I'm nearly certain that there are quite a lot of drivers out there who would be willing to forgo this if it meant taking home the huge share of their revenue that's currently going to Uber.
The bigger issue is it's not clear drivers going on the blockchain is even legal. Uber and Lyft provide some minimal vetting and certification. Prior to them, drivers directly owned their own taxi businesses, but needed medallions, which also involved regulatory compliance. Uber and Lyft could get away with operating in legal gray areas because of huge legal departments funded by VCs and stock holders. Can individual drivers do that or will cities just hammer them?
> Can individual drivers do that or will cities just hammer them?
This is a good question. Personally, I think it's a risk that many drivers would be willing to take and that enforcing this sort of law on a per driver basis would prove extremely difficult.
I wholeheartedly disagree. It's not even easy to get a female driver in certain places because they're afraid of riders. And most women would never use a service where the drivers aren't identified, background-checked, and banned upon their first incidence of assault.
But if you're right, where is decentralized Uber? Or decentralized Twitter? Or literally decentralized anything?
All we have right now is tokens.