travis county sheriff against banning uber/lyft (Austin, San Diego: vehicle registration, how much)

[Trainwreck20]

There are so many levels to this issue, and if you focus on one (or another) specific one, you have an 'obvious' answer.

Why does Uber oppose fingerprinting? Some possible reasons:
1) Discourages new drivers - even with a spotless record - due to dislike of being fingerprinted and/or requirements to physically go somewhere (it sounds like you don't have to go anywhere currently?);

2) Possibly slows down the process of activating new drivers;

3) Added cost - probably minimal, but it is a cost and all companies try to control cost, especially if they see them as unnecessary;

4) Legally, creates the appearance (and maybe the fact) of Uber drivers being employees and Uber being responsible for their actions (discriminatory behavior, criminal action, etc);

5) Starts the process of becoming 'fully regulated' like a 'taxi' company - possibly fare restrictions, reporting, etc.

Why do people want fingerprinting?
6) Additional background security/confidence (users)

7) 'Fairness' or just additional regulatory burden (competitors such as taxis)

There are other reasons out there, specifically how drivers may want (or not want) fingerprinting.

For me, '7' is a non-starter - I would rather drop the requirement for taxis than add it to Uber/Lyft IF the only reason is bureaucracy or a competitive advantage issue. Of course, that all comes down to '6' - how much extra security is provided by the fingerprinting? Is security just a process of getting to '7'?

At the end of the day, though, I am pretty sure '4' is what is driving this whole argument. There are a lot of possible issues depending on how you deal with contractors vs employees and who is responsible in either scenario.

[Aquitaine]

I certainly don't mind fingerprinting. The feds already have mine from my CHL.

I ask this question with as much equanimity as possible, Steve, because you're certainly right that it's not a big burden. What does fingerprinting get you?

It is a check against a Federal database. That's a small portion of all crimes - and exactly the same crimes that are already easy to check for without a fingerprint. Fingerprints aren't part of your court records.

Your realtor analogy holds some weight but I don't know if it is entirely appropriate. You don't become a part-time realtor without much investment (and can't, because TREC doesn't want you to). It's a smaller career pivot than, say, jet pilot, but there are significant investments required and barriers to overcome. You don't decide on Thursday and start Real-ting on Friday, as I did with Uber -- and because you're already taking a class, paying a lot of money, and finding someone to practice under, a fingerprint is minuscule on your list of barriers.

The whole point of of Uber (or any 'sharing economy' job) is to reduce barriers to entry and make it available to people who can't or won't overcome barriers to more traditional jobs. A steady and high supply of drivers is critical to that model. That doesn't mean it's a right or that we should automatically favor it, but I do think it's fundamental to what Uber and Lyft are all about.

I'm on the fence about this particular requirement because while it isn't a big burden, I don't see a real case behind supporting it. It seems like security theater to me. All the horrible taxis I ever took in NYC and elsewhere weren't made less horrible by their fingerprints being on file; fingerprints help us identify somebody. Uber already has their identification and location. I guess if you plan on breaking into your passenger's place because you know their work schedule, it'd help there, but again, Uber knows you've had contact with them and that's a brainless trial for the cops to follow and get fingerprints after the fact.

[Austin97]

Originally Posted by Novacek

False. Red light cameras work.

There is some increase of hits from behind (from people slamming on the brakes). That is more than made up for by a decrease in t-boning accidents. Those are the ones that kill people, you just don't have the crumple zones on the sides that you do front/back.

what data do you have? I would be interested in seeing. Here is a random example of an article showing they dont work.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20.../1345216.shtml

Yet Another Study Shows That Redlight Cameras Increase Accidents
from the what-problem-are-they-solving? dept
This certainly isn't the first time, as we've seen plenty of similar reports in the past, but yet another study is showing that red light cameras tend to increase the number of accidents.

here is another from chicago

icago's red light cameras fail to deliver the dramatic safety benefits long claimed by City Hall, according to a first-ever scientific study that found the nation's largest camera program is responsible for increasing some types of injury crashes while decreasing others.

The state-of-the-art study commissioned by the Tribune concluded the cameras do not reduce injury-related crashes overall — undercutting Mayor Rahm Emanuel's primary defense of a program beset by mismanagement, malfunction and a $2 million bribery scandal.

ADVERTISING

Emanuel has credited the cameras for a 47 percent reduction in dangerous right-angle, or "T-bone," crashes. But the Tribune study, which accounted for declining accident rates in recent years as well as other confounding factors, found cameras reduced right-angle crashes that caused injuries by just 15 percent.

At the same time, the study calculated a corresponding 22 percent increase in rear-end crashes that caused injuries, illustrating a trade-off between the cameras' costs and benefits.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/w...219-story.html

[Novacek]

Originally Posted by Austin97

what data do you have? I would be interested in seeing. Here is a random example of an article showing they dont work.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20.../1345216.shtml

Do Red Light Cameras Reduce Accidents?

Police Chief Magazine - View Article


Your link is a link to a link that eventually leads to

Maryland: Red Light Cameras Increase Accidents

Which didn't "study" any longer than 3 years. And while it doesn't call out t-bones, their numbers suggest an overall decrease of non-read-end collisions.

Originally Posted by Austin97

here is another from chicago




Tribune study: Chicago red light cameras provide few safety benefits - Chicago Tribune

That supports what I'm saying.

I'd definitely personally trade-off a 22 percent increase of rear-end crashes for a 15 percent decrease of t-bones. It's the later that's going to kill me.

[austin-steve]

Originally Posted by Austin97

Because it actually does little to nothing for actual safety and is intrusive in a way that the government should not be.

It would be cheap and easy to fingerprint all children at birth or anytime they go to a doctor. We could catch a lot of criminals that way... right?

I agree that "cheap and easy" alone isn't a reason to do it.

Would you support removing the requirement for cab drivers? Or do you want a driver not eligible to drive a cab to nevertheless be allowed to drive for Uber instead?

To me, it's a yes/no for the industry and it doesn't make sense to me that cab drivers have to but Uber doesn't.

[austin-steve]

Originally Posted by Aquitaine

I certainly don't mind fingerprinting. The feds already have mine from my CHL.

I ask this question with as much equanimity as possible, Steve, because you're certainly right that it's not a big burden. What does fingerprinting get you?

It is a check against a Federal database. That's a small portion of all crimes - and exactly the same crimes that are already easy to check for without a fingerprint. Fingerprints aren't part of your court records.

Your realtor analogy holds some weight but I don't know if it is entirely appropriate. You don't become a part-time realtor without much investment (and can't, because TREC doesn't want you to). It's a smaller career pivot than, say, jet pilot, but there are significant investments required and barriers to overcome. You don't decide on Thursday and start Real-ting on Friday, as I did with Uber -- and because you're already taking a class, paying a lot of money, and finding someone to practice under, a fingerprint is minuscule on your list of barriers.

The whole point of of Uber (or any 'sharing economy' job) is to reduce barriers to entry and make it available to people who can't or won't overcome barriers to more traditional jobs. A steady and high supply of drivers is critical to that model. That doesn't mean it's a right or that we should automatically favor it, but I do think it's fundamental to what Uber and Lyft are all about.

I'm on the fence about this particular requirement because while it isn't a big burden, I don't see a real case behind supporting it. It seems like security theater to me. All the horrible taxis I ever took in NYC and elsewhere weren't made less horrible by their fingerprints being on file; fingerprints help us identify somebody. Uber already has their identification and location. I guess if you plan on breaking into your passenger's place because you know their work schedule, it'd help there, but again, Uber knows you've had contact with them and that's a brainless trial for the cops to follow and get fingerprints after the fact.

I think your thinking makes sense. I think many industries are seeing disruption and that the old rules and regs just don't match up with new technologies.

Even some Real Estate trade articles I've read say that some companies are experimenting with "on demand showings", which would be like an Uberfication of Real Estate. Won't work for occupied homes as people still need notice. Won't work period. But it's interesting to see these ideas floated.

In general, I think everything is moving to fast, and the impatience and urgency that has crept into consumerism and services will ultimately prove to be a cancer that's hard to kill.

We live in the age of "NOW". So I guess that means if someone who owns a Camry and an iPhone impulsively wakes up at 7AM and wants to become an Uber driver NOW, they think they have the right to tap on their phone for a bit and start driving by lunch. I call BS on that and think it's ridiculous. But oh well.

[Austin97]

Originally Posted by austin-steve

I agree that "cheap and easy" alone isn't a reason to do it.

Would you support removing the requirement for cab drivers? Or do you want a driver not eligible to drive a cab to nevertheless be allowed to drive for Uber instead?

To me, it's a yes/no for the industry and it doesn't make sense to me that cab drivers have to but Uber doesn't.

yes cab drivers should have most restrictions removed too. Unfortunately their rates are regulated and Im not sure how to resolve it.

[Austin97]

Originally Posted by Novacek

Do Red Light Cameras Reduce Accidents?

Police Chief Magazine - View Article


Your link is a link to a link that eventually leads to

Maryland: Red Light Cameras Increase Accidents

Which didn't "study" any longer than 3 years. And while it doesn't call out t-bones, their numbers suggest an overall decrease of non-read-end collisions.





That supports what I'm saying.

I'd definitely personally trade-off a 22 percent increase of rear-end crashes for a 15 percent decrease of t-bones. It's the later that's going to kill me.

Umm it depends on HOW MANY tbones there are.

In raw numbers at the 90 intersections included in the study, the researchers concluded the cameras prevented as many as 76 right-angle crashes and caused about 54 more rear-end injury crashes.

also they put cameras in intersections that have no history of collisions. Ultimately costing taxpayers 500 million dollars.

It is a money grab and results in no safety improvement for the dollars spent.

6.57 million dollars spent to prevent each right angle crash.

[Trainwreck20]

6.57 million dollars spent to prevent each right angle crash.

Per period the length of the study - so, each year that cost goes down....

[bpvarian]

KVUE (1 day ago) just had a piece using stats from *Austin* showing how Red Light Cameras have absolutely reduced accidents.
APD unit calling for more red light cameras