

Uber Partners and Drivers - timjahn
https://partners.uber.com/#!/uberx/sf

======
josteink
What's up with the name? Uber? Is it supposed to be Über? And if so, how does
that even make sense?

What do they even _do_? I had to go to their normal homepage to get a vague
idea. They have a brand saying pretty much nothing.

This seems like a company prime for a future identity-crisis.

~~~
thetylerhayes
This comment just popped my Silicon Valley bubble.

------
robertwalsh0
I feel like this it just one assault away from hurting Uber's brand big time.

~~~
robbiep
The horse has sort of bolted on this one

[http://www.autostraddle.com/raped-by-an-uber-cab-driver-
horr...](http://www.autostraddle.com/raped-by-an-uber-cab-driver-horrified-by-
everything-152906/)

~~~
johncarrion
This article is terrible. There is no "rape", no "rapist", and no "survivor"
until a trial has been conducted. Until then, there is only an "accuser" and
an "accused". The article also links to a report that only 54% of rapes are
reported to the police. Until there has been a trial, there is no way to know
if there has been a rape. What they mean is that 54% of people who claim rape
do not report it to the police. I don't know they know that even.

~~~
venus
Yeah, that is a shocking article. The site seems to be a hardcore feminist
outrage blog with a strong prejudice to what they perceive, wrongly, to be the
female interest. Even the use of the word "survivor" at all is highly
objectionable, being a subtle attempt to raise the stakes, as if rape and
attempted murder are synonymous.

The story itself sounds highly questionable. Even in the same blog post, the
details are inconsistent (did she walk back to the cab of her own volition, or
was she called?) Where was this jacket and why would she think she "might"
have left it in the cab? Why would the driver wait until she left and returned
to attack her? Why would an uber driver, in full knowledge that they are
emphatically on record as having picked up and dropped off a person, basically
lock themselves in prison and throw away the key by committing such a crime?
Why would they then carry the victim's body onto the property!?

Seeing that the police have questioned the driver and not charged him, a more
likely explanation might be: Deeply intoxicated underage drinker brought home
by uber driver, wrongly believes she left something in cab, falls over and
hits her head walking back to it, driver carries her back onto her property,
she makes something up the next morning to explain things to her parents.
Wouldn't be the first time.

Anyway, none of these reasonable objections slow the site down in whipping
itself up into a self-righteous fervour as they declare the driver guilty and
lament the "survivor" "will not see and has not seen justice in any real sense
of the word".

Oops, there I go engaging in "wildly misogynistic and rape-apologetic
discussion" again!

~~~
johncarrion
It's not even about whether the evidence as we know it is convincing.

Even if it is plainly obvious that someone did commit a rape, such as a video
of it, a civilised society would treat them as simply an accused, just one
side of a legal case, until the trial is complete.

If I could design society, I would remove the dock and in all court cases have
two identical sides of the room - person A (person A could be the state or the
Crown) says person B did something, person B says that person A is falsely
accusing them of doing something. There's no defendant and victim, just two
opposing stories and a trial to establish reasonable fact.

Every criminal case should be simultaneously a false accusation case.

~~~
lutusp
> If I could design society, I would remove the dock and in all court cases
> have two identical sides of the room ...

But that already exists -- it's called civil law. Contrast with criminal law:

In criminal law, the state has an interest and brings charges against a
defendant, the sides are called "prosecution" and "defense", the standard for
judgment is "beyond a reasonable doubt", and the outcomes include
incarceration and (in some countries) execution.

In civil law, the state has no interest, the offenses aren't called crimes,
the two sides have equal standing and are called "petitioner" and "respondent"
(the names change in different locales), the standard for judgment is
"preponderance of evidence", and the outcome is usually a monetary payment.
Incarceration isn't possible.

> There's no defendant and victim, just two opposing stories and a trial to
> establish reasonable fact.

This already exists, but it's not suitable for all cases. Any time the state
has an interest, the rules change, and the word "crime" begins to be heard.

~~~
johncarrion
Why isn't it suitable? You say that the 'rules change' when it's criminal, but
that's only because those are the rules we've got. There's no reason that we
couldn't make all trials use the civil approach.

If Sarah wants to accuse Bob of rape, she petitions a court and has to prove
beyond reasonable doubt that it happened. If Bob denies it then automatically
an opposite trial of false accusation runs at the same time. If Sarah has
evidence that Bob raped her, perhaps the testimony of police detectives, Bob
looses both cases and goes to prison. If there's not enough evidence, both
sides loose. If it becomes clear that Bob definitely did not rape her, Sarah
looses both cases, including the false accusation case, and goes to prison.

At the moment Bob would have to make a separate trial for defamation or
whatever. I think it should be rolled into one.

In the case of murder, or treason, or grafatti of public property or whatever,
it would be the state accusing. If it turns out that it was a malicious false
accusation then the police or prosecutors would be liable.

~~~
venus
While I definitely agree that false accusation should be treated far more
seriously and consistently than it seems to be, I think this is going too far
in the other direction. Why should a victim of crime be obliged to prove a
case against their aggressor? Who pays? What if the victim doesn't have the
resources or time to take someone to court?

And you need to make an exception for murder, attempted murder, disablement,
etc anyway. No, the current concept of criminal justice works reasonably well,
or would with consistent and serious enforcement of false accusation (and, for
that matter, prosecutorial harassment).

I repeat myself over and over again but I maintain that the best thing we can
do to fix the justice system is to enforce the bloody law. All the laws.
Consistently. If the law is too ridiculous to enforce, revoke it. But enforce
the ones we have. Discretion in enforcing the law leads to gaming the system,
protected and taboo groups, corruption, and ultimately profound injustice.

~~~
lutusp
> While I definitely agree that false accusation should be treated far more
> seriously and consistently than it seems to be, I think this is going too
> far in the other direction. _Why should a victim of crime be obliged to
> prove a case against their aggressor?_ [emphasis added]

Wait -- that's already true. Do you think the present system relieves a
plaintiff of the burden of evidence? In a rape trial, the plaintiff has to
produce evidence "beyond a reasonable doubt", and the state can do little to
help (most rape cases rely on circumstantial evidence).

And "innocent until proven guilty" is a cornerstone of Western legal systems
-- this discussion isn't about that, and shouldn't be.

> Discretion in enforcing the law leads to gaming the system, protected and
> taboo groups, corruption, and ultimately profound injustice.

Yes, and it's unconstitutional as well, therefore illegal and grounds for
dismissal if it can be proven. But the suggestion being made here doesn't
really address it -- both civil and criminal courts are equally likely to
treat cases selectively, as do the police.

------
dishank
I always loved this idea of business, it allows for you to make some extra
money when you have time. I remember another product a couple of years ago
that didn't do so well. It was located in Georgia, it has since closed down.
The biggest problem they had was with the ability to scale this product to
keep the attention to customers high while keeping costs low.

~~~
borlak
Russians have been doing this for years, without any company involved. Don't
want to wait for taxi or trams? Just put your arm out, and someone will stop,
and you tell them where you want to go and ask 'how much'? They call them
private drivers.

Want to make some extra money on the weekend? Be a private driver. Hang out
near tram stops and you will get customers..

------
chrsstrm
The second image in the rotator showed something I found interesting. Do
drivers rate passengers as well as passengers rating drivers? What seems to be
the name of the pickup at the bottom of the screen has a rating behind the
name.

~~~
stbtrax
yes, I've seen an uber driver get prompted to rate me at the end of a fare

------
vlokshin
Direct competition to Sidecar? (Lyft as well, but Lyft schedules the drivers a
bit)

