Is this a bot which comments exact same thing on every Uber story? Just an observation because of how most of your comments make sense but every uber story has exact same question.
Some of us are lucky enough to live in cities where public-transport is both common-place and effective.
I've used Uber a couple of times in the UK, but only on a company-account. Here where I live there is a presence, but I've never used it personally, nor do I intend to. (Same goes for competitors.)
i meant the exact same statement "It never fucking ends with this company" ..This same user puts this exact same response on every post. Uber deserves it or not is not even the question. I am just curious if there are bots on HN.
Whether Lyft treats drivers better is very debatable. After 180 days of change campaign that Uber did many drivers believed Uber is better for them than Lyft. But Lyft also takes smaller cut of fare compared to Uber (Lyft also charges way less in my city so drivers get paid pretty much the same.) Both companies screw their drivers in one way or the other but Lyft does it with smiles and fist bumps. Source: I spend more time on uber/lyft drivers subreddits than i would like to admit.
There might be a reason for many of those not being H1B holders. If you are H1B holder your ability to stay in country is tightly bond to your employer. You are completely dependent on your employment to stay legally in US and hardly have any wiggle room where you can quit your job and try entrepreneurship for a while if nothing works out go back to applying for another job. The visa policies should be in place for both of the cases where deserving people from other countries get funding and deserving americans get jobs at fair compensations.
Can they thought ? The whole gig economy model depends on not treating service providers as employees. The reason for ban does not specifically say what regulations were not followed. It mentions uber did not report crimes . Well I don't get that argument as the victim reports the crime to police and not to uber. Secondly , there is no proof or suspicion of greyball ever Been used in London. It was like they just put that in there to make Uber look bad instead of giving actual reason to ban it . All the uber drivers in London are certified private hire drivers so I don't see exactly what regulations they are talking about . Maybe they want more background checks in that case uber should obey those requests.
If so then they should mentioned incidences which lead to this suspicion. Both mayor and uber has failed to make it clear what the reason of contention is between them. The rules which uber is not following should have been listed instead of arbitrary statements like Uber failed to report crimes by their drivers . This can happen only if victim decides to report to uber instead of police which sounds very unlikely scenario to me.
That's nonsense. If you have a dispute between you and a company, everyone will expect you to talk to the company first. If it turns out that your dispute relates to breach of the law (for instance, improper racial discrimination of clients), you might not necessarily realise you have the ability to report it to the police. To say it sounds like a very unlikely scenario to you makes it sound like you're trying to find reasons to defend Uber, not trying to interpret the scene fairly.
If you have suffered something that you think is a crime, call the cops (in the UK they are pretty okay for these things).
If you had a very bad experience, but maybe not a full blown crime, you might decide to make a 1.0 star rating and complain to the company.
There could be systemic problems (racial discrimination), but even in those cases, there are concrete victims, that can report it to authorities (to the TfL for example).
Since we don't have full disclosure of what tread secrets uber is being accused of but it is a general knowledge that it revolves around Grizzle bear 3 circuit board design. There had been two recent stories which tried to portray that the whole thing was of low-value to Waymo.
Both of these stories points to waymo not being diligent in hiding their tread secret or simply did not value this information much. That's why Uber is probably trying to make this figure public to make them sound greedy.
Except same people drive for both companies. There is a very tiny fraction of drivers driving for just one. And in general they make more money using Uber because of quests (bonus after finishing certain rides per day). The experience depends on your luck and which driver you end up getting.
This is such a click bait. The author provides no real proof for the title except for "a source close to Uber thinks the path still exists for Travis to come back." He is the founder the path is always going to exist. I do not doubt that Travis will want some control over decisions of the company and any founder would wish that. But let there be some real proof before these reporters jump on publishing such crap. Their new CEO does not even start till next week.
