1471

submitted 1 day ago by FoxtrotDeltaTango@lemmy.zip to c/programmer_humor@programming.dev

139 comments fedilink hide all child comments

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/9525207

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] kevincox@lemmy.ml 35 points 1 day ago

"Rideshare" is also the least accurate term used to dodge regulations. It is just a taxi/cab. You are paying someone to get you from one place to another. They aren't sharing their ride, they were never going where you are going before you told them to.

[-] hddsx@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago

Taxis/cabs are legal. Also, perhaps because of age, I tend to view taxis and cabs as phone numbers you call for a car to show up (or go to a taxi stand), whereas I see rideshare as reserve via an app.

I think ride share really just means a vehicle that is used not solely for commercial purposes

[-] kevincox@lemmy.ml 19 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

They are legal if you follow the regulations. The problem with the "rideshare" companies is that they don't. I think just about every taxi company these days is on some app or another (often the same that call unregulated cabs in countries that actually got their shit together and banned the unregulated ones).

[-] Sabrinamycarpet@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 day ago

I think just about every taxi company these days is on some app or another (often the same that call unregulated cabs in countries that actually got their shit together and banned the unregulated ones).

I'd like to point out this probably would have taken another 10-15 years to achieve had it not been for the disruption of said ridesharing apps.

[-] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 1 points 11 hours ago

Just because there's a inconvenience for consumers doesn't mean you make workers suffer instead of fixing the problem.

[-] Sabrinamycarpet@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 hours ago

I'm assuming/ hoping you mean the taxi drivers when you say workers.

I empathize with anyone who's livelihood is affected by changes in society. But stagnating progress because someone somewhere will be negatively impacted only assures no progress will ever be made.

[-] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

You can have progress without forcing people into starvation because "it's the system".

[-] Sabrinamycarpet@sh.itjust.works 1 points 51 minutes ago

I mean we could build a better social safety net so this doesn't happen...

You telling me you think we should continue to endure a transportation system that is basically a monopoly, where the user has little transparency on what they get charged beforehand, where they can only use the service if they call or are lucky enough to be in a high traffic location, just so no one loses their job?