• Zenith@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    2 days ago

    Why tf is Uber notifying people of anything not directly related to a ride they’ve ordered??

    • ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 days ago

      I don’t think so.

      When my city had a soda tax, every fucking store put a sign out calling it a war on poor people tax. But it was a $0.10 increase on sugary drinks to add to the educational budget.

      Or maybe it is illegal but I live in a shit hole country.

    • eureka@aussie.zoneBanned from community
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      In what country? It’s pretty normal to see companies lobbying for policy here, or urging people to sign petitions.

      • jaschen@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        I don’t know. It just feels like something like this shouldn’t be legal

        • Griffus@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          In most of the world it is, and seeing how where it is not is developing, that is a vert god thing.

    • CalipherJones@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 days ago

      For some reason tech companies get a pass on a ton of regulations just because they’re a different form of whatever they’re replacing.

      “No no no Ubers not a taxi service it’s an app. toooootally different…” /s

    • Shardikprime@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Looks like an app notification

      They can send notifications through their app (which you installed and very probably accepted to in the terms and conditions) without any legal concern so yeah no.

      Even if you try fighting it they’ll just say hey it’s your phone man just uninstall the app

  • hark@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    ·
    3 days ago

    When tiktok did this, politicians took that as a sign to further ban efforts. When does uber get banned?

    • rmuk@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      When it stops being American and stops bribing American politicians, obvs.

  • tlekiteki@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    67
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    3 days ago

    Ridesharing is an improvement on some of the problems of privately owned cars. Its more equitable and accessible. It saves the necessity of giant parking lots.

    Public transit is even better!

    • hitmyspot@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      38
      ·
      3 days ago

      Yes, in principle. However, uber have a well known history of skirting labour laws, skirting taxi laws and doing so to undermine competition and then jack up prices. Risesharing is better than owning a car, but monopolies in how that works are not good for anyone except uber.

      • tlekiteki@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 days ago

        My high school econ teacher pointed out that New York used to have a fixed number of taxi licenses.This made competition illegal and kept the price up.

        • AA5B@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          Everywhere. That’s not a nyc problem.

          Ubers success is largely from breaking this customer unfriendliness. I use uber because the app is more convenient and effective than finding a taxi and trying to tell them where to go. Uber is less expensive, I can track the route if I disagree with it, and I have the opportunity to give feedback. At least as importantly, uber is far more common than taxis were. From a customer perspective, it’s a pretty good deal.

          However they bent a lot of laws to get there, and exploit their drivers. Limited taxi medallions were originally in place to establish standards for customer service mandate service to underserved areas, on the one hand and to support reasonable wages on the other, although likely got captured by the industry. Every “gig economy” business is bending employee/contractor law and most are likely dependent on violating minimum wages, benefits and worker protection laws, what little we have of that.

          Downtown I can get an uber in minutes, while there were never enough taxis. Here in the suburbs it takes a long time to get an uber, but medallions always required there be taxis on duty (I actually don’t know if taxis are still in business here). I imagine coverage is even worse in less populated or les desirable parts of the country, and that’s one of the things we lost with taxis

        • hitmyspot@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          I don’t know about NYC specifically, but that’s pretty common. Not only were there a set amount, there are set fees and minimum standards and requirements for people with disabilities and police checks for drivers etc.

          Uber circumvented a lot of those rules. The taxi industry was due for an update and vested interests were preventing that. However, we’ve exchanged one monopoly for another. And now, instead of lots of small business owners, we have one large business andots of wage slaves and surge pricing.

      • huppakee@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        3 days ago

        Free ride sharing (eg hitchhiking) is better than cheap ride sharing (eg blabla car) which is better then expensive ride sharing (eg a taxi) which - but all are better than there only beingprivately owned cars that are exclusively privately used.

    • LemmiChanga
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      Fediverse rideshare? Maybe. Not sure how the liabilities would fall.

    • capybara@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      Define ridesharing. I think of e.g. sharing a ride to work or school and not people working, often full-time, with sharing rides

    • Lyrac
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      3 days ago

      no need to kink shame

  • videodrome@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    57
    ·
    3 days ago

    “Everyone in the city”. Hyperbole much? They didn’t send it to every single person in the city.

    • TragicNotCute@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      63
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      I think you might have taken it a bit too literally. It’s clearly an uber push notification, so the implication is that everyone in the city (who uses uber and has the app installed) got a notification.

      • forrgott@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        3 days ago

        Or deliberately misquoting somebody to change the scope of their statement. “Everyone” is not in op post, unless he edited it out. I’m on op side here, though 😝

        • huppakee@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          3 days ago

          Not that i care that much about there being an exaggeration, but “Everyone” is literally in the title of the post? Or are you referring to the push notification as ‘the op post’??