Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by kedean 3995 days ago
No, people blinding defending ride-sharing is the derailment. It's not about whether or not ride-sharing is a thing, it's about the legal gray area these companies operate in and the entitlements they claim with it. The concept is not the issue, the companies behind it are.
1 comments

Not really, drunk driving deaths are saved, you should tell this story to parents who have had their kids die. I had 2 stories on my facebook feed recently about lives ruined due to drunk driving. Stop overstating the case.
What prevents drunk driving deaths is not driving while drunk. There are plenty of ways to avoid that. Decades before Uber existed, the big PSA push was "call a taxi!" Then the designated driver came into vogue. In large cities at least, almost no one drives to bars at all; the plan is always to use transit or taxis. Of course today even small towns have taxi services that trawl the bar areas around closing time, so you rarely even have to call (or have the bartender call for you). To the extent that Uber makes any difference here, it's solely by providing additional taxis, which any taxi company can do.

This might be the weakest defense of Uber I've ever read.

Not really, your ability to contemplate alternatives is reduced significantly, impulsive people and people with EF deficits by definition have a lowered ability to mentally represent alternate outcomes and are more prone to drinking, you cannot tell them to not drink because of how their brain processes choices and the economy of outcomes, if these people take an uber there and back they will be good and saved.

I have plenty of defenses, it is yours that is weak.

At no time did I suggest that people not drink. I suggested that the solution to drunk driving wrecks and deaths is that people not drink and drive. You've completely glossed over the relevant point, which is that people who have chosen to drink need to look for ways to get home that don't involve driving. A taxi service, like Uber, is one way to do that. There are many taxi services; any will do for this purpose.
Dude it is easily understood that drinking reduces executive functioning which by definition is your ability to contemplate alternative outcomes and makes you choose economically poor ones, so by definition they are very unlikely to think "I shouldn't drive" it reduces your ability to contemplate those outcomes. You are assuming some neurologically stable state that is not distributed evenly.

But if they took an uber there, they do not have the option to drink and drive either way. See Russell Barkley's last book for EF I can spam quotes if needed.

You haven't explained why Uber is any different from any other taxi service in this regard, so I think we're finished here. I know I am.