If they want to jack up the prices they can just increase them - they don't need to add random fees.

There is no option to say “send me a mini van”

On the other hand I did get banned from an online local selling site (rhymes with Canary) for charging back a small purchase where the wrong thing was delivered and their system for reporting it was broken and they refused to refund. I even tried having a roommate create an account (same address) and they banned that when they made a purchase.

You just get the charge removed or some amount deducted if it’s approved. You aren’t requesting a new card.

edit: This was for a purchase I made but didn’t receive exactly what I paid for. Now for fraudulent charges I didn’t make, yes they send a new card. I’m in the US, maybe it’s different elsewhere.

The toilets were awfully dirty, there was no toilet paper and no soap. I took some pictures just in case, then I filed a chargeback with my bank. After some weeks, they gave me my 2 euros back, and the company that manages the toilets probably paid a small fine to MasterCard or whatever.

Was it a waste of time, for just 2 euros? Sure. But if nobody starts complaining, nothing will ever be fixed.

So I get the item, contact support for my price match and they say sorry, we can only give you $5 back. I get upset because that's not what I was told, and have a screenshot of the chat to prove it.

We went back and forth forever, I got more and more angry and eventually returned the item for the full amount, and prime had just recently renewed and was in the refund window, so I got a refund for that.

Unfortunately I need Prime where I live, so I signed up for it again a few days later, but used a free trial month.

The whole thing was a giant waste of time, and felt very "optimized".

But instead of refunding the $2 it cost, they refunded like $1.19 or something to that affect.

I really do not care how uncomfortable it makes the driver to move a family a few extra blocks to somewhere vaguely safe. I’d similarly threaten him if he tried to drop my family off in a forest, or on the side of a highway, even if that’s what the GPS, God’s Position System, tells them to do.

If your job ends in a way that someone who was your customer is now in danger, you absolutely deserve to be threatened.

What he was amazed at, was the driver’s insistence that they get out, without any recourse or care. A Waymo could do the same, I guess, but they could also sit in it until the company contacted them, or the cops showed up.

A New York cabbie would probably threaten him right back, but would also have known they were headed for a bad patch, and maybe have asked if they had the right address. This was their first time ever, in Milwaukee, and I suspect Milwaukee cabbies are of a similar stripe to New York cabbies. I know quite a few former cabbies.

Funny how the least verifiable thing in the story is the one everyone hooked on. I guess I could ask him. It happened last week. Not sure if I’d want to spoil everyone’s good time calling him a criminal, if it turns out he was just able to shame the driver into accepting a couple of Jacksons to get out of there. If he did, I suspect Uber would sanction the driver, for accepting a fare, outside their system.

That being said, I think a lot of people are against automation when it does something worse than the manual version. Think automated customer service over a human being.

2000: you are a second class citizen who can’t even get a job in many places if you do not have a car. Also the median person is overweight. But here is this new internet thing that lets you get everything you need in life sorted out with no need for human interactions. Yeehaw!

2025: the average person can no longer hold a conversation with a stranger for five seconds without having an anxiety attack. Oops!

Also, I'm just doing my best to get the most out of the ludicrously high rent is pay every month.

The problem is their system extorts you into tipping. If you don't tip, the driver will give you a 1/5 rating. If your rating averages low enough, nobody will pick you up. It's more of a bribe you pay for a good passenger rating than an actual tip.

As a result, you're forced to tip if you want to use it long term.

Personally, I'm hoping Waymo takes Uber's lunch money. I will gladly pay more for a service has not been infected with tipping.

I'm just saying $15 that I will add a tip to vs $20 that I have no intention or inclination to tip isn't anything more than I don't have any expectations or empathy about tipping a machine. It doesn't seem particularly complex an issue about why Waymo can charge the same amount that I am willing to pay anyway.

It's definitely a generational issue. Gen X and older seem to appreciate small talk more than most millenials and pretty much all of Gen Z.

That's not it. The issue is that it is FAR easier for me to interact with automation than some completely incompetent service worker.

Yes, I get it. The service jobs pay so poorly that nobody competent wants to work them. However, at the end of the day, I simply want to accomplish my task and get going. For example, if you're drunk or stoned off your ass, to pick a totally random (not) example, you're probably in my way.

Because of general levels of incompetence, automated systems are quite often better than most service workers I'm interacting with. Additionally, the service worker probably is limited to the same authority as me ie. totally unable to help because they are completely stuck with the same shitty web interface to solve my problem as I am.

So, like transit?

I will likely have my own personal self-driving vehicle. And I'm 100% sure that there'll be an upmarket segment with slightly more expensive cars that are kept more clean than the rest.

https://support.google.com/waymo/answer/14248697?hl=en

I've seen many reports of dirty waymos on reddit recently for example.

second I'd assume they would start charging you for point 3, "loading delay fee" when you take too long to load, after all that's missed profit from other rides.

after that point 1 and 2, with you getting either a Jag (nice car), a Zeekr (unknown to me, Chinese company), or a Ioniq 5 (much cheaper feeling car than a Jag, with hard plastic everywhere). You want the jag? Expect to pay for it. So suddenly all cars aren't the same, and only some are comparable to Uber Black.

To summarize:

Point 4, followed by 3, followed by 2 and 1 (which imo are just one point). 5 I don't expect to change unless they have to start cost-cutting on compute and sensors, but I HIGHLY doubt that.

And that’s better than mandating a small percentage of the population use FSD cars?

Not sure I like the autocratic tone of that plan

It would work well for local municipalities that want to provide low-cost door-to-door service for the elderly.

We have a bus service here, The ART, and a dedicates "paratransit" bus service that provides door-to-door service to eligible riders.

And a couple private large-scale developed and managed neighborhoods that have driverless non-automated (remote controlled) transit systems.

If you know a large portion of your riders have disabilities, dedicated buses or vans make sense.

I'm sitting here advocating for this, and it's a great service that I'm glad they have it for those in need, and yet I need fucking plywood for hurricanes myself.

Yeah, it is Florida. But honestly, the transit system here and bike infrastructure development and traffic planning is good.

But then thinking more about it I thought of how great we (all the people who like Waymo) think it performs around bikes and pedestrians. So now I agree with you directionally but you might not be taking it far enough. Once (if?) autonomous vehicles rule the road, and they're known to be safe, the future will likely be the broad spectrum from autonomous buses (on the large side) to super-cheap, bike-like vehicles (on the small side) that cost way less than a car. For a single occupant, if you knew another vehicle wasn't going to kill you, wouldn't you take an e-bike (with a cover and basket on it?) for short trips if the fee was proportionate to the cost of the vehicle? I would. Assumes lidar shrinks I guess and that automated kickstands are a thing, but that seems tractable in the years to come.

Because once they become ubiquitous, I suspect the vast majority will be operating in carpool mode at rush hour. Most people won't be willing to pay 4x to get a private vehicle if they're by themselves. Especially since the more vehicles there are, the more efficient carpool mode becomes for everyone.

If you zoom out a bit, your argument would be more-or-less the same when regular automobiles were replacing the functioning transit systems in the USA, specifically in LA.

Why is "that person gets to be extraordinarily wealthy" for inventing the future rather than "we all chipped in so we could all benefit" for inventing the future?

If Waymos make the world better and safer and more convenient, why are they not simply something we figure out how to make a public good?

In Star Trek you didn't have to pay to take the turbolift or transporter around large spaces, everyone got the benefits of the technology.

Oligopoly, cartels, huge barriers to entry into the market.

I appreciate your optimism in the free market for a domain where you have to spend tens of billions of dollars to even enter it

https://www.savannahnow.com/story/news/2024/12/09/what-is-a-...

Human drivers will become more likely to offer extra services like drugs, company and entertainment. Silent careful drivers will be driven out by Waymo.

Things like "call center jobs" are where "superior" gets muddy.

They can be superior for the business. The business does not want to spend money. Now they aren't paying a person, and they have to worry less about a sob story convincing their agent to make an exception. Health insurance company, for instance, where the life-saving treatment was declined. Refund of plane ticket because the flight was delayed and normally the policy would be to deny it but this particular person missed his father's funeral as a result, so the agent takes pity. So it's "superior" for the company because it entirely IS about saving money.

Hard to say those are superior for the customer. And most of us aren't the megacorp-owners here. We're the customers.

So yes, AI agents could be the logical next step in the "turn people into robots" march of bureaucracy. But that's not a good thing.

Human interactions, human judgement, human empathy - these are features, not bugs. Consider also that loneliness epidemic. Let's make it even worse! (In the short term "not talking to people" is being seen as a positive here - because we've already raised a few generations of scared, not-socially-equipped kids, since these are old trends. How is people-avoidance-maximization working?)

That may eventually happen, but most of the time current AI systems need a lot of handholding to reach human levels of accuracy. I personally find this kind of supervision extremely tedious, it’s more stressful to use a poor level 2 system than just drive yourself. Driving has surpassed that point, but it’s taken billions so extrapolating into other fields without that kind of investment is premature.

Please don't use the present tense to describe a not yet realized future.

Just wait until your human needs inside the bowels of some corporate or government bureaucracy, that no matter what will inevitably make either human or algorithmically generated mistakes, are being "attended" by some AI agent that can feel nothing, cares nothing and of course doesn't really think for itself or use common sense outside the bounds of formal rules, and you find yourself fucked over by this in some absurd way.

Imagine all the so-called customer service (almost entirely non-human) that Google shafts its users with, about which so many people on HN have complained, but writ much larger, in all kinds of far more vital user attention scenarios.

No thank you. Human bureaucrats are bad enough, but at least there's an avenue for empathy and flexibility in many cases.

The AI fawning on some comments here lives in a bubble of perfect expectations that will die a horrible death in the real world, or cause people horrible miseries in that same real world.

An AI manager might be "superior" in the view of the executives of the company, but that AI manager's reports might feel very differently. From a societal perspective, the employees' feelings are what should matter most, but from a capitalist perspective, the executives won't care if workers are treated poorly, as long as the work gets done and profits go up.

And I think we already see the shit experience customers get when customer service jobs are replaced by AI. I doubt that will ever improve, by design.

Remember, also, that computers only deal with situations and problems that they are programmed to deal with. AI is a little different, but still suffers the same limitations in that they can only deal with things they're trained on. Humans can make exceptions and adapt to new situations. If we get to AGI, perhaps that problem will go away, but I expect we'll be granted many new problems to deal with instead.

I’ve seen three of these implementations in contact centers. AI drives lower satisfaction and lower cost. That business is about delivering defined level of service at the lowest possible cost.

The advantage of Waymo is that it’s a first party service that doesn’t hide behind the fig leaf of an independent contractor. Easier to regulate those nexus points than to figure out of some dudes 2015 Sienna is safe or reliable.

No thanks.

Desperation isn't an excuse for risking the life of your passenger and other road users or pedestrians.

Capital costs matter, and how quickly you get ROI matters.

This is a good thing. I do think we're much better off now than we were in the 80s-10s (relentless, pervasive over-fragrancing).

But lately I've been running into the occasional Axe-weilder or odd desktop gadget that creates an airplane sized zone of unbreatable air. It might be time to dust-off some civil reminders about air quality.

Same. Only time I will rate lower is for safety issues. Offensive conversation and bad smells are not great, but I don't want to screw up what might be someone's only job because they're having a bad day or because they can't afford to get their car cleaned as often as they should.

But I also don't judge people who would rate lower for stuff like that; everyone's threshold for what's acceptable is different.

I'm skeptical we save a lot of time with our technology-mediated world. I think I could say "one medium pizza with pepperoni" and hear back "ok it'll be ready in 20 minutes" on a phone call quicker than I can put that order in with a device. Apps/websites are only better for group orders that require coordination. That's after I've picked out the restaurant, of course, but there is no shortage of literature on how the huge menu of choices presented by modern app-based services usually slows down people's decision making. (Amusingly this may swing back the other way, just with us talking to LLM-backed machines soon, but I find it hard to believe "we don't want to talk to the guy at the pizza place because we value our time THAT MUCH.") Compared to the phenomenon discussed in all sorts of media from https://www.reddit.com/r/memes/comments/15ecqat/phonephobia/ to https://www.thecut.com/article/psychologists-explain-your-ph... to https://www.cbsnews.com/newyork/news/gen-z-developing-fear-o...

Very curious if you have a source for that time value bit. I find it hard to believe. We Americans often have EXTREMELY long commutes using a mode of transportation that allows less multitasking than most others. I don't mind my car-based commute personally - it lets me listen to music in peace - but that's similar to how I don't mind making small talk while getting my hair cut - it's a peaceful respite from the usual noise of modern life. Certainly a nice change of pace from using that time to scroll social media or argue on the internet even more.

"Not going to go down" does not seem consistent with the way other tech trends have developed: magical at first, then subject to endless churn to seem dynamic and reduced quality, increased costs, or both as it becomes harder to squeeze out additional revenue.

There’s a million ways to do it. Shadow ban locations, mistakenly pull up to the wrong location, etc.

Kind of. American tipping came out of the post-slavery south as a form of exploitation where people weren't guaranteed a wage.

This is why tipping was common in historically black jobs like hospitality, food service workers and railroad porters.

There still a federal "tipped" minimum wage at $2.13 - which some states still abide by, roughly corresponding to the historic south https://www.epi.org/publication/waiting-for-change-tipped-mi...

These also seem to be some of the worst tipping states according to most sources, https://www.lyft.com/blog/posts/the-united-states-of-tipping...

Which kind of makes sense - if people in those states invented tipping to pay people less, then those states paying tipped people less isn't that surprising ...

Cultural behavior patterns last decades, which is why there's some dissipation 150 years later.

These things can be weird. For instance coat check (person who holds on to expensive coat) and car valet (person who holds on to expensive car) is functionally equivalent with a 100 year separation so the tip culture sticks.

Same goes for the shoe shiner and car washer; the person who makes your mode of transportation more presentable.

Maybe this sounds like crazy free association, but the pattern seems to hold. Take porters and food delivery drivers, for instance, not that different.

Anyway, when you start scratching at weird american anomalies like tipping and the electoral college, usually you find something to do with slavery's long tail.

If you buy the expensive beer you're not impressing too many people. But of course, there are 50 cheap beers, most of which suck. The pride is kmowing that one cheap beer that's as good as the expensive ones.

The fact that taxis often tried to extort tips out of you and lied to you about the price by not running their meters is what made Uber popular here -- it ended up being cheaper.

My advice: stop tipping. Just you, personally. If the average person tips 10%, and tomorrow everyone stopped tipping, prices will probably increase by ~10%.

So just personally stop tipping and enjoy the permaneny 10% discount all the other suckers are gifting you.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

So bizarre. The levels people will go not to deal with any conflict, no matter how trivial it is...

A fair bit of the unclean part of Ubers/Lyfts comes from the drivers: cigarettes, marijuana, food, perfume, air "fresheners", body odor.

Waymo's have internal cameras that can detect visible uncleanliness.

Easy to report and have accountability (to the previous rider) if there's a significant cleanliness problem (spilled food, vomit).

Next generation Zeekr vehicles (limited by tariffs right now) might be better designed for cleaning: better materials, fewer nooks and crannies, larger door openings.

Can't wait for Waymos to appear in my area.

I think the fact they can just take a car out of rotation and to the hub which probably has dedicated cleaning staff is a big reason it will last.

Your average uber driver is desperate to work. I’ve seen a driver open his trunk and clean up urine from a drunk female passenger he just dropped off in front of me and then just carry on with our ride like it was no big deal.

EDIT: Yes you’re def right. I looked around a little more and there’s no support for my BYD memory. Geely it is.