> Remember, consumers are using platform apps like Uber because they don't trust the drivers on the other side.

Oh, I thought it was because "push button to summon car" is, like, super convenient.

There were taxi apps before Uber and they didn't work because the taxi drivers wouldn't reliably come.

That too, but taxi drivers are indeed among the most notorious for scams.

People use platforms because it would be very silly to have an app on the play store for each driver.

If there was a driver you trusted then you could text them or their taxi dispatcher. The problem is they won't come, will scam you, won't take you to a poor neighborhood, etc.

And yet, I almost wonder if that would not be a better system overall.

> Remember, consumers are using platform apps like Uber because they don't trust the drivers on the other side.

I don’t understand where these complex theories about ride sharing apps come from.

People use Uber because it’s easy and it’s an app. Taxis did not have a universal app at the time.

If you talk to young Uber users, chances are they wouldn’t actually know how to call a traditional taxi if you asked. It’s either Uber or Lyft because those are the apps they’ve heard about.

Also, it’s common for drivers to work for both Uber and Lyft at different points, maybe the same time. There’s no real element of trust difference between the two options.

Uber solves one part of the equation. As I have recently learned, ride sharing apps just allow you to get in touch with the customer. In some countries, apparently, the drive will 'work with rider' outside app control. It is a weird cat and mouse game.

Hence the regulation would force Uber (and ultimately the customer) to make it worth their while.