[aerodeck]

The article mixes its message a bit between automation/disruption/capital. One couldn't really say that Uber is in the business of automation. The capital/labor distinction is more productive, but since it is derived from marxism no one actually uses it.

I'm starting to get the impression that this genre of "technology gone bad" article is starting to be a safe surrogate for talking about class. The muddling of terms is actually a feature: one can avoid the dirty reality of class by framing it as an inherent feature of technological progress, which, of course, is a good in-and-of-itself (unless you're a dirty commie).

I think the same is true of immigration: low class people blame their poor condition on immigrants, rather than their class standing.

[stoolpigeon]

Actually here on this site is where I've read many times that automation is Uber's destination and that when they get there they will truly have attained their goal.

[vertere]

> The capital/labor distinction is more productive, but since it is derived from marxism no one actually uses it.

Capital and labour are very standard notions in economics (and go back at least to Adam Smith).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_(economics)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_(economics)