it) himself in real-time. No one needs to tell him about it.
Are you sure that queue was for people buying an iPhone X, and not people who got too shitfaced during New Years and who broke their iPhone?
PS: This is not a dig at Apple specifically. Samsung has the same problem. The Samsung S8 is also made of glass and will break the first time you drop it (for people who were too stubborn not to get a case for it right away). This is not to say that having highly breakable phones is not a commercial success. It is to some degree. But it does hurt those brands in the long run. After all, it's not like Apple and Samsung are the only two smartphone makers to choose from.
I, for one, am betting on AI being the best hope. Let AI watch conversations on games (where it is a private affair, mind you, not a constitutional issue), and start cracking down on overly-aggressive players before they can turn into hazards.
Modded 5 insightful. Seriously? AI is already moderating Youtube comments. How well do you think that's going?
And in games only? How do you plan on training the AI anyway? I can just imagine an AI sending a SWAT team to my place just because I said "Fred, Shoot that guy! Finish him off!" during a Call of Duty game.
The claims are so over the top that it would be expected no reasonable person would believe they actually had scientists applying scientific methods to the match-making algorithm. This should have been a clear and obvious case of mere puffery.
It didn't need to be.
eHarmony could have said. At eHarmony, we apply the scientific method. By paying for this service, you accept the possibility that you may be part of our double-blind control group, where we assign candidates semi-randomly. By semi-randomly, we mean we'll still try to find someone who fulfills your most basic criteria and who lives near your area, but some of those criteria will be chosen by a random algorithm instead of using our match-making algorithms. This is so that we're able to improve the success rate of our match-making algorithms over time.
Are users really complaining? I think you can already get Youtube on SamsungTV, SonyTV, LG TV, Chromecast, etc.
Why shouldn't Spotify work like Netflix? If Netflix can't negotiate to buy a particular series, it doesn't show it to its customers. It is as simple as that. For instance, the last time I checked (six months ago, for all I know things may have changed by now), but Game of Thrones or South Park wouldn't stream on Netflix. So that left users forced to watch either show on HBO/Comedy Central (or if they're not in the right world region, forced to watch illegal streams).
Doesn't Spotify obey DMCA requests? What about if you're Howard Stern or Dave Chappelle? What if you negotiate an exclusive deal with satellite radio or HBO? What gives Spotify the right to break those agreements? If Spotify refuses to follow the law, why can't a judge just give their domain name away to the rights owners (like they did with AllOfMP3.com)?
The ones at CES won't have any defects. That's how it works. Make a batch of 10,000, send the one or two that don't have any defect to CES. Not that this matters much, it's not like we have any movie filmed at that resolution anyway.
But the parent you're replying to is suggesting to increase the expense of a security glitch.
We need a security commitment from the whole industry vs just one brave little company who would go out of business rather quickly.
But that's his point, isn't it? By targeting the C-level executives and making them liable for security breaches, then you're effectively solving the problem for everyone involved, from the small companies to the huge companies.
Just let nature take its course and wait until the company goes bankrupt on its own.
I personally do not think there is any danger of a consumer accidentally buying a Steve J Jobs Tablet instead of an iPad.
Taxis have the ability to stop to pick up someone, when they're already on the way to pick up someone else. Hence, they're unreliable (even if they're not supposed to do that, they still do it). In the most populated American cities, their total numbers were/are artificially limited, which means they were almost impossible to hail during peak hours (unless you're waiting for one at a very nice hotel, where the doorman has some leverage with taxi drivers because he can blacklist them if they do not show up).
Uber has an elastic workforce, elastic pricing, elastic capacity (if you know about UberPool), which adapts itself well to the peaks and valleys of market demand. The taxi industry, on the other hand, has a static workforce that doesn't adapt itself very well the ebbs and flows of the market.
Also, if you're having an emergency, you might as well order an Uber, a taxi, and a Lyft, all at the same time, and only get into the first one that arrives, but you'll find that if you cancel on the taxi, the taxi dispatcher will most likely blacklist your phone number for cancelling on them.
I can give you more reasons if you want.
In any case, you're correct that Uber is an awful company, for the workers, for the drivers, and for the investors, and I can give you a dozen reasons of why that is so, but from the perspective of the customer, the system works pretty well.
If you don't believe me, talk to any veteran policeman, or talk to any veteran bartender, where Uber (or Lyft) is strong, and they'll tell you that Uber/Lyft has saved thousands of people from getting DUIs in their city.
Most leases have mileage limits. If you're doing Uber, you can't have that. You're easily doing 5,000-6,000 miles a month.
Their mission is to keep drawing in investment money from venture capitalists.
Don't forget the pyramid.
The venture capitalists themselves are hoping to sell off after an IPO.
I'd rather pay to ride public transit or drive my own car instead of living in that dystopian hell.
Why would it be a dystopian hell? UberPool is opt-in only. People who want to pay full price just pick UberX. I assume it would be the same for this UberFree idea.
If you think that's a realistic view of the future...
This idea already exists anyway, but with shuttles. In the San Francisco Bay Area, there are free shuttles that take people from the Bart station to different malls and there are free shuttles that take people from the airport to particular hotels.