I generally support the stated goals of Wikileaks, but complete lack of discretion helps no cause
Discretion? Okay, but who gets to decide what should be kept private and what should be made public? Julian Assange? You give him that power?
That's the problem with sites like Wikileaks and Gawker. Whether the information they publish is about a government or an individual, they can't be trusted to use any discretion.
Yup, I didn't RTFA. Also, whoever wrote that article called it "profit" in one place and "industry share" somewhere else.
Reading more closely it appears that neither the 75% nor 30% are a share of profit though. They're the companies' the share of industry wide operating income, which has little to do with profit anyway.
75% of profit.
30% of market share.
that is not the American Way
Nor is it the European Way. Or the Asian Way. Or anywhere else.
Taxi's potentially compete with Uber (and Town Cars), but Uber (and Town Cars) does not compete with ad hoc taxi service.
The person called Uber instead of a taxi. You don't call that competing?
Uber drivers are not sharing a ride, they're offering an alternative to taxis; that's competing.
Unattended voting booths have two major problems, fraud and failure.
Attended voting booths do nothing to stop fraud. Democrats have blocked every law that requires a person have some form of identification at the polling place. They also point out the the level of fraud detected is very low. Ever stop to wonder why they don't want a process which would detect fraud?
a move made possible by fewer and shorter sentences for drug offenses,
The linked article does mention reduced sentences for drug related crimes. But it also makes it clear that drug related crime is a very minor factor in the decision to get away from private prisons.
"Once an inspiring effort at transparency, WikiLeaks now seems more driven by personal grudges and reckless releases of information..."
Wikileaks was always about embarrassing people.