Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!)
-
@loopback0 said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@Rhywden said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@loopback0 Naw, those were not taxi drivers but private hire drivers.
Private hire drivers, for example, are not bound by the mandated taxi tariffs.
Ok fine but the regulations in question still seem pretty stupid.
You have to draw the line somewhere. And, no, it's not stupid if you want to have both regular taxis and something like a rental limousine service with a chauffeur.
Plus, from what I've been told about the amount of money Uber now charges, our fixed tariffs are competitive.
-
@Rhywden said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@loopback0 said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@Rhywden said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@loopback0 Naw, those were not taxi drivers but private hire drivers.
Private hire drivers, for example, are not bound by the mandated taxi tariffs.
Ok fine but the regulations in question still seem pretty stupid.
You have to draw the line somewhere. And, no, it's not stupid if you want to have both regular taxis and something like a rental limousine service with a chauffeur.
That's just begging the question. The quoted taxi regulations seem completely inane. What's the importance of the legal differentiation that you're concerned about?
-
@boomzilla said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@Rhywden said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@loopback0 said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@Rhywden said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@loopback0 Naw, those were not taxi drivers but private hire drivers.
Private hire drivers, for example, are not bound by the mandated taxi tariffs.
Ok fine but the regulations in question still seem pretty stupid.
You have to draw the line somewhere. And, no, it's not stupid if you want to have both regular taxis and something like a rental limousine service with a chauffeur.
That's just begging the question. The quoted taxi regulations seem completely inane. What's the importance of the legal differentiation that you're concerned about?
Why is it "inane"? You either are
- a taxi company and allowed to have your taxis drive around nilly-willy (and with special parking slots at train stations / airports / ...) but at fixed prices or
- a chauffeur service allowed to set your own prices but with the mandate that every trip begins and terminates at your home station.
Done. Easily discernible differences between the services. Last time I looked, most chauffeur services even want to stop at their home station in order to clean the limousine / bus / whatever.
-
@Rhywden the regulations I was calling stupid weren't those, but the ones I quoted a few posts ago.
-
@Rhywden said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@boomzilla said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@Rhywden said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@loopback0 said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@Rhywden said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@loopback0 Naw, those were not taxi drivers but private hire drivers.
Private hire drivers, for example, are not bound by the mandated taxi tariffs.
Ok fine but the regulations in question still seem pretty stupid.
You have to draw the line somewhere. And, no, it's not stupid if you want to have both regular taxis and something like a rental limousine service with a chauffeur.
That's just begging the question. The quoted taxi regulations seem completely inane. What's the importance of the legal differentiation that you're concerned about?
Why is it "inane"? You either are
- a taxi company and allowed to have your taxis drive around nilly-willy (and with special parking slots at train stations / airports / ...) but at fixed prices or
- a chauffeur service allowed to set your own prices but with the mandate that every trip begins and terminates at your home station.
Done. Easily discernible differences between the services. Last time I looked, most chauffeur services even want to stop at their home station in order to clean the limousine / bus / whatever.
Why should anyone care about the "every trip begins and terminates at your home station" thing? Such a regulation would never have occurred to me. How would you even enforce it? If they're probably going to do it anyways, why bother with a law?
-
@loopback0 Then maybe they should work to get the regulations changed instead of trying to do an end-run around them in a country which is (in)famous for taking such regulations seriously.
What did they expect? Fanfares?
-
@boomzilla said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
Why should anyone care about the "every trip begins and terminates at your home station" thing? Such a regulation would never have occurred to me. How would you even enforce it? If they're probably going to do it anyways, why bother with a law?
Regulation, not law. If you don't understand it by now I can't help you.
-
@Rhywden said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
Then maybe they should work to get the regulations changed instead of trying to do an end-run around them in a country which is (in)famous for taking such regulations seriously.
Probably. I was just making sure we were talking about the same thing.
-
@Rhywden said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@boomzilla said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
Why should anyone care about the "every trip begins and terminates at your home station" thing? Such a regulation would never have occurred to me. How would you even enforce it? If they're probably going to do it anyways, why bother with a law?
Regulation, not law. If you don't understand it by now I can't help you.
Oh FFS . This is dumb pedantry even for you. Pretend I said regulation instead of law.
How could being a regulation vs law possibly make a difference about the usefulness of the content?
-
Most of the Uber drivers (and some of the “taxi drivers”) round here have vehicles that say “prior booking only” on them, meaning they’re licensed enough to take you where you want to go, and do so via an app but they can’t sit at the cab rank and wait for you to just get in, even though here in my town there are several such ranks.
What’s interesting also is that I’ve gotten a few lately, and Uber isn’t actually cheaper than the local cab company - assuming I can book on their shitty app (Uber’s app is infinitely better), or speak to an actual human to get the thing registered like some kind of extrovert.
The reason: “proper” cabs have a legally mandated pricing structure here via their meters, which is a base fee for getting in (and for the first x distance) then it’s a set increment of £0.20 per x distance thereafter. Seems to work out cheaper for short trips, haven’t done anything over £5 locally in a while.
-
@loopback0 said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
Ok fine but the regulations in question still seem pretty stupid.
Your inner criminal is showing itself. Every decent citizen will agree that all Uber employees should be hanged.
@Rhywden said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
What did they expect? Fanfares?
They get fanfares from me.
-
@MrL said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
Your inner criminal is showing itself. Every decent citizen will agree that all Uber employees should be hanged.
Why did you complain about stealing though?
-
@loopback0 said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@Rhywden said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
Then maybe they should work to get the regulations changed instead of trying to do an end-run around them in a country which is (in)famous for taking such regulations seriously.
Probably. I was just making sure we were talking about the same thing.
Except not. Other lawsuits about them operating without a license (which would require them to actually pay their taxes, first) or not checking that drivers have insurance are still very much not about "inane regulations".
-
@topspin but also not the "inane regulations" I was talking about
-
@loopback0 well, I don't really care that they also break some stupid regulations as long as they break ones that are not stupid.
-
@topspin said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@loopback0 said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@Rhywden said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
Then maybe they should work to get the regulations changed instead of trying to do an end-run around them in a country which is (in)famous for taking such regulations seriously.
Probably. I was just making sure we were talking about the same thing.
Except not. Other lawsuits about them operating without a license (which would require them to actually pay their taxes, first) or not checking that drivers have insurance are still very much not about "inane regulations".
What's the license for, specifically?
I'm not convinced on the insurance thing, but I can at least accept there's a reasonable argument about how much responsibility they might have for ensuring their drivers are following the law. I remember having to upload pictures of stuff like this back in the day.
-
@boomzilla said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
What's the license for, specifically?
For operating a taxi service, I assume.
-
@topspin said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@MrL said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
Your inner criminal is showing itself. Every decent citizen will agree that all Uber employees should be hanged.
Why did you complain about stealing though?
Because you don't see a difference between stealing and retarded regulations.
-
@boomzilla said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
How could being a regulation vs law possibly make a difference about the usefulness of the content?
Regulations can be changed way easier. As such, it would have been their prerogative to work through the system instead of trying to ramrod their way through.
That may work in the US, here it won't fly.
-
@Rhywden said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@boomzilla said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
How could being a regulation vs law possibly make a difference about the usefulness of the content?
Regulations can be changed way easier. As such, it would have been their prerogative to work through the system instead of trying to ramrod their way through.
That may work in the US, here it won't fly.
IOW, no, you have no defense for the inanity of the regulations.
-
@MrL said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@topspin said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@MrL said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
Your inner criminal is showing itself. Every decent citizen will agree that all Uber employees should be hanged.
Why did you complain about stealing though?
Because you don't see a difference between stealing and retarded regulations.
You literally said:
And of course, cheating on taxes is laudable.
If you like being an outlaw so much, why do you complain if someone steals from you?
-
@GuyWhoKilledBear said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
absurdly pedantic point, even for this website
-
@topspin said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@boomzilla said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
What's the license for, specifically?
For operating a taxi service, I assume.
Their whole history is about not being a taxi service, so I can understand why they didn't do that. I get that the Powers That Be in Germany have subsequently decided otherwise for whatever reasons. I don't claim to be an expert on German law (or regulations!) and culture but of course I have no problem calling either one dumb.
-
@boomzilla said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
Their whole history is about not being a taxi service
I think that's the crux of the matter. Basically, some European countries' reply to Uber's "we're not actually a taxi service!" argument is "yes you are, and stop using technicalities to pretend you're not".
-
@boomzilla said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@topspin said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@boomzilla said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
What's the license for, specifically?
For operating a taxi service, I assume.
Their whole history is about not being a taxi service, so I can understand why they didn't do that. I get that the Powers That Be in Germany have subsequently decided otherwise for whatever reasons. I don't claim to be an expert on German law (or regulations!) and culture but of course I have no problem calling either one dumb.
In Sweden, they definitely are a taxi company. A taxiväxel. and much like how companies making medical machinery, they can't opt out of the regulations in the market they work just because they don't provide the doctors/drivers to end users.
-
@topspin said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@MrL said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@topspin said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@MrL said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
Your inner criminal is showing itself. Every decent citizen will agree that all Uber employees should be hanged.
Why did you complain about stealing though?
Because you don't see a difference between stealing and retarded regulations.
You literally said:
And of course, cheating on taxes is laudable.
If you like being an outlaw so much, why do you complain if someone steals from you?
TDMS
I also don't condone murder - how's that for an unsolvable puzzle?
-
@boomzilla said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@topspin said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@boomzilla said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
What's the license for, specifically?
For operating a taxi service, I assume.
Their whole history is about not being a taxi service
Um, that doesn't pass the Duck test.
-
@boomzilla said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
IOW, no, you have no defense for the inanity of the regulations.
Because your definition of "inanity" and mine does quite differ. Stop trying to make yourself the sole arbiter of The Truth.
-
@Rhywden said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@boomzilla said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@topspin said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@boomzilla said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
What's the license for, specifically?
For operating a taxi service, I assume.
Their whole history is about not being a taxi service
Um, that doesn't pass the Duck test.
False.
-
@Rhywden said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@boomzilla said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
IOW, no, you have no defense for the inanity of the regulations.
Because your definition of "inanity" and mine does quite differ. Stop trying to make yourself the sole arbiter of The Truth.
I'll ask again: Please tell me about the importance of going back to the office. Perhaps there's some good reason to enforce that, but no one here has alluded to any.
-
@boomzilla I'd say it's so they don't clog up the parking spaces. The best parking spots would be those where you are most likely to find a fare.
I'm always slightly amazed to see how wide are streets in many US cities. Was it actually planned to have three lanes in every direction plus an entire lane (=1 average American ) wide sidewalk in the old days already? And then there's the grid system. Cities (especially centers) in Europe are fucking claustrophobic in comparison.
-
@Applied-Mediocrity seems like you'd want the taxis out of there too, though. But I agree that could be a problem in areas like that, which ironically include our cities. At least, that's how they feel to me coming from the suburbs with streets and commercial properties laid out for cars.
-
@boomzilla said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
Please tell me about the importance of going back to the office.
because a) shitty managers have no better way to micromanage or rule their workers except by fear in close proximity and b) office buildings don't buy themselves and someone has to pay for it and we can't possibly let the poor starving landlords be poor and starving.
At least these are the reasons I have observed.
-
@Arantor said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@boomzilla said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
Please tell me about the importance of going back to the office.
because a) shitty managers have no better way to micromanage or rule their workers except by fear in close proximity and b) office buildings don't buy themselves and someone has to pay for it and we can't possibly let the poor starving landlords be poor and starving.
At least these are the reasons I have observed.
I left it off that time, but the question was about why it should be enforced by law (or regulation if you have your stuck in your panties).
-
@boomzilla it would if some of our politicians had their way because they don't want to lose out on the rent.
I should note, one of our politicans visited offices in parliament and left 'while you were out' notes on their desks...
-
@Arantor for sure I would have accepted, "Our bureaucrats are corrupt and always on the lookout for way to separate the public from their money."
-
@boomzilla wait, this is a gameshow now? That's an unreasonably specific answer to expect :P
-
@Arantor I was paraphrasing.
-
@Rhywden said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@boomzilla said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
IOW, no, you have no defense for the inanity of the regulations.
Because your definition of "inanity" and mine does quite differ. Stop trying to make yourself the sole arbiter of The Truth.
Aren't you the one that's arguing that car service cars should need to go back to the office between jobs, but taxis should not? And that that distinction should be The Law?
Isn't that setting yourself up as the sole arbiter of The Truth?
-
@MrL said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@topspin said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@MrL said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@topspin said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@MrL said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
Your inner criminal is showing itself. Every decent citizen will agree that all Uber employees should be hanged.
Why did you complain about stealing though?
Because you don't see a difference between stealing and retarded regulations.
You literally said:
And of course, cheating on taxes is laudable.
If you like being an outlaw so much, why do you complain if someone steals from you?
TDMS
I also don't condone murder - how's that for an unsolvable puzzle?
Well, you laugh at me for complaining about them not paying their taxes when everybody else is supposed to, basically lauding them for stealing from the public. So I don't see why, in return, anybody should care if they steal from you.
-
@GuyWhoKilledBear said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
Isn't that setting yourself up as the sole arbiter of The Truth?
@Rhywden isn't the one who made the laws or regulations, and also isn't deciding "everybody except Uber needs to follow them". The laws are made by the legislative and the courts have, repeatedly, told Uber they have to follow them like everybody else if they want to operate.
I'm pretty sure nobody would give a single shit if you argued for changing some regulations (which I find dubious, because y'all had argued that Uber shouldn't have to follow "inane regulations" without even caring which regulations they don't follow).
-
@boomzilla said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
Their whole history is about not being a taxi service
You can't operate a taxi service and call yourself not-a-taxi-service. Otherwise I would just declare myself a tax-exempt charity.
In the same way their bullshit of being a "ride-sharing" app doesn't fly, because they are not. We have ride-sharing apps, and you can ask your passenger for a fee to share a ride. But that's absolutely not what the Uber taxis are doing.
-
@topspin said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@GuyWhoKilledBear said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
Isn't that setting yourself up as the sole arbiter of The Truth?
@Rhywden isn't the one who made the laws or regulations, and also isn't deciding "everybody except Uber needs to follow them". The laws are made by the legislative and the courts have, repeatedly, told Uber they have to follow them like everybody else if they want to operate.
People said those rules were dumb and he disagreed but can't say why.
I'm pretty sure nobody would give a single shit if you argued for changing some regulations (which I find dubious, because y'all had argued that Uber shouldn't have to follow "inane regulations" without even caring which regulations they don't follow).
Right now I'm just mocking you guys for having some silly government regulations and then blindly going along with them because They Are The Rules.
-
@topspin said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@boomzilla said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
Their whole history is about not being a taxi service
You can't operate a taxi service and call yourself not-a-taxi-service.
Of course not. Look, I get that for whatever reason the German government decided they were operating a taxi service but I wouldn't consider that to be a taxi service and even if it was I've learned that your rules about taxi services are pretty inane.
-
@boomzilla said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
Right now I'm just mocking you guys for having some silly government regulations and then blindly going along with them because They Are The Rules.
Mandating that drivers have insurance covering commercial transportation isn't silly. The supposed existence of some "silly rules" doesn't mean "Uber should be allowed to break all of them".
You are intentionally ignoring the point that Uber is gaining a competetive advantage by breaking The Rules that everyone has to follow. And they have a history of doing it. Their "disruptive" business model is basically about Breaking The Rules, not about being "app-based".
-
@boomzilla said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
but I wouldn't consider that to be a taxi service
What is a taxi service, then?
-
@topspin said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
Their "disruptive" business model is basically about Breaking The Rules
Which is why I don't use Uber. Lyft may or may not be breaking the same rules, but AFAIK they're not as blatant about it.
-
@topspin said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@boomzilla said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
Right now I'm just mocking you guys for having some silly government regulations and then blindly going along with them because They Are The Rules.
Mandating that drivers have insurance covering commercial transportation isn't silly. The supposed existence of some "silly rules" doesn't mean "Uber should be allowed to break all of them".
What are you talking about? We've already established that everyone agrees on this and that drivers apparently lied to Uber.
You are intentionally ignoring the point that Uber is gaining a competetive advantage by breaking The Rules that everyone has to follow.
No, I'm not.
And they have a history of doing it. Their "disruptive" business model is basically about Breaking The Rules, not about being "app-based".
Yeah, it seems like they totally misunderstood the laws in Europe. Cities in America tried to do to them the same things as you guys did but courts shut them down. Legislatures have responded by making some laws, such as the one I mentioned earlier where you register differently if you drive for a service like Uber.
-
@topspin said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
@boomzilla said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
but I wouldn't consider that to be a taxi service
What is a taxi service, then?
I gave it the duck test, as mentioned above. Also observed the evidence of courts in the US finding it wasn't a taxi service.
As I've said, I'm much less familiar with German law, but my understanding is that a big difference (and one that's been fought over in the US, too) is the difference between employees and independent contractors. Uber doesn't provide nearly the level of support to drivers like I'd expect from an employer. It seems like a much more distributed thing.
I think they should pay for whatever laws they actually broke, but I also think that when people see punishments for ridiculous laws (and regulations!) like have been brought up here people should be upset and get rid of that nonsense.
Also, as previously stated, taxis are notorious here for abusive, anti-competitive and anti-customer behavior, which is a big part of why Uber was so popular.
-
@boomzilla said in Uber, the sociopathic company full of psychopaths, now with murder! (Because regulations aren't "Disruptive" enough!):
I gave it the duck test, as mentioned above. Also observed the evidence of courts in the US finding it wasn't a taxi service.
As I've said, I'm much less familiar with German law, but my understanding is that a big difference (and one that's been fought over in the US, too) is the difference between employees and independent contractors. Uber doesn't provide nearly the level of support to drivers like I'd expect from an employer. It seems like a much more distributed thing.We had the "employee vs independent contractor" debate here too (I think the actual case involved food delivery services like Deliveroo, but it's pretty similar), the courts also used a "duck test", and IIRC they reached the opposite conclusion -- i.e., while the workers are technically independent contractors, the contract they have to sign is similar enough to an employment contract that they aren't actually independent.
I think the USA/EU difference boils down to two main factors:
- "spirit of the law" vs "letter of the law"
- "employer-friendly laws" vs "employee-friendly laws"