Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?
-
@levicki said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@boomzilla In other words, just making traffic worse for everyone? Why I am not surprised? Oh wait, I knew that's going to happen because people are selfish bastards.
What? TDEMSYR
-
@levicki said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@boomzilla I was replying to your quote:
Most users take their own private Lyfts and Ubers, shunning pooling even though it costs them more. Rather than the apps becoming a model of algorithm-driven efficiency, drivers in major cities cruise for fares without passengers an estimated 40% of the time.
What part of my reply you don't understand?
The part where you imagined that drivers waiting for passengers was an obvious corollary to your (not unreasonable) take on human nature.
-
@levicki said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@boomzilla said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
The part where you imagined that drivers waiting for passengers...
But I didn't even imagine that, sorry if you got the wrong impression.
Hallucinated?
I was just saying that people when left to their own devices will prioritize themselves, because they assume that everyone else will do that, and they don't want to be the stupid ones. I have more sympathy for the drivers than the passengers in this case.
Again, more stuff that makes no sense at all in this context. Yes, I know what you meant regarding people, but I can't see the connection here and you haven't even tried to draw one, expecting us to see whatever magical link exists in your brain.
One thing TFA didn't mention was about how often taxis cruise around looking for fares and their effect on traffic. I wouldn't be surprised to find out ubers did it less than cabs, especially since they can sit in one spot because they don't have to actually cruise for passengers.
I often see some of them chilling out in my supermarket's parking lot. Of course, I'm in the suburbs where lots of free parking lots are a thing. Certainly a lot less opportunity for that in urban environments like San Francisco.
-
@levicki said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
The priority system actually encourages them to queue at the closest taxi station and wait for rides.
I don't know how things work in other parts of the US, but where I've lived, taxi stands are pretty much non-existent except at major airports, where there is a continuous stream of people who need rides right there where the taxis are waiting. I don't know what other taxi drivers do between fares, but on the very rare occasions I've needed a taxi in the suburbs, the wait was between a half-hour and an hour; wherever they're waiting or cruising, it's not within 2.5 km.
-
@HardwareGeek it's not exactly news that the American taxi system is fucked up. That's why Uber found it so much easier to get a footing there than in lots of other countries
-
@boomzilla what is the Murder Inc. stuff doing in the Gamer-gate thread?!?!1!
-
@levicki said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@boomzilla said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
The part where you imagined that drivers waiting for passengers...
But I didn't even imagine that, sorry if you got the wrong impression. I was just saying that people when left to their own devices will prioritize themselves, because they assume that everyone else will do that, and they don't want to be the stupid ones. I have more sympathy for the drivers than the passengers in this case.
You forgot one thing. For people who do actually prioritize the environment, there is a far better alternative than Uber carpooling: taking a bus. It's not that most people are selfish bastards - it's that the services offered by Uber don't appeal to the good ones.
-
Yet another European underestimating the size of US metropolies.
-
@Gąska yeah. I just drove back and forth across my home metro. It's not that big in population, only a couple million, but it's about 25 miles. And that's not even max distance--the whole thing is like 40 miles across.
-
@Gąska said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
there is a far better alternative than Uber carpooling: taking a bus.
Until you realise that the realities of modern bus systems mean that to get where you are going, you'll have to take four different buses with a ten minute wait at each change. Or if you can get there on one bus without changing, it takes an hour for a journey that you could make on foot in 57 minutes. That is why people don't take buses.
-
@Steve_The_Cynic said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Gąska said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
there is a far better alternative than Uber carpooling: taking a bus.
Until you realise that the realities of modern bus systems mean that to get where you are going, you'll have to take four different buses with a ten minute wait at each change.
I didn't say environmentalists are smart people.
-
@Gąska said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Steve_The_Cynic said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Gąska said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
there is a far better alternative than Uber carpooling: taking a bus.
Until you realise that the realities of modern bus systems mean that to get where you are going, you'll have to take four different buses with a ten minute wait at each change.
I didn't say environmentalists are smart people.
At least smarter than people who think everyone using an UBER will solve the traffic problems.
-
@Gąska Except that buses are much much dirtier per passenger mile than cars.
Which is cleaner? A car driving exactly where it needs to go with four passengers getting 60mpg on petrol with an engine that has extensive emissions controls, or a bus driving round and round the city in the longest route possible with ten passengers on getting 4mpg on diesel with absolutely no emissions controls?
-
@gordonjcp said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Gąska Except that buses are much much dirtier per passenger mile than cars.
Which is cleaner? A car driving exactly where it needs to go with four passengers getting 60mpg on petrol with an engine that has extensive emissions controls, or a bus driving round and round the city in the longest route possible with ten passengers on getting 4mpg on diesel with absolutely no emissions controls?
You assumed a full car of 4 passengers while only a half full bus. Why not compare a single person in the car to a half full bus, or a full car to a full bus? Why do you assume the bus has no emission controls but the car gets 60mpg, in the city? Pretty unbalanced. In the context of UBER taxis, two people in the car also is just a single passenger, btw.
And all the traffic those cars cause compared to buses.
-
@topspin Because buses are full exactly twice a day, and the rest of the time they're driving around more-or-less empty.
Have you ever seen a bus? Thick clouds of dense black smoke from the exhaust. Modern Euro6 engined ones have some emissions controls, so they're only permitted to spew out fairly thick clouds of very dark grey smoke.
All petrol cars made in the past 20 years are essentially zero emission. Diesels, not so much but still far cleaner than buses.
-
@gordonjcp said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
All petrol cars made in the past 20 years are essentially zero emission.
That's bullshit.
They give out different emissions to diesel engines (excluding CO2) but they most certainly do give out emissions. Petrol engines tend to produce nitrogenous oxides (that are not immediately visible, but which are most certainly a significant health problem especially when exposed to sunlight) whereas diesels are more inclined to produce particulates.
-
@dkf They only put out nitrogen oxides if they are extremely defective.
-
@gordonjcp said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@dkf They only put out nitrogen oxides if they are extremely defective.
Maybe we should move this discussion to the garage...
Filed under: Doing the needful, Just joking
-
@gordonjcp said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
A car driving exactly where it needs to go with four passengers
No. This just doesn't exist. Perhaps you should get your head out of your tushy and look at the number of passengers in a stream of cars during rush hour in a major(-ish) city.
-
@gordonjcp said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@topspin Because buses are full exactly twice a day, and the rest of the time they're driving around more-or-less empty.
Have you ever seen a bus? Thick clouds of dense black smoke from the exhaust. Modern Euro6 engined ones have some emissions controls, so they're only permitted to spew out fairly thick clouds of very dark grey smoke.
All petrol cars made in the past 20 years are essentially zero emission. Diesels, not so much but still far cleaner than buses.
I have. Not sure where you are, but over here literally none of them exhaust black smoke.
Have you ever seen traffic? It isn't exactly filled with Smart-class cars transporting 4 passengers each. You're comparing worst-in-class to best-in-class performance.I can only find numbers for around here, so let's have a look at that:
Buses in Berlin (2017 numbers) range between 3.7 mpg and 5.6 mpg Diesel, and average at 71 mpg per passenger. That is the effective average over a mixed fleet. For comparison, my small-ish car gets 52mpg petrol peak, around 40mpg for my driving mix, and in the city stop-and-go maybe 30mpg, depending on traffic.
German-wide average is 32 mpg (petrol + diesel), for city traffic it's apparently closer to 27mpg (of course, you'd have to multiply that with the number of passengers). No idea where you are, but I kind of doubt the numbers are much better in the US, with their SUVs and pick-ups. From my NYC experience, it seemed absolutely moronic to use a car instead of public transport, as there is constant congestion, so it's both slower and more expensive. Everybody using their own car exacerbates that problem and makes it even less efficient.Now, if you take the most-efficient small car (and 60mpg seems a lot) and pack it with 4 passengers, you might beat buses. But that's not what the actual average looks like, as mentioned in the article. Add to that the idling of taxis just driving around and you're rather close to a single passenger average.
If you're arguing hypotheticals, you'd get better results again if you looked at the best possible buses and always have them filled completely.
-
@topspin said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
German-wide average is 32 mpg (petrol + diesel), for city traffic it's apparently closer to 27mpg (of course, you'd have to multiply that with the number of passengers). No idea where you are, but I kind of doubt the numbers are much better in the US, with their SUVs and pick-ups.
Heh...my sedan gets about 30mpg on the highway. Closer to 18 "city," which is more suburban than urban.
-
@gordonjcp said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@dkf They only put out nitrogen oxides if they are extremely defective.
Nitrogen oxides are an inherent product of internal combustion engines. The only way to eliminate them completely would be to run the engine on pure oxygen instead of air. At least a few of the reasons that would be impractical should be readily apparent.
-
@gordonjcp said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Gąska Except that buses are much much dirtier per passenger mile than cars.
Which is cleaner? A car driving exactly where it needs to go with four passengers getting 60mpg on petrol with an engine that has extensive emissions controls, or a bus driving round and round the city in the longest route possible with ten passengers on getting 4mpg on diesel with absolutely no emissions controls?
Where do you live where every car owner drives a Prius but every bus is an out of tune piece of shit from the 70s?
-
@HardwareGeek said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@gordonjcp said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@dkf They only put out nitrogen oxides if they are extremely defective.
Nitrogen oxides are an inherent product of internal combustion engines. The only way to eliminate them completely would be to run the engine on pure oxygen instead of air. At least a few of the reasons that would be impractical should be readily apparent.
True, but stuff like catalytic converters reduce the amount emitted, which isn't what he'd originally said, but might have been what he meant.
-
@gordonjcp said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
Have you ever seen a bus? Thick clouds of dense black smoke from the exhaust.
Have you? None of the buses where I live exhaust any black smoke, and haven't for decades
-
@boomzilla said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@HardwareGeek said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@gordonjcp said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@dkf They only put out nitrogen oxides if they are extremely defective.
Nitrogen oxides are an inherent product of internal combustion engines. The only way to eliminate them completely would be to run the engine on pure oxygen instead of air. At least a few of the reasons that would be impractical should be readily apparent.
True, but stuff like catalytic converters reduce the amount emitted, which isn't what he'd originally said, but might have been what he meant.
And there are similar particulate reduction systems for diesel engines. (I believe they use urea as a key component, but never understood exactly what was involved.)
-
@Steve_The_Cynic said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
Or if you can get there on one bus without changing, it takes an hour for a journey that you could make on foot in 57 minutes.
So for the price of 3 additional minutes, you get to travel sitting down and arrive rested? That's a pretty worthwhile tradeoff in a lot of people's minds.
-
-
@Mason_Wheeler said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Steve_The_Cynic said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
Or if you can get there on one bus without changing, it takes an hour for a journey that you could make on foot in 57 minutes.
So for the price of 3 additional minutes, you get to travel sitting down and arrive rested? That's a pretty worthwhile tradeoff in a lot of people's minds.
You're not wrong, except that unless the traffic is really fucked up, doing it by car involves a fairly direct route without too many weird stops, and takes fifteen minutes at the most, while that bus takes in every weird neighbourhood and stops here there and everywhere.
-
@gordonjcp said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Gąska Except that buses are much much dirtier per passenger mile than cars.
Which is cleaner? A car driving exactly where it needs to go with four passengers getting 60mpg on petrol with an engine that has extensive emissions controls, or a bus driving round and round the city in the longest route possible with ten passengers on getting 4mpg on diesel with absolutely no emissions controls?
Umm... what cars get 60 MPG? My car, which was near the very top of fuel efficiency available when I bought it ~6-7 years ago, gets around 40 under ideal conditions, and a bit less in typical city driving.
-
@gordonjcp said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
60mpg on petrol
Also,
Can 4 passengers even fit in a car that gets 60mpg? Well, I guess if they're about 5 years old, they might...
-
@dcon said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@gordonjcp said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
on diesel
Many of our buses now use LPG.
Same here, where "here" means Lille, in the north of France.
-
@strangeways said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@gordonjcp said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
A car driving exactly where it needs to go with four passengers
No. This just doesn't exist. Perhaps you should get your head out of your tushy and look at the number of passengers in a stream of cars during rush hour in a major(-ish) city.
That includes the carpool lane. The majority of those cars have one person. (Either because they're cheating, it's pay-to-play [Lexus lanes], or they have a sticker because they run on alternate fuels [including battery])
-
@Mason_Wheeler said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@gordonjcp said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Gąska Except that buses are much much dirtier per passenger mile than cars.
Which is cleaner? A car driving exactly where it needs to go with four passengers getting 60mpg on petrol with an engine that has extensive emissions controls, or a bus driving round and round the city in the longest route possible with ten passengers on getting 4mpg on diesel with absolutely no emissions controls?
Umm... what cars get 60 MPG? My car, which was near the very top of fuel efficiency available when I bought it ~6-7 years ago, gets around 40 under ideal conditions, and a bit less in typical city driving.
Depends on what size your gallons are, I guess. In proper Imperial gallons, 60 mpg is a chunk easier than it is with those wimpy American ones.
-
@Steve_The_Cynic said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Mason_Wheeler said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Steve_The_Cynic said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
Or if you can get there on one bus without changing, it takes an hour for a journey that you could make on foot in 57 minutes.
So for the price of 3 additional minutes, you get to travel sitting down and arrive rested? That's a pretty worthwhile tradeoff in a lot of people's minds.
You're not wrong, except that unless the traffic is really fucked up, doing it by car involves a fairly direct route without too many weird stops, and takes fifteen minutes at the most, while that bus takes in every weird neighbourhood and stops here there and everywhere.
And involves dealing with strange, smelly, violent, or otherwise uncomfortable fellow-riders. That's the real problem with riding public transport--all the other people.
-
@Benjamin-Hall said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Steve_The_Cynic said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Mason_Wheeler said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Steve_The_Cynic said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
Or if you can get there on one bus without changing, it takes an hour for a journey that you could make on foot in 57 minutes.
So for the price of 3 additional minutes, you get to travel sitting down and arrive rested? That's a pretty worthwhile tradeoff in a lot of people's minds.
You're not wrong, except that unless the traffic is really fucked up, doing it by car involves a fairly direct route without too many weird stops, and takes fifteen minutes at the most, while that bus takes in every weird neighbourhood and stops here there and everywhere.
And involves dealing with strange, smelly, violent, or otherwise uncomfortable fellow-riders. That's the real problem with riding public transport--all the other people.
As someone who regularly commuted on public transit for over a decade and ran into such people probably an average of less than once per year, that's not really a serious problem.
-
@Benjamin-Hall said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
That's the real problem with riding public transport--all the other people.
That and the above-mentioned facts that it takes much longer than driving a private vehicle, and you may still have to walk a significant distance to/from the nearest transit stop at both ends of your trip in weather that may, depending on your location and the time of year, be anywhere from extreme frostbite danger to your shoes are melting on the pavement.
-
@Mason_Wheeler said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Benjamin-Hall said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Steve_The_Cynic said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Mason_Wheeler said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Steve_The_Cynic said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
Or if you can get there on one bus without changing, it takes an hour for a journey that you could make on foot in 57 minutes.
So for the price of 3 additional minutes, you get to travel sitting down and arrive rested? That's a pretty worthwhile tradeoff in a lot of people's minds.
You're not wrong, except that unless the traffic is really fucked up, doing it by car involves a fairly direct route without too many weird stops, and takes fifteen minutes at the most, while that bus takes in every weird neighbourhood and stops here there and everywhere.
And involves dealing with strange, smelly, violent, or otherwise uncomfortable fellow-riders. That's the real problem with riding public transport--all the other people.
As someone who regularly commuted on public transit for over a decade and ran into such people probably an average of less than once per year, that's not really a serious problem.
Depends strongly on your location and route. I rode the busses in grad school (no car) for 6 years and ran into such people almost daily.
-
@Mason_Wheeler said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Benjamin-Hall said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Steve_The_Cynic said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Mason_Wheeler said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Steve_The_Cynic said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
Or if you can get there on one bus without changing, it takes an hour for a journey that you could make on foot in 57 minutes.
So for the price of 3 additional minutes, you get to travel sitting down and arrive rested? That's a pretty worthwhile tradeoff in a lot of people's minds.
You're not wrong, except that unless the traffic is really fucked up, doing it by car involves a fairly direct route without too many weird stops, and takes fifteen minutes at the most, while that bus takes in every weird neighbourhood and stops here there and everywhere.
And involves dealing with strange, smelly, violent, or otherwise uncomfortable fellow-riders. That's the real problem with riding public transport--all the other people.
As someone who regularly commuted on public transit for over a decade and ran into such people probably an average of less than once per year, that's not really a serious problem.
This differs with my experience, so I'll pretend I'm you and tell you that your experience never happened.
-
@Benjamin-Hall said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
Depends strongly on your location and route.
I've rarely had problems with people on transit. (In fact, I once met a guy who turned out to be a coworker, went to my church, and had a daughter the same age as mine, who eventually became best friends. Of course, that's a one in a million exception.) However, I've never lived nor taken transit in places like NYC, south Chicago, or east Oakland, where I think unpleasant encounters would be much more common.
-
@Steve_The_Cynic said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Mason_Wheeler said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@gordonjcp said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Gąska Except that buses are much much dirtier per passenger mile than cars.
Which is cleaner? A car driving exactly where it needs to go with four passengers getting 60mpg on petrol with an engine that has extensive emissions controls, or a bus driving round and round the city in the longest route possible with ten passengers on getting 4mpg on diesel with absolutely no emissions controls?
Umm... what cars get 60 MPG? My car, which was near the very top of fuel efficiency available when I bought it ~6-7 years ago, gets around 40 under ideal conditions, and a bit less in typical city driving.
Depends on what size your gallons are, I guess. In proper Imperial gallons, 60 mpg is a chunk easier than it is with those wimpy American ones.
But anywhere they would use those gallons uses liters instead
-
@hungrier said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Steve_The_Cynic said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Mason_Wheeler said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@gordonjcp said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Gąska Except that buses are much much dirtier per passenger mile than cars.
Which is cleaner? A car driving exactly where it needs to go with four passengers getting 60mpg on petrol with an engine that has extensive emissions controls, or a bus driving round and round the city in the longest route possible with ten passengers on getting 4mpg on diesel with absolutely no emissions controls?
Umm... what cars get 60 MPG? My car, which was near the very top of fuel efficiency available when I bought it ~6-7 years ago, gets around 40 under ideal conditions, and a bit less in typical city driving.
Depends on what size your gallons are, I guess. In proper Imperial gallons, 60 mpg is a chunk easier than it is with those wimpy American ones.
But anywhere they would use those gallons uses liters instead
Which are actually really tiny gallons.
-
@Benjamin-Hall said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Steve_The_Cynic said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Mason_Wheeler said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Steve_The_Cynic said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
Or if you can get there on one bus without changing, it takes an hour for a journey that you could make on foot in 57 minutes.
So for the price of 3 additional minutes, you get to travel sitting down and arrive rested? That's a pretty worthwhile tradeoff in a lot of people's minds.
You're not wrong, except that unless the traffic is really fucked up, doing it by car involves a fairly direct route without too many weird stops, and takes fifteen minutes at the most, while that bus takes in every weird neighbourhood and stops here there and everywhere.
And involves dealing with strange, smelly, violent, or otherwise uncomfortable fellow-riders. That's the real problem with riding public transport--all the other people.
Eh. Most of the time that's fine, but it's the complete lack of reliability that's the big problem for me. Even with GPS-enabled bus tracking, I still sometimes have "ghost buses" that never show up. The thing will say it'll arrive in 3 minutes, location last updated 25 seconds ago, then 3 minutes later it's completely gone from the list, and the next bus is "14 minutes away, based on schedule"
-
@HardwareGeek said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Benjamin-Hall said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
Depends strongly on your location and route.
I've rarely had problems with people on transit. (In fact, I once met a guy who turned out to be a coworker, went to my church, and had a daughter the same age as mine, who eventually became best friends. Of course, that's a one in a million exception.) However, I've never lived nor taken transit in places like NYC, south Chicago, or east Oakland, where I think unpleasant encounters would be much more common.
My two big experiences with public transport were in
- Gainesville, FL (a college town)
- Eastern Europe (cities all over Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia)
- (bonus off-by-one case) taking a greyhound bus from Idaho to Florida.
Different groups of strange people, but the strange people were common, if not omnipresent.
-
@boomzilla said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@hungrier said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Steve_The_Cynic said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Mason_Wheeler said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@gordonjcp said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Gąska Except that buses are much much dirtier per passenger mile than cars.
Which is cleaner? A car driving exactly where it needs to go with four passengers getting 60mpg on petrol with an engine that has extensive emissions controls, or a bus driving round and round the city in the longest route possible with ten passengers on getting 4mpg on diesel with absolutely no emissions controls?
Umm... what cars get 60 MPG? My car, which was near the very top of fuel efficiency available when I bought it ~6-7 years ago, gets around 40 under ideal conditions, and a bit less in typical city driving.
Depends on what size your gallons are, I guess. In proper Imperial gallons, 60 mpg is a chunk easier than it is with those wimpy American ones.
But anywhere they would use those gallons uses liters instead
Which are actually really tiny gallons.
I prefer to think of them as slightly larger quarts
-
@Benjamin-Hall said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
the strange people were common
Two of your three experiences involve people in or going to Florida. 'Nuf said.
-
@hungrier said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@boomzilla said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@hungrier said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Steve_The_Cynic said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Mason_Wheeler said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@gordonjcp said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Gąska Except that buses are much much dirtier per passenger mile than cars.
Which is cleaner? A car driving exactly where it needs to go with four passengers getting 60mpg on petrol with an engine that has extensive emissions controls, or a bus driving round and round the city in the longest route possible with ten passengers on getting 4mpg on diesel with absolutely no emissions controls?
Umm... what cars get 60 MPG? My car, which was near the very top of fuel efficiency available when I bought it ~6-7 years ago, gets around 40 under ideal conditions, and a bit less in typical city driving.
Depends on what size your gallons are, I guess. In proper Imperial gallons, 60 mpg is a chunk easier than it is with those wimpy American ones.
But anywhere they would use those gallons uses liters instead
Which are actually really tiny gallons.
I prefer to think of them as slightly larger quarts
Ah, baby gallons. Sure, that could work.
-
@Benjamin-Hall said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
the strange people were common, if not omnipresent.
[Insert "it takes one to know one" joke here. Adjust level of lewdness and inappropriateness to taste]
-
@Vixen said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
@Benjamin-Hall said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
the strange people were common, if not omnipresent.
[Insert "it takes one to know one" joke here. Adjust level of lewdness and inappropriateness to taste]
Oh, I'm absolutely strange. No question there. But not as outwardly strange as many of the people I met.
-
@HardwareGeek said in Is Uber the *worst* .com currently?:
I've rarely had problems with people on transit.
It depends a lot on what the route actually is. In particular, if it goes close to the local mental hospital then you can expect some… strange… experiences with fellow transit users.