Uber allowed to continue operating in Boston | Hacker News Reader

Uber allowed to continue operating in Boston

mass.gov

114 pointsnelhage23 comments

That's pretty cool of MA. They seem to have provided pretty quick turnaround and resolution, once they became aware of the situation and its possible repercussions on innovative companies operating in MA.

As companies see quick response to something like this they might say, "gee, MA responded quickly and found quick resolution to an emergent issue; they are receptive to new ways of doing business, I think I'll do business in their state" as opposed to a possible recalcitrant alternative, which could have happened ---letting the process drag on...

How could they not have known this prior to staging a "sting" and issuing a cease and desist?

Just sounds like a politicking to me.

That "they" in your sentence is misapplied. It's not like there's some Great Cambridge Hive Mind at work. Someone was an idiot, they embarrassed the state government, and got overruled by their boss. Then someone else wrote up a press release to make it sound as unembarrassing as possible.

That's "politicking" I guess. But it's the kind of politics we want, where governments do the Right Thing because people ask them to.

> It's not like there's some Great Cambridge Hive Mind at work.

This is a common motif in internet outrage, and it's not surprising to see it every day on HN which is startup focused.

Massachusetts' government is not 1 giant perfectly-in-sync machine. Nor is Apple. Nor is Microsoft. Nor is Google. They're enormous and have tons of inertia.

It is perfectly consistent for one part of such a large organization to make a routine action as part of policy, only to find that somewhere (often higher up) in the organization, priorities no longer reflect the policy in place. This means the action was an error for the organization.

It doesn't mean people are lying. It doesn't mean people are acting in bad faith at all. It means that tens of thousands of people acting toward the same goals don't manage to act with perfect information.

Stings are routine, like reflexes they don't require communicating with the head of the system. Anyway The Division has since learned that this device is already being evaluated for certification by the National Institute of Standards and Technology. This is not something I would really expect law enforcement agencies to be up-to-date on.

That's reasonable.

I suppose it just seems odd that someone would think to themselves "lets plan out how to ticket someone and then issue a cease and desist" without doing due diligence to ensure that they even need to do any of it.

Have you ever worked for an organization as large as the State of Massachusetts? That might be a useful bit of experience upon which to base your opinion.

It sounds like someone higher up just put the smack down on someone who might be on the take. Boston is trying to be as progressive as they can despite the puritan roots they're stuck with.

While they might not get it correct the first time, I'd expect MA to be very aggressive in adopting and promoting new technologies that have obvious/clear values to its constituents. The current governor, Deval Patrick, has put forward a clear agenda of "education, innovation and infrastructure"[1] for the state. Personally, as a tech entrepreneur, I really like the tone it sets.

[1] http://www.mass.gov/governor/utility/governor-deval-patrick....

As a Massachusetts resident, I'm quite proud of this stance and the linked statement really hits the nail on the head. Innovation and competition are good things. Consumer protection and standard measurements are good things. A simple acknowledgement of the situation with an apology makes me think so highly of the state.

This is an excellent advertising strategy and cities play right into their hand - go launch in a new place, knowingly bend some old taxi laws and get served, make huge deal about it stopping innovation and be featured on every local news channel and newspaper. City changes old laws, doesn't want to look bad. That creates another multimillion dollar round of free advertising so everyone in town knows about them. Bravo.

Anecdotally, it seems to be working. When I asked my Boston Uber driver last night about his workload recently he said that it's been much, much higher in the last week. He also attributed it to people hearing about the service for the first time due to the controversy and increased media coverage. He expects it to increase even more as the college students return over the next few weeks.

Our governor actively encourages founders and young companies to launch or relocate here, and is a very public champion of the MassChallenge accelerator. He makes a lot of appearances at local events related to innovation and entrepreneurship.

It doesn't hurt that his office staff use Uber, either:

http://www.universalhub.com/2012/governor-were-going-find-wa...

Is this type of statement characteristic of Massachusetts government?

I really like he overall tone and stance taken in the statement and it seems uncharacteristic of government in general.

This particular department, at least, seems to be trying to put forth a modern/accessible image as consumer advocates, with delivery style perhaps patterned more on Consumer Reports than traditional bureaucratese. They have a YouTube channel trying to demystify various things, e.g. which aspects of home improvement might require permits: http://www.youtube.com/user/massconsumer

It probably helps that Secretary of Economic Development Greg Bialecki has used the car service and his office oversees the MA Div. of Standards (which ordered Uber to cease operations.)

Good for MA - it's a fine thing to see some rational people in government rather than the bureaucratic drones that they are so often (and often unfairly) stereotyped as.

As a Cambridge resident, I use Uber often and I think it's a valuable service. It would be a loss to the Boston area to have Uber shut down.

What are your usual use cases for Uber? MBTA covers pretty much everywhere I go, but I think MBTA coverage has also shaped where I tend to go (and where I live).

anywhere past 1230am. anywhere in south boston (some mbta stops, but easier to use uber with friends and hailing a cab can suck if youre not near bars)

For me:

- calling a car to my home (faster, easier, and more trackable than phoning a taxi) if I'm in a hurry

- late-night after bars close (0200+) and street taxis are scarce (downside: surge pricing)

I'll typically prioritize my transportation: (1) walk/MBTA where possible, (2) hail a cab if they are available, and (3) Uber. Still, that leads to a handful of trips a month.

According to the state ruling, the "device" in question is an "I phone" https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/408509-massachusetts...

It uses some technology (circa 1978) called "GPS".

We're living in the future!

Quite frankly, I wouldn't certify that. Measuring based on data derived from the GPS chip (not the raw data), always at the mercy of the operating system not to hibernate your app.

I assume that the device entering an NIST evaluation process provides some preliminary assurances of the device's accuracy that MA is willing to make do with.

So is the state essentially trusting Uber's word that the device is accurate, knowing that if it turns out that it isn't, Uber opens itself up to liability?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com