[kartan]

> Disregarding any problems we might have with specific companies, I think ridesharing companies are a benefit to consumers.

I am all for ridesharing. But Uber and Lyft, as an example, has nothing to do with that concept. It is not like your Uber driver was coincidentally going to the exact place that you were going.

Ridesharing, as understood before the gig economy, was someone in the company realizing that there were more employees in her neighbourhood and providing a ride for them for a price (some times just sharing gas expenses).

That is a really good approach. Uber/Lyft and others hide their business model calling themselves ridesharing when they are not, calling their employees contractors, when they are not, etc.

[kelnos]

Except we never called that "ridesharing". It was just "carpooling".

As much as I hate the term ridesharing, since it doesn't actually describe what these companies and drivers do, it's not like it was a widely-used term that's been redefined over the past decade.

[randomsearch]

I believe it was called carpooling and ride sharing both, depending partly on where in the world you were. That’s a pedantic point anyhows; clearly ridesharing does not describe a taxi service like UberX.

[rightbyte]

When you "share a ride" you go to the same place or in the same general way?

Unless the Uber takes more than one passanger it's not any ride sharing involved. Maybe the could call it vehicle sharing ...

[welly]

If the rest of us continue to incorrectly call Uber etc. "ridesharing" then that definition will soon become set in stone. Can we not just call them exactly what they are? Which is taxis. By every definition, they are taxis.

[kelnos]

I'm pretty sure that ship has already sailed.

[traviscj]

To me, the distinction comes down to: carpooling implies some kind of repeated/scheduled vehicle sharing (like coworkers coordinating a route to get to work at 9a every weekday, while ridesharing is much more ad-hoc/on-demand (like craigslist rideshares between Seattle and Portland to split the gas bill).

Definitely agree that Lyft/Uber aren’t really ride sharing in that sense though — the driver’s goal is to earn a fare on a trip he wasn’t going to take otherwise, while the original ride shares were a cost-reduction on a trip the driver was going to make anyway.

[kelnos]

> carpooling implies some kind of repeated/scheduled vehicle sharing

In the Bay Area there's something called Casual Carpool; essentially it's just a series of locations you can go to around work-travel hours, and people who have cars and are willing to pick up people going to the same area will randomly show up and pick people up. No scheduling or prior arrangements aside from the locations. (And it's been around way longer than Uber/Lyft/etc.)

[mch82]

Ridesharing is when a group of people rent a van through a ridesharing program and one of those people drives it. The driver is kind of like a school bus driver.

Carpooling is when 2+ drivers ride together in a car one of them owns instead of everyone driving separately.

[kelnos]

I've never heard of your ridesharing example before. When people do that I still hear it called carpooling, just perhaps, "we rent a van and carpool".

[gowld]

It's called vanpooling, often, obviously.

[chungleong]

A service like BlaBlaCar (in Europe) is what can legitimately be called ride-sharing. Uber is fleet of pirate taxis.

[TomMarius]

In many cities of Europe (like Prague, where I live) we call Uber "savior". Using taxis used to be flat out dangerous (crazy drivers with no regards for anything, often drunk or on cocaine or meth) and it was guaranteed you're going to pay at least 3 but usually 5 times more than you should - Uber fixed that and is cheaper than the "correct" (by law) price, it solves safety, I don't have to wait 30+ minutes, ...

And the drivers are satisfied. I made a point to ask each one and they really like it, much more than any traditional work and MUCH more than being an "official" taxi.

[cc81]

It is also very nice when you are visiting a country with unreliable taxi services for work. Just skipping the hassle of learning to avoiding the scams, getting the correct price, getting a receipt is annoying and all that is removed with uber.

[TomMarius]

Yes, I would never use foreign taxi if it wasn't for Uber and friends

[StavrosK]

In many cities of Europe, and Greece, where I live we have apps like Beat that are basically Uber for actual taxis. That way you get good drivers, ratings, they have an incentive to be good or get booted off the platform and lose customers, etc, without the indentured servitude of Uber.

[TomMarius]

The problem in Prague is that the taxi lobby tries everything it can (including making hard to obey laws and stopping the whole city traffic as a protest) to stop new players from entering the official market. They (the official taxi drivers) have allies on the government side since the late 90's - the market actually used to be way more liberal (and it was better back then).

[StavrosK]

It's the same here, they just haven't managed to outlaw Beat yet (and it's hard because there's not much basis for that). Hopefully that strategy will work for you as well.

[chewyland]

Just used one in Sofia. It was pretty great.

Ride to bus station cost me about 2Euros.

[nmstoker]

It feels like this says more about the status of the law and behaviour in Prague than it does about the apparent merits of Uber style services.

In London we used to have a good taxi system that was well run with trustworthy drivers in "Black cabs", but with the undercutting of Uber they are more likely to try underhand tactics.

[johnnycab]

>In London we used to have a good taxi system that was well run with trustworthy drivers in "Black cabs"

It is hard to deduce from your comment, which period of time you are describing ─ as black cabbies haven't been very popular or trustworthy for a very long time[1]. Also, there was a very similar campaign of resistance to 'mini-cabs' decades ago, as the one conducted against Uber et al. at present, by the 'Black cab' community.[2]

I am glad that these dinosaurs are slowly diminishing in their market share, who have been exploiting 'The Knowledge'[3] for far too long by regurgitating morally repugnant views/opinions, formed from a diet of gutter press/red-tops and forcing them upon unsuspecting passengers and blind siding visitors into thinking that it is the traditional experience!

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Worboys

[2] https://www.spectator.co.uk/2014/02/the-case-against-london-...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxicabs_of_the_United_Kingdom...

[nmstoker]

It's not a precise timeframe nor a perfect correlation, but since Uber has been undercutting them there's been a trend to worse behaviour by cabs, with poor navigation and dishonesty around payments (keeping the meter running, disabling the regulation card payment devices etc).

I take your general point, although I'm not convinced the Warboys case is a reason to dislike Black cabs anymore than Harold Shipman is reason to dislike doctors!

[johnnycab]

I cited the case as an illustration, albeit an extreme one, that black cabbies operate under a code of silence and not explicitly as a reason to dislike them. They have always ran a similar campaign of black cabs are safe thus trustworthy, in order to justify the skewed figures reported to TfL[1].

The reasons to dislike them would be the 3x charges compared to their counterparts, knuckle-dragging attitude towards implementing technology and under-handed tactics e.g. insisting on only accepting cash, then never having change from high-denomination notes at the end of your journey, so you are forced to leave it as a hefty tip, ignoring disabled riders, surge pricing after late night public transport has stopped; only accepting rides if they end up in the general direction of their residence at the end of the shift - despite this practice being against their rules, always taking a longer route to rinse the rider and many more..

[1] https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-are-black-...

[TomMarius]

Yes I can see that in London it could make problems. It is not a silver bullet, I'd say. Some cities benefit from this Uber-like form, and other cities benefit from the former London form.

While it is not a silver bullet, it is also not an universally wrong/bad way - that's my point.

[chungleong]

You know who else was called a savior? The guy who annexed Czechoslovakia. Bad things happen when people value expediency uber alles.

[TomMarius]

I don't know who called that guy savior but certainly not the Czechs that live in Prague. We value improvement, which Uber clearly is for all sides involved. I'm not sure about other cities, but definitely in Prague.

[ibeckermayer]

And why exactly should anybody care what you like and don’t like? If you don’t like Uber/Lyft, be my guest and call a taxi.

Nobody is using these services under the impression that the drivers just happen to be going to the same destination. So your semantic quibble is just that.

[will4274]

Uber offers ride-sharing services (Uber Pool) and Taxi services. As a frequent Pool rider, I'm not sure what else you would call it besides ride-sharing - the three of us taking the Pool don't own cars and wouldn't have otherwise gotten in touch with each other. Uber provides a car, a driver, and route coordination for a price and the three of us share the ride.

[jquery]

Edit: [mistaken reply to wrong post]

[willio58]

I thought that was called carpooling.

[your-nanny]

yeah the whole "sharing economy" is just bs marketing.