This is one way of rationally approach this situation. Another is to look at any great things in the past. None of them were easily possible. None of t he freedoms that people got were for free. Keeping those freedoms is also not free of charge. You are not willing to pay then they privilege may and will be revoked. As for being a fool - people taking part in any activity against establishment like civil rights movement in US or siblings Scholl had when they started no reasonable way to believe in their success. Some of them succeeded. Some of them died in vain. It is foolish to believe however that even those that failed completely did not help us in some way. By showing that something bigger than few cents and one more day to live is there. It is there not because dear god gave it to us but because we decided it is. That is what I think. Not sure if I would do what people doing this stuff did. But I value their sacrifice.
There is also another thing which one may consider. Willingly or not federal prosecutors in Germany are bringing some energy into this fault line so we may eventually see some conclusion some day. Even if they succeed this may be what Pyrrhus got long time ago.
No such fortunate situation when real culprits from Verfassungschutz and other federal institutions including the chief master boss Frau Merkel would be charged with anything.
The lists of triggers are still not analyzed by the parliamentary commission because NSA did not give its permission. Either German government is just a vassal of Murica on own wish or Murica has (thanx among others NSA activities) something nasty on key figures in government. Either way it is time to resign for some of them or be forcibly removed from office. That would be pity of course as they were not damaging(*) all too much so far, which is already good thing for any government.
* - they did not manage to destroy the luck that Germany had in riding the waves of economic disruptions of late.
There are other uses too. Clearly they are not a must but if you can control some of the house functions from your phone then why not from outside of the house?
At one thing you are correct - having multiple house is not a must with this technology and probably not even most used albeit a summer house at the seaside is a multihome situation already.
As for the laws that are BS - would you be more specific? Which parts of insurance and safety requirements are wrong? The limit on taxis in some places - maybe? But that is not even the main issue in many of the places where Uber has legal problems and Uber still says 'fuck it'.
I do not like cabbies all that much but I do not care about Uber either. Yet I see Uber as a global monopolist in making and I dislike it even more. Uber owner and managers behave like UFC back in first half of previous century. Only difference now is that Marines get sent less and mostly to fight terrorism these days. Trade treaties and lawyers are used instead to ensure US corps are well. I guess if Uber were forced to obey the law in EU after EU and US signed the TTIP we in EU would have to pay Uber a nice sum of money for lost profits or?
... To say that any law that prevents maximal profits is good, because anyone who wants to maximize profits is automatically wrong, is kind of silly.
Does anybody say that actually? Maximizing profits is how companies do business. Maximizing profits in certain ways - not following rules like everbody else - maybe questionable. If violating existing laws provide a company economic advantage and disadvantage to everybody else then I'd say such maximizing of profits is not beneficial to society. It is arguably a question of values. I value society that prevents such a thing. Uber owner does not unless I suppose his property and well being is in question.
It is oversimplification to say that in case of Uber it is only other corporation that gets profits. The way Uber acts means that not only additional costs are incurred locally by somebody else than Uber but also the bigger profits are taken out of the local context too. Frankly I do not see how that benefits me as a citizen or customer.
From what I see Uber as providing global money skimming service over the taxi market. In some places that provides allegedly better service to customers. The technology Uber provides is not new either and apps hiring local cabbies are there for some years already. I can imagine however that some US businessmen see advantage in mcTaxi service and investors celebrate a company fighting 'red tape' and against 'workers rights'. Does not look like I should be celebrating anything unless I am Uber shareholder or live in jurisdiction where Uber profits arrive after long hard traveling all over world.
Assuming GP did wrong, how are you better?
We the people have a say only in minority of cases. Th civil rights era was bloody and its fight still did not end apparently. I do not see how people would raise in such case where worker's rights (oops sorry - freelancers working for Uber voluntarily on contract bases) or public safety or property rights (due to insufficient insurance for instance) of some individuals are/can be affected. This is not racial discrimination that made some substantial number of white people to sympathize with oppressed. In this case costs to society is spread and individualized while benefits are mostly concentrated in Uber.
Uber is attacking with the sun and down the hill on isolated enemy positions, the only thing better would be if enemy gave up.
It is somewhat entertaining watching all the sociopaths joining the ranks Uber. The good thing is that even if Uber wins it will be forced by forces in the business itself to comply with some laws and will be tamed this way. It happened to all big companies and it will happen to Uber too. The question is whether it is good for us all to wait till that happens or to tame Uber directly.