Richard Stallman's personal site.

For current political commentary, see the daily political notes.

RMS' Bio | The GNU Project

Reasons not to use Uber

We should not accept the promotional term "sharing economy" for companies like Uber. That is spin. A more accurate term is "piecework subcontractor economy".

Uber is a big advance in massive surveillance. Unlike a taxi, an Uber car can't be used anonymously. You can't pay cash. It also requires use of nonfree software, which mistreats the user.

Uber increases car traffic, increase wasteful driving, reduce use of other transit modalities, and undermine public transit.

Because I reject technology that mistreats me, I will never order or pay for an Uber car. Because Uber threatens to eliminate the taxis that are acceptable to use, I go beyond that: I will not let someone order an Uber car for me. How about joining me?

Privacy

Users' Freedom

Abuse of Drivers

Taxes

Comparison to Real Taxis

Discrimination

Legal

Misc

Privacy

Users' Freedom

Uber requires customers to run a nonfree program (an app). As always, a nonfree program tramples its users' freedom. I'm not talking about the software that Uber runs in its servers; that does not directly affect customers. If some of that software is nonfree, it tramples Uber's freedom, but not the customers' freedom. The nonfree software and digital services that Uber requires its users to use attack their freedom in various ways.

The Uber app requires running other nonfree software (in the case of Android, Google Play).

Uber is trying again to force all customers to agree to arbitration of disputes — rather than lawsuits.

Abuse of Drivers

Taxes

Uber is selling low and losing money to destroy its competitors. If you are a short-term thinker, you will be delighted to take advantage of this — until it controls the market and squeezes you forever.

Uber has already made arrangements not to pay US taxes if it does start making a profit.

Uber in China tracks drivers and actively pressures them to stay away from protests. The company could not prevent Chinese repression, but upholding it in this way is complicity.

Comparison to Real Taxis

When taxi drivers struck to protest the troll's partial Muslim ban, Uber took the opportunity to undercut the strike.

Cities and even public service campaigns are outsourcing transportation to Uber, which is a form of privatization of public transit. This excludes poor people, and subjects those who do use the service to being tracked. Lyft is no better than Uber in this regard.

Uber has changed the regulations that cover charging passengers for making cars wait. This decision itself may not be objectionable. Taxis typically charge for making them wait. But that regulation is set by a city agency which is at least somewhat responsible to the people. Uber is a business headquartered somewhere else, which accepts no responsibility to the people of any city. We should not allow a company to privatize the making of the regulations that create our social order.

Uber plans to do away with human cab drivers. It would be easy for a non-plutocratic government to prohibit this, and that's what every country ought to do, unless/until every person gets an adequate basic income so people don't need to be employed.

With real taxis, you can flag one on the street or phone in any fashion; you can pay cash; you can be anonymous.

Beware of thinking of Uber as one more option in addition to real taxis. At the moment, that's true, but if Uber is a big success, real taxis could disappear. Then what will you do, if you don't want to tell Big Brother where you are going?

Discrimination

Uber has set up a social credit system: passengers that get bad ratings from drivers will be blacklisted (refused disservice). One must suspect that customers' racial and ethnic appearance influences the ratings, so one effect will be discrimination. However, the chinification will do wrong to every customer, including those who are blacklisted, and those who only face the possibility of being blacklisted. This reinforces my conclusion that transportation services should not be allowed to identify their customers.

Uber systematically discriminates against passengers that are black, and tends to cheat women. The study does not demonstrate how the discrimination and cheating occur, but does demonstrate the statistical phenomenon.

Uber charges different prices to different people. Other companies also engage, or have engaged, in price discrimination. It turns out that identifying customers helps many businesses put customers at a disadvantage. The only thorough solution is to do what is needed for other reasons: eliminate the systems that let companies know who the customer is.

Legal

Uber investigated a lawyer handling a lawsuit against Uber's policy of surge pricing, using methods that may reach the domain of illegality.

Guber programmed its system for special treatment of people that might be investigating accusations of violating municipal regulations. The special treatment was that the system would say a car was coming, but no car would ever arrive. Uber has the ability to do this because it forces all its clients to identify themselves — which is fundamentally unjust.

Uber's autonomous cars frequently violate traffic laws. Uber tries to put the blame on human safety monitors, who could in principle intervene to stop this. That's the general Uber attitude: profits to the company, burdens to the drivers. I would guess that the safety monitors would be hard-pressed to react fast enough to prevent these maneuvers — which would mean that they are an excuse and a scapegoat, not a real safety system.

Uber operated a team to spy on competitors and to "impede, obstruct or influence" legal investigations, according to an ex-manager who was involved with the team.

Uber blames state governments for eliminating cities' power to regulate such companies.

Uber imposes arbitration on customers for all complaints, including rape by drivers, and this covers up the prevalence of the problem. No company should be allowed to require its customers or its workers (whether labeled "employee" or "independent contractors") to use arbitration instead of going to court.

Misc

Copyright (c) 2014-2019 Richard Stallman Verbatim copying and redistribution of this entire page are permitted provided this notice is preserved.