[nserrino]

I've mostly switched over to Waymo, but had to take Ubers twice in the last month:

* The first one, the driver made multiple racist remarks about different groups he observed as we drove.

* The second one, the driver talked at length about UFOs and how they are real, for the entire 50 minute drive.

Most drivers are totally normal and don't do things like that, but the tail end of negative experiences can be quite bad. Dirty cars, loud radios, body odor, and unsafe driving are all relatively common with human drivers. A Lyft driver I was riding with a few years back almost ran over a man in a wheelchair who had the right of way.

Wait times are also more reliable so far with Waymo. It's not uncommon for an Uber/Lyft driver to accept a ride but then not drive toward you for 5+ minutes. Waymo has the advantage of predictability - both in terms of arrival time and overall travel time (whereas there is variance among human drivers).

Sometimes I've had Waymos get stuck, but it usually resolves within 10-15 seconds.

Given how smooth, predictable, and safe Waymos are, I don't see a strong reason to risk a negative experience with a human driver (beyond ideological reasons). However, I hope another strong provider comes on the market soon to give them some competition.

[brotchie]

Yeah, the whole "order an Uber/Lyft, but they don't move for 5 minutes" phenomenon. Had this happen for a trip from MTV to SF, I guess they sit at home and wait for a ride?

Uber and Lyft MUST be hurting in SF.

Personally have switched to Waymo, most people I know have switched to Waymo. Find that it's induced a lot of personal demand. I'd rather wait a little longer and have a safe, comfortable ride, than drive in SF myself, circle around trying to find parking, and then be worried about my window being smashed, etc.

[Gustomaximus]

I assumed they could accept the next ride while close to dropping someone off, but the app limits their location while they drive the last bit to another customers house for privacy.

[adventured]

Those reasons are similar to why Americans aggressively dislike public transportation. A single digit percentage of experiences are horrible (or worse).

Trapped in a small space with sometimes psychotic, violent, smelly, modestly insane people. Somehow the proponents of public transport haven't figured out that's undesirable. It's not at all remotely worth the risks, unless you have no other good options.

[kweingar]

You're not objecting to public transportation, you're objecting to the public. The people on the bus or the train are not any different from the people at the supermarket or at the park.

Many Americans, like myself, are ok with being around people in a city. But you're right that there is a group of fearful suburbanites who would rather sit in isolation miles away from the cities they drive to than risk catching a whiff of B.O.

[panarky]

I take busses, Bart and Caltrain every day in SF and San Jose, and I'm in Seattle a week per month and use busses and trains there extensively, and I've never been attacked by psychotic violent people.

[Zigurd]

Public transportation varies widely in the US. A few places have great subways and commuter rail, but most don't. A few places have reliable bus service that has enough capacity utilization to actually save pollution and money, but in a lot of cases bus service is supported only as a means of getting low wage workers to their jobs. In many many places on-demand rides are the only plausible thing that would reduce private car trips.

[happymellon]

I wonder why, as someone outside of the US and supportive of public transport, we don't encounter that.

Perhaps it could trigger some other reflections?

[caditinpiscinam]

I've faced way more danger and discomfort from crazy drivers on the road than crazy people on a bus.