• 0 Posts
  • 17 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 30th, 2023

help-circle





  • Yeah…but busses exist right now. Cars are still the problem. A private company getting involved bus routes won’t do shit for that problem. We have one of the best transit systems in the world in nyc. But people can’t give up their cars. Letting Uber muscle into public transit won’t change that. If anything, it’ll drive up the cost of busses and make even fewer people rely on busses.

    We have citibikes in nyc. The traffic problem is still awful. As a bike rider myself, I can tell you that riding a bike here is not for everyone. I know plenty of able-bodied people terrified away from riding bikes. But say the city into the bike sharing service. It wouldn’t be $15. It would be…I dunno, $5. Then more people would use them. See what I’m saying?

    The way to spread anything good is to make a cost, not a profit maker. Bringing business into the public service game is a horrible idea. There’s no way this does anything good for anyone but Uber. That’s how businesses operate. There might be a time where it seems things are getting better, but that’s just the phase where they’re willing to operate at a loss to corner the market. This phase is ending right now with Amazon: they drove out so many businesses by becoming so reliable, quick, and convenient. Now, they’re starting to scale back free returns. This happened not too long ago with Uber and Lyft. The money behind it finally said, “alright, play time is over. We won’t operate at a loss for much longer, we’ve cornered the rideshare market, now it’s time for prices to creep up to the point where we profit more and more.”

    It’s their business model. It’s vampiric and destructive. Not helpful. Trusting them with a public service is so, so, so foolish.


  • But…that’s our point. Uber taking over bus routes would ultimately void that choice. Public transportation is a public service. Letting a VC-funded for-profit company weasel their way into that space is never going to not fuck poor people. It’ll fuck everyone, but it’ll make “public transportation” unaffordable. And, really, when you’re poor, “if you want to get somewhere faster” isn’t really an option. That’s…the thing with being poor. You don’t have the extra money to spend to catch a shuttle and you don’t have the luxury of paying for comfort. Not to mention, even in the best case scenario, where busses would keep their existing schedule and routes (though the likelihood of this happening is slim) and we’d just get more busses? It’d clog the system, ultimately slowing bus routes.

    So, no. Not “the more the merrier” when it comes to private companies elbowing their way into public service, and especially not when we’re talking about fuckin traffic.



  • Look at any of these tech companies’ history. They corner the market by operating at massive losses that VCs can foot for, like, a decade. And then when they’ve driven out other options, they abuse the fuck out of customers. They “disrupt” by obliterating, and that’s when they move for the kill shot: ever-expanding profits.

    This is not a good thing. Even in NYC, where the MTA is a massive chunk of money, we have one of the slowest bus systems in the world. That’s through no fault of the busses, mind, this is the cars fault. And, kinda Uber’s fault. The traffic is so bad, even where busses have their own lanes, the traffic slows that shit down like crazy.

    Depending on the govt (Adams would probably jump at this, whoever his successor will be will obviously determine how it’d go), the city sees $$$ and sacrifices the long term well-being of the city for their own “successes” while in office. And money/budget is always a crunch, no matter the place. So if Uber wanted to “disrupt” NYC by basically taking over busses or getting a contract to use the bus stops and bus lanes, the govt saves money while generating revenue because those VCs are eyeing the long term where they can ultimately make the city reliant on their services and force people to contribute to their bottom line. Our trains are great, but they don’t go everywhere, sometimes busses are necessary, especially for outerborough people and historically poorer neighborhoods. You can see those areas on the train map, because trains basically avoid them.

    Trusting vampiric capitalists with any public good is a fuckin stupid thing to do. Look at healthcare. How we have privatized healthcare is beyond me, but look at the state of it. Now, this is more expanding on the conversation than actually replying directly to your question, but it sort of does get at the heart of it. For a time, we would get more transportation. It wouldn’t be public, it’d be private. But it wouldn’t solve the issues. It’d just create new ones.




  • the “for you” page of TikTok is an algorithmic beast unlike anything else. It is miles better at training to your likes than anyone else manages.

    And maybe this is me being a pessimist and something of a Luddite lite, but I take that to mean the data they’re extracting from users is way more invasive than other companies.

    They’re not hand selecting things they think you’d like, like you said, it’s an incredibly advanced algorithm that is scientifically creating the most effective content service they can.

    And yeah, def agree people who trust WhatsApp are dumb af. I don’t trust meta any more than I trust the people who own TikTok’s algorithm.

    I think we’re basically saying the same thing, but just looking at it differently. I take what you’re saying to mean they’re more invasive. You are more or less saying they’re as invasive as any other SM company, and they’re all pretty much neck and neck.

    I’d agree in some senses, but think TikTok has mastered that profiling to the heights anyone could even imagine. And I also think, with ties to the Chinese govt—a ruthlessly authoritarian state—that it doesn’t bode well for user privacy, probably going beyond that threshold you mentioned. I would say the exact same thing if Facebook were owned by the US govt and was operating in China, Russia, etc.


  • I see. Maybe that’s true. I don’t think we even know the true extent of their snooping. Any of them. It’s probably much more extensive and creepy than any of us could ever know.

    Although, I do think them providing “better” service is subjective. It’s basically vine, right? Vine had an “explore” page, right? I would definitely agree they provide a more stimulating service than any other social media company.

    But if you asked them their mission statement, their answer would be “providing customers with a great experience.” Though, if you could actually get the non-PR answer, their goal is to maximize engagement with an app people have a hard time turning off, while maximizing profits by dominating the data broker market.

    Would you say they’re providing customers a better experience? Or that they’re the most effective social media company? I’d argue that probably every new iteration of social media, and every year they exist, they get more invasive. They’re finding new ways to streamline their profit centers. And they’re…free apps. So….

    That’s all I’m saying. I don’t know for certain who’s more invasive, but I will say it’s a race to the bottom and we’ll never know who actually won until there’s a whistle blower. That’s…not a good sign. I’m sure we can agree on that much.


  • I really wish I could post those pictures. I opened the “learn more” page on the App Store. It does list some of the same info under a few different headers, but I take that to mean it’s more detailed info to apply to their multiple tracking desires.

    As soon as a user starts using TikTok, the company begins building a profile about them, including their interests, political leanings, sexuality, and every other variable that could impact the selection of videos they see. TikTok also collects information about users’ keystroke patterns, location information, browser history, and even biometric information (face and voice print).

    https://www.thequill.ca/features/2023/2/17/five-reasons-why-tiktok-is-a-privacy-nightmare

    I’m not a social media person, so I was never going to use the app anyway, but I’m also pretty strict about what apps I’ll download. It’s probably a security blanket, but I try to do what I can. I’ve changed my mind about downloading a couple of apps that required way fewer permissions. So maybe my opinion is different than others’.




  • I don’t think “shortsightedness” is the difference. The sheer amount of privileges TikTok requires on your device speaks to Cambridge analytica levels of personal profile knowledge.

    Couple that with the endless scroll, hot people doing thirst traps, flashy idiocy, flashing icons hugging the full screen image, no discernible window with controls tempting you to back out or log off…it’s the “perfect” tech product. One that’s endlessly addictive. That’s what makes tech good. They know you better than you know yourself, and they will shamelessly serve you exactly what you didn’t realize you wanted to see.