| It might work just fine, but it clearly does not have the sex appeal associated with a big potential market and a profit seeking gatekeeper. And nothing wrong with that, mind you. Frankly, I see the incentive to develop such a thing directly correlated to how well existing, centralized players treat their market potentials. Uber appears to have developed a lot of negatives quickly. I know little about Lyft. The dynamic might just be the same sort of thing we see with closed vs open software, only with law playing the role patents play in software. Like with closed software, ain't nothing wrong with that, but it had better be real easy and deliver real value, or people will attempt something to keep that equation honest. Notice how it's not hard, nor expensive to get access to Office these days. Some of that is Microsoft working hard to deliver value and serve it's markets, but the prospect of free / OSS out there keeps it all pretty sane too. There is zero chance of an OSS tool reaching critical mass, and the work needed to prevent that is good for everyone. Say Uber continues to irritate... enter FUber, the decentralized, direct compensation, combination ride share, taxi service to the rescue. It could be a general marketplace. People want a taxi, exuber driver, rideshare, etc... sign up, check the little boxes and go. Doing this would devalue things, but also doing this might show that there really wasn't anywhere near the value to begin with. And some people just don't like the thought of that kind of check and balance gaining traction. |