I like the service for what it is, so I will still use it for what it is. I don't particularly remember or care what their marketing was. I judge it by the value it brings me today.

I still use them, and they beat both expectations and earnings in Q4. We'll see what the market does, but I don't think Uber is going anywhere. I agree they used low pricing to capture market share and that wasn't a fair fight, but I am still not ever going back to taxis.

I'm not saying it doesn't matter. I am saying there are other large markets where the cab solution made our lives a nightmare. You should choose what works best for you and the market can decide where taxis are working great and where they are failing.

Yeah, but if they apply to everyone then the article isn't really about tech or that interesting. The ways in which tech is unique are the interesting questions.

I don't think he is saying anything remotely like that.

The airport is a pretty small subsegment of national taxi use and this isn't the common urban experience. They might be one place the taxi model worked. For those of us without cars and relying on taxis for normal transportation they were a nightmare.

Ask the locals if it sticks their country was chosen

Illegal doesn't mean nonexistent. We know it's banned, and we know it's still a problem.

Samsung isn't American and Adam Smith was brilliant.

They might, but their manufacturing now has huhe defect rates. Its not a false perspective.

Could we not please? Terrible idea

I love this so much I want to join your start up.

Throwing in Facebook is garbage but the rest is easy.

If the government builds their own, Elon Musk will still be the one getting rich building it and maintaining it. You think the owner of the only tech that could launch thousands of sattelites is bummed at the prospect of the government wanting to build something that requires thousands of sattelites?