Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Compare cell phone plans using Wirefly's innovative plan comparison tool ×

Comment Re:How the hell (Score 2) 156

offer 20$ of rides free as introduction offer, undercut taxis by subsidizing rides

Does this mean, eventually, uber fares == taxi fares, when the subsidizing stops?

No, they'll be far more expensive if everything stays the same. Taxi drivers make very little and most taxi companies are run on shoestring margins (sometimes for a lot of money because of volume, but still very low margins), and they're selling a far lower quality product in most markets.

Comment Re: I would invest (Score 3) 156

Don't forget that they're also screwing the city by putting lots of wear and tear on the streets without generally paying any commercial fees/taxes that would otherwise go to offset that damage - street infrastructure is stupid-expensive and they're basically using it for free (individual car fees are generally much lower on the expectation that you're not spending all day driving around downtown).

Comment Math doesn't work out (Score 5, Insightful) 1023

Guess what? Those $35K robots are also cheaper than paying people $8/hr.

Human beings are incredibly expensive. They're also the economic engine that turns a single business into part of a functional economy, but I digress.

There are very, very few positions that could be automated in a way that makes sense financially at $15/hr that wouldn't also make sense at $5/hr. Either a position is automatable, or it is not, and at 4000-5000 hours per year (plus benefits, etc) that's a lot of money for a single position that could be thrown at a robot if that's the way you wanted to play it. Basically, automating that position will either be super-cheap or super-expensive.

Automation is a very important discussion point. Its disingenuous to tie it to the current debate over moving the minimum wage back up to a living wage.

Comment Re:wait, is this a siri issue or an apple pay issu (Score 1) 223

Not true. Liability has always been with the business. The credit card companies want to make some more $$ from the transaction fees and from selling new hardware.

No, grandparent was correct. If you take a trackdata swipe on a card that had a chip on it, and the data gets intercepted, you (the merchant) are now liable. Previously (and currently with chips) the network ends up taking the hit and chalking it up to the fraud percentage.

Comment Re:It really is about security, not repair (Score 2) 381

What's to stop them from keeping the data encrypted, not allowing access, and just using a second account (call it a guest account like on a PC) that has no access to the stored and encrypted data but does allow then to use a second profile until it can be replaced with a proper sensor?

Technically nothing, but security is a really touchy area. The more code that you have that says, "Well, we think there's been a breach, but let's be super-clever instead of just shutting down," the easier it is for someone to escalate and gain privileges, which in this case includes the ability to generate Apple Pay tokens at will.

Comment Re:Shouldn't be an issue (Score 1) 260

Not really. The idea behind some regulations is in fact to promote a level playing field. Remember that restrictions that are lifted from "Transit Companies" like Lyft and Uber are also lifted from the next guy to come along, even though they're policies don't necessarily match. Or Uber will run low on drivers and drop some of their policies, because there's not any kind of legal requirement for them not to.

Slashdot Top Deals

You can not get anything worthwhile done without raising a sweat. -- The First Law Of Thermodynamics