[HN Gopher] Lyft's plan to take control of its maps and its future
___________________________________________________________________
Lyft's plan to take control of its maps and its future
Author : edward
Score : 216 points
Date : 2023-05-30 16:42 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.lyft.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.lyft.com)
| generativeai wrote:
| Sound like the company has not invented here syndrome. Maps is
| largely solved problem. Mapbox has a great product that is
| customizable.
|
| Perhaps the company could better spend their R&D to focus on
| products that directly imoroves it's market share and revenue.
| eklitzke wrote:
| They likely do use mapbox for rendering maps, as their SDK is
| really customizable, is designed to work with the OSM data
| format, and you don't need to pay mapbox to use it (at least
| for older versions). But mapbox is not necessarily a good
| solution for all of the routing requirements Lyft has. For
| example, at SFO ride hailing drivers are required to wait in a
| special parking lot outside of the airport, and then
| dispatching for rides is done based on which driver has been
| waiting in that lot the longest. You could probably make this
| work with mapbox, but it isn't necessarily a matter of just
| plugging it in and calling it done.
| rabuse wrote:
| I don't ever see Lyft being a profitable company. I've been
| betting against their stock since they hit the market, and it
| just keeps plummeting YoY.
| braza wrote:
| I have been in a company that marginally that was in the same
| situation as Lyft, financially speaking, and for me sounds
| brave and bonkers that those folks still have time to blog post
| in a very stock-nose-diving situation.
| rabuse wrote:
| Seriously. That's their focus as their value tanks? Maps?
| remote_phone wrote:
| It's weird that Lyft is flexing on something that Uber did almost
| 10 years ago. Everything they talk about has been known and done
| by Uber for a very long time.
| mistrial9 wrote:
| this is the "Digital Twins" story right here - private corporate
| walled gardens with total control and feeding off of commons.
| reaperman wrote:
| That's a curious use of an already established term, "Digital
| Twin"[0]. A digital twin is a virtual model designed to
| accurately reflect a physical object.
|
| 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_twin
| mistrial9 wrote:
| you are a bit late to the party.. this has been in motion for
| at least three years, see various standards efforts.
| reaperman wrote:
| Link me? I'm not sure what you're referencing. For what
| it's worth, the concept and model of the digital twin that
| I referenced was first publicly introduced in 2002 by
| Michael Grieves, at a Society of Manufacturing Engineers
| conference in Troy, Michigan.
| pookha wrote:
| I like OpenStreetMaps but any business that uses them in their
| core app should be prepared for some wild shenanigans:
|
| https://mashable.com/article/mapbox-antisemitic-vandalism-sn...
|
| Facebook uses OpenStreetMaps and I'm pretty sure they had to
| design their own batch processes to validate that area's of
| interest weren't renamed racial slurs or for Pokimon creatures.
| sp8962 wrote:
| That was an issue because of the validation pipeline Mapbox was
| using at the time, the vandalism had long been fixed in
| OpenStreetMap proper when the story hit the news.
|
| So, yes, you are going to need to make a trade off between
| potentially more incidents, but faster repair, and less
| incidents, but being stuck with your current validated release
| for a while if something goes wrong.
|
| PS: it is OpenStreetMap, no plural "s"
|
| PPS: Meta produces a publicly available validated version of
| OSM data.
| patrickserrano wrote:
| > Ninety-eight percent of drivers who try Lyft's maps stick with
| them -- rather than switching to Google, Apple, Waze, or any
| other app.
|
| I find this surprising because my personal experience is the
| exact opposite. At least in NYC, drivers use the Lyft (or Uber)
| app for managing riders but use a dedicated mapping application
| for navigating to the destination once you're picked up.
| RandallBrown wrote:
| They may have just never tried Lyft maps before.
| tomtheelder wrote:
| In LA they seem to almost all use the Lyft navigation.
| sroussey wrote:
| And it may be on another device or the car itself so the Lyft
| app still stays open.
| justaddwater57 wrote:
| Agreed. A lot of drivers in NYC (where I'm also based) seem to
| have multiple devices in the car. Maybe there's some flawed
| data gathering if a driver still is using the native Lyft app
| but running navigation on a separate device?
| marcinzm wrote:
| That statistics really makes me wonder if this is a NYC only
| thing or if Lyft is that disconnected it's own user base.
| LeFantome wrote:
| If what you say is true, the Lyft app may still be using the
| Lyft map. That would lead Lyft to conclude that drivers were
| using their map.
|
| Another open application or another device would not show up in
| the Lyft analytics.
| open592 wrote:
| I'm sure they take into account whether the driver is
| following their app's suggested route. If the driver
| disregards the suggestions that would suggest the driver
| isn't using their maps.
| q7xvh97o2pDhNrh wrote:
| If this is how they're attempting to measure it, then the
| only thing they've actually verified is that their maps are
| 98% as good as the competition.
| pcurve wrote:
| "For instance, Google always presents drivers with the fastest
| route, regardless of tolls. But sometimes, paying a toll would
| shave only a minute or two off the ride, while adding
| significantly to the cost."
|
| Ah... the joy of NYC tolls. Even with EZ pass, a ride to JFK from
| NJ is almost $28 just in toll roundtrip. $37 without EZ pass.
| $37!!!
| acdha wrote:
| That seems fair for crowding into one of the most densely
| populated areas in the country, especially since going to JFK
| instead of flying out of Newark means you're taking up space
| and polluting NYC without generating any positive value for the
| city. Tolls directly benefit the city by partially helping to
| pay for the extremely expensive infrastructure needed to make
| that trip work, and indirectly by encouraging people to make
| travel plans with fewer downsides for everyone around.
| pcurve wrote:
| JFK and Newark don't have a lot of overlapping routes that I
| use. They used to pre-9/11, but a lot changed since then. Big
| international airlines and routes that I take don't fly out
| of Newark.
|
| Believe me, if I had the choice, I would.
|
| Thankfully, domestic routes are still decent from Newark,
| though often more expensive than LGA or JFK.
|
| This isn't just about the airport. I visit friends in Queens
| and spend money there. The toll is exactly the same as going
| to JFK.
| grishka wrote:
| > and pickup and drop-off guides to heavily trafficked
| destinations, so drivers and riders can get in and out of the
| airport (or stadium or park) more easily
|
| Lyft doesn't have that?! I though this was a standard feature of
| taxi apps. Yandex Taxi allows you to call a taxi to a specific
| pole in the arrivals area at the airport in my city, for example.
| thallavajhula wrote:
| The way they made it sound seemed like they built a new solution
| for the maps. Them using OSM over Google Maps doesn't seem like
| it is too much of a big deal due to Lyft's limited presence.
| ikawe wrote:
| In some sense OSM is "just" the database -- what things exist
| and where are those things.
|
| A mapping product like Google/Apple Maps includes a lot more
| functionality that often gets taken for granted.
|
| For instance: - A geocoding search engine to find places by
| name, address, or description - navigational directions -
| tiling and other data distribution (which is both software and
| hardware) - styling and UI
|
| There is a huge variety of open source options for this
| functionality, but it's hardly a plug and play thing, and
| quality varies wildly. Putting it all together is no small
| feat.
|
| Disclaimer: I work on Headway (https://about.maps.earth) which
| is trying to make this kind of thing easier.
| ceejayoz wrote:
| I sure hope they're throwing OSM some cash donations as a thanks.
| bri3d wrote:
| Does anyone know if Lyft plan to contribute their map corrections
| back to OSM? They mention other companies doing so in this blog
| post, but don't make it clear whether or not they, too, intend
| to.
|
| I'm curious to see how good Lyft Maps is, too. Uber Maps is,
| frankly, a disaster in my area, frequently suggesting illegal
| and/or impossible turns. I try to submit map feedback every trip
| (very hard as a rider, as most forms of available feedback seem
| to be to punish the driver rather than the platform), and it's
| still never been fixed. Most drivers seem to use Google Maps or
| Waze instead and if I see a driver using Uber Maps, I need to
| watch the trip and suggest several corrections. Ironically, I'm
| only a few miles from the office where most Uber Maps staff used
| to work.
| throwaway049 wrote:
| I've submitted a correction for an illegal turn instruction
| twice on Google maps. No reply. But my other corrections have
| been accepted.
| Retric wrote:
| Map creators include intentionally incorrect information (Map
| Traps) so people copying them are obviously copying them. I
| sometimes wonder if that's the root cause of companies
| failing to correct some of their _mistakes_.
|
| https://www.gislounge.com/map-traps-intentional-mapping-
| erro...
| bri3d wrote:
| Using anything that could cause incorrect directions as a
| trap location / trap street would be a ridiculously bad
| idea. I strongly suspect the reason is a more standard
| corporate one; the volume of corrections and signal to
| noise ratio is probably quite poor.
|
| In the case of my repeated Uber map correction attempt, I
| suspect that my correction isn't prioritized because of two
| factors: first, the turn which Uber Maps suggests, while
| both illegal and very dangerous, is not impossible (it's an
| illegal left turn accomplished by making a U-Turn around an
| island designed to prevent left turns). So, they probably
| see enough volume of "driver completed route as suggested"
| data signals to ignore any "but it's illegal and dangerous"
| complaints, a classic problem with "data driven" systems.
| And, Uber don't seem to have a real process for riders to
| submit mapping corrections, only drivers, so my request is
| unlikely to ever be routed to the correct queue to begin
| with.
| pietervdvn wrote:
| Map Traps (as these are called) are normally pretty
| harmless, e.g. a non-existent, small cul-de-sac that
| doesn't exist. A turn restriction (which is quite
| invisible!) seldom is.
| Scoundreller wrote:
| Meanwhile, in Toronto, I see some bigger driveways listed
| as roads on Google maps, and I always wonder if it's a
| legally correct city survey artefact and I could park a
| car there etc. if I wanted, or just a
| trap/misclassification.
|
| https://maps.app.goo.gl/CXRh6LFRhgZo1P9k8?g_st=ic
| pietervdvn wrote:
| Yeah, good question. Whether it was intentional or not,
| it still acts as good Map Trap
| altairprime wrote:
| The way to get that corrected is to ask the local police to
| ticket illegal turns at that intersection for a day,
| indicating that Google refuses to correct the issue and is
| directing hundreds of violations a day at the intersection.
| Google ignores _unenforced_ road signs that are frequently
| ignored by their data providers (drivers), so enforcement
| complaints from drivers are necessary to force the
| correction.
| bsimpson wrote:
| I don't understand how Maps verification works.
|
| I've added sidewalk vendors to the map with names like
| "coconut cakes lady," and had them approved instantly.
|
| I've also tried to rename streets, including the news article
| about the name change, and had them unceremoniously ignored.
| Same for adding a new bar to the map with a photo of the
| menu, even though other places I've added have had hundreds
| of thousands of views.
|
| There doesn't seem to be an underlying system. There's a
| famous traffic stop in Muine, Vietnam listed as something
| like "social security office." The photos are all of the
| traffic stop. The reviews are about the traffic stop. If you
| run the name on Maps through translate, it comes back
| "traffic stop." I've tried repeatedly changing the category
| to "traffic police" and been silently denied.
|
| There's a bar in downtown SF at the wrong address. Comments
| are about the address being wrong. There's even a photo that
| says "our address on Maps is wrong." Try to fix it in Maps?
| Denied.
| digdigdag wrote:
| Providing feedback to large corporate machines is akin to
| screaming into the void at this point. Sometimes the void
| hears you and responds with a generous canned message. Other
| times you unsurprisingly get silence. That's why I became
| completely divested and disinterested in providing general
| feedback for maps, locations etc.
| sushisource wrote:
| I also find it consistently obnoxious that there is essentially
| no way to say "My driver was fine, but your platform did
| something stupid" when leaving feedback. At least, not without
| jumping through a million hoops. The arrogance of our industry
| is tiresome.
|
| I took a ride in SF a while ago and it predicted a 3 minute
| pick up time which turned out to be 25 minutes - no fault of
| the driver, and the only way I could complain about this was to
| click through like 4 levels of "other issue" and then jump
| through hoops sending emails back and forth with support.
| bsimpson wrote:
| Lyft support is inconsistent.
|
| Sometimes, you'll report a minor issue and get an over-the-
| top "OMG - WE'RE SO SORRY! HERE'S FREE MONEY AND YOU'LL NEVER
| BE PAIRED WITH THIS DRIVER AGAIN!"
|
| Other times, you'll report an actual problem, like being
| charged more than advertised, and they'll do nothing to
| remediate.
|
| After being charged more than expected on a couple recent
| rides, I basically stopped using Lyft.
| throwway120385 wrote:
| If it's anything like AirBnB, it probably depends on
| whether you're getting the chipper day-shift call center or
| the cheap outsourced offshore call center as far as what
| kind of support you get. My wife and I landed in a
| cockroach-infested but very beautiful condo through AirBnB
| once and the night shift guy basically accused me of being
| used to living with cockroaches as a business traveler and
| that one or two should be expected. I had to offer to send
| him video of me spraying the walls of the kitchen with
| roach spray with tens of wriggling bodies of various instar
| stage falling onto the counter before he would even commit
| to looking in to it.
|
| I called the same support number the morning after and the
| support people were all very accommodating. Called them one
| more time that afternoon to confirm that our payments were
| refunded and got the same treatment as the previous night.
|
| This experience is one of the reasons I never use AirBnB
| for anything anymore. Their support was awful at the exact
| moment I needed them to offer me any option other than
| sleeping in our rental car on the beach.
| tedivm wrote:
| Lyft's pick up estimates are basically made up as far as I
| can tell.
| balderdash wrote:
| This - I find 2/3rds of my issues are platform vs driver. And
| there is no way to penalize the platform vs the driver + the
| driver then deals with the aftermath of a pissed off customer
| even if they were great. It would be as easy as having two
| star ratings, "how was your driver?", and "how was your whole
| experience?".
| fshbbdssbbgdd wrote:
| I think for users who comparison shop between Uber and Lyft,
| the pickup ETA is part of each app's bid. Putting a lower
| price costs them money, while putting a lower ETA is free.
| balderdash wrote:
| 100% massively detracts from my willingness to pay for
| their services ...
| fshbbdssbbgdd wrote:
| This is a case where a positive AB test result could push
| you in the wrong direction. It might take a long-term
| holdout group to find the negative effect, and those can
| be hard to manage.
| panarky wrote:
| Which is why Lyft does that annoying 59-second countdown
| until you can see your driver's details and actual wait
| time, so you have a sunk cost to discourage you from
| switching to Uber when the actual wait time is longer than
| promised.
| londons_explore wrote:
| This... As soon as you click "reserve", you're locked in...
| yellow_postit wrote:
| Lived near a bridge and both Lyft and Uber would endlessly
| try to have drivers end the drive on the bridge instead of
| routing off it.
| nharada wrote:
| Totally agree, I just had this happen to me two days ago. The
| Uber app bugged out and left me with a fare that was double
| what I was quoted, and there was basically no way to get in
| touch with Uber about it. You know how often support chatbots
| offer a "talk to a human" option? Not Uber. Just links to
| articles about how I'm holding it wrong.
| BizarreByte wrote:
| It's worth taking to Twitter to complain in those
| situations. I'd love if we didn't half to, but I've found
| most companies help when you make your issue public.
|
| Maybe Uber isn't a company who will care, but most are.
| ryandrake wrote:
| Pick up time predictions are garbage, because ride shares
| allow cancelations. Last time I used a ride share, I had
| eight drivers accept and then cancel on me. The predicted
| departure time was always "8 minutes away" and then "looking
| for another driver" over and over. I probably waited an hour.
| mustacheemperor wrote:
| It's especially rich when Lyft gives you this treatment
| after you've selected the more expensive "rapid pickup"
| option. Nothing hits quite like the tech company
| gaslighting experience of being told "Just a moment...Just
| a few more seconds..." for upwards of five minutes by an
| app eager to discourage you from canceling your $5 extra
| "three minute pickup."
| m463 wrote:
| I wonder if you could penalize for cancellations somehow.
|
| Maybe add a cost to accept a ride, which is waived at
| pickup.
|
| (I don't know how things work)
| balderdash wrote:
| I feel like the ride shares need to commit to firm pricing
| and pickup times at booking, ride is discounted $1/min for
| every minute over the estimate.
| KMnO4 wrote:
| I had a ride from YVR airport where no less than 30
| drivers[0] cancelled on me. I would get the notification
| that the driver was on their way, tap it, and then catch a
| brief one second flash of the driver before they
| disappeared and I was back in the queue.
|
| [0]: I'm sure it would be much more, but I gave up and took
| the train instead
| balderdash wrote:
| I don't understand why I shouldn't receive a $5
| cancellation fee when drivers cancel if they are choking
| to charge me $5 for cancelling...
| balderdash wrote:
| I feel like the regular taxi stand is now often much
| faster (and often cheaper) at many airports as a result
| of these dynamics
| JohnFen wrote:
| This is my experience as well, but it's highly dependent
| on what city you're in.
| Firmwarrior wrote:
| Do they actually take credit cards nowadays? And do they
| expect gigantic tips?
|
| I really hate shelling out $60 for a 20 minute taxi ride,
| then being expected to shell out an extra $20 on top of
| that and getting endless grief over wanting to use a
| credit card to top it all off
| ricktdotorg wrote:
| i recently flew to Austin a few times and the turnaround
| time from airport to destination using waiting taxis was
| far, far faster. not cheaper though! i have found these
| Uber/Lyft lots that airports are using now to be a bit of
| disaster; they have markedly reduced the convenience
| factor of uber/lyft from airport to destination.
|
| edited for spelling
| londons_explore wrote:
| At airports, its often much better to walk just outside
| the boundary of the airport.
|
| Airports often have special rules, pickup fees, etc.
| Drivers don't want to pay an $8 fee just to make a loss
| on your journey. As soon as you're a few yards out of the
| airport, none of that applies and a driver will be happy
| to take you.
| dylan604 wrote:
| >its often much better to walk just outside the boundary
| of the airport
|
| are you serious? what airports do you visit where you can
| do this as a suggestion without laughing. It's like
| telling the freshmen that there's a pool on the school
| roof.
|
| even something as small like a Bob Hope in Burbank would
| be difficult. Most airports do not consider pedestrian
| traffic to the edge of their properties. I've done it
| once at that airport because my office was pretty much
| next door to the Fry's across the street. still made me
| regret that decision. I'm now in Dallas and even
| Lovefield pedestrian traffic past getting to the parking
| area is non-existent. From DFW? Forget it. Much like your
| suggestion
| labcomputer wrote:
| Off the top of my head:
|
| LAX: walking paths and signalized crosswalks get you all
| the way to the hotels east of Sepulveda, or take the free
| shuttle to the cell phone lot and order from there.
|
| SJC: Cross the parking garage to the bike path and from
| there cross the street. Or just walk down the bike path
|
| ORD, MDW: Free shuttle to the rental car facility, or
| take the L one stop.
|
| MSN: kind of a long walk, but there are sidewalks the
| whole way
|
| SLC: take the light rail one stop
|
| PSP: dunno why you'd want to walk in the heat, but it's a
| short walk on sidewalks to El Cielo Road
|
| Bear in mind: The minimum wage retail staff that run all
| the stuff in the airport can't really afford to pay even
| economy lot parking rates, so basically every large
| airport has some kind of public transportation if you
| know how to look for it.
| mulmen wrote:
| When I fly out of Seatac in the summer I park my
| motorcycle in the employee parking, which is free. Do
| other airports not offer cheap/free employee parking?
| closeparen wrote:
| Before they had ridesharing at Midway, I would ride the
| first hotel shuttle I could get on and request from its
| parking lot.
| error503 wrote:
| Since the thread is about YVR, it's actually pretty easy
| and safe to walk all the way to Richmond (or a shorter
| distance to the east side of Sea Island which has normal
| businesses / residences). Sidewalks all the way from the
| terminal, and no crazy crossings are required. I'm sure
| this isn't typical, but if you don't mind the walk it's
| perfectly viable in this case.
|
| You can also take the SkyTrain for free within Sea Island
| (which is not well known, I feel) - 2 stops to Templeton,
| and there are probably plenty of Ubers around there,
| since there is an outlet mall near that station, or at
| least a much shorter walk into Richmond.
| LynxInLA wrote:
| It is very easy at LAX. You walk about 100 yards across
| one (admittedly very busy) intersection and get picked up
| for 1/3 the price. You already have to take a shuttle to
| even get picked up unless you have a black car, so this
| adds 5 minutes. It is still annoying if you have luggage.
|
| You could also take a shuttle to a local hotel or car
| rental, but that is breaking some rules.
| dylan604 wrote:
| What 100 yards are you talking about? Stepping out the
| doors at any terminal at LAX takes you to the parking lot
| if you walk 100 yards. To get off of airport grounds
| would take a much significantly longer walk without any
| pedestrian walkway
| labcomputer wrote:
| The airport boundary is Sepulveda, which is, admittedly,
| closer to 300 yards from Terminals 1, 7 and 8.
|
| But there is a pedestrian walkway the entire way. With
| traffic lights at crosswalks and everything.
| LynxInLA wrote:
| I am talking about the walk from LAXit. This is the
| parking lot where Uber/Lyft/Taxi pickups are, and you
| generally have to take a shuttle to get there to begin
| with.
|
| LAXit is on Sepulveda, but it is safer to cross the
| street to a parking lot. I'll admit I underestimated the
| distance. It is closer to 300 yards:
|
| https://goo.gl/maps/DWsk4MSx9HuDJAJz5
| ghaff wrote:
| Walking out of an airport of any size (and even many/most
| smaller commercial airports) is between impossible and
| taking your life in your hands given that
| sidewalks/crosswalks/etc. are largely lacking. Most
| commercial airports just don't contemplate pedestrians
| walking in and out. It _might_ be possible to walk to
| East Boston from Logan airport though I 'm not sure how--
| and that's an airport that's basically right in the city.
| ebiester wrote:
| Logan is one of the easiest. You just take the bus to the
| MBTA stop or the free silver line into Seaport. The
| convenient public transportation is the reason I rarely
| take cabs or rideshare to or from Logan.
| ghaff wrote:
| Sure. It's convenient to public transit. Really no reason
| to catch a cab to downtown unless you have a lot of
| luggage, you're going in or out at a weird time, or home
| is somewhere inconvenient to public transit. I was
| responding to literal "walking." (I live outside the city
| personally and transit doesn't really work.)
| [deleted]
| sahila wrote:
| Take a shuttle to car rentals or a hotel, and then you'd
| be out of the airport area; doesn't have to be a "walk"
| walk.
| dylan604 wrote:
| Most airports have moved to a centralized rental car
| location that is still inside the airport perimeter, so
| not sure how this is helping? The ride share algos are
| still going to recognize you are at the airport and
| charge you accordingly
| labcomputer wrote:
| Typically the centralized rental car facility is near or
| at the airport boundary at airports I'm familiar with.
| mvdtnz wrote:
| > At airports, its often much better to walk just outside
| the boundary of the airport.
|
| Even easier to use one of the many taxi cabs waiting at
| the curb right by the terminal.
| jazzyjackson wrote:
| Talking to a driver about this I was told that the platform
| is always re-routing drivers to maximize revenue for lyft,
| so when the app says "finding you another driver", it's not
| the driver that canceled, it's the platform decided that
| driver was better off, revenue wise, to complete a
| different fare.
|
| The fact that this is opaque to the end user just means we
| get mad at the workers and not the corporation, classic.
| londons_explore wrote:
| The fact that OP can see "finding another driver" 8 times
| suggests that perhaps there is some prioritization
| system, and OP was low priority - such that if any other
| request came in before him, then the driver would be re-
| routed.
| dylan604 wrote:
| Possible that those shitty tips you've been leaving are
| adding up in other ways? I live in a neighborhood that
| borders a part of town that is accepted as a "bad" part
| of town and is often confused as being part of that part
| of town. I have only ever not had the "finding another
| driver" twice from my house, and originally assumed it
| was location location location. I had a guest stay with
| me last summer, and they never received that treatment
| which led me to believe it was an account thing. We'd
| test by requesting a car at the same time. Their rates
| were cheaper, and they never had a new driver issue.
| londons_explore wrote:
| It would make perfect sense to have some ML model which
| predicts which customers will be most profitable, and
| treat those guys well to improve retention amongst that
| client set.
| 29083011397778 wrote:
| (Regarding Uber, not Lyft, but...) It would also make
| perfect sense to predict which customers are
| investigators in areas Uber is illegal, and avoid them.
| Which they did [0]. I would be shocked if they _weren 't_
| giving more profitable customers higher priority and
| better treatment.
|
| [0]
| https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/mar/03/uber-
| secr...
| darkwizard42 wrote:
| Forget ML, Lyft can tell if you are a more profitable /
| more engaged customer through your usage of Lyft Pink,
| which explicitly offers Priority Pickup. They are
| transparent about getting you a driver sooner, for
| cheaper, and I guess the subscription you pay for drives
| the value.
| justrealist wrote:
| Uber used to never allow drivers to rate the riders after
| the tipping was complete. Not sure if that's still the
| flow.
| minhazm wrote:
| It's much simpler than that. Drivers accept and then they
| cancel the ride themselves if they don't like the
| destination or the earnings. Normally you would penalize
| those drivers but I imagine with Lyft losing market share
| they likely can't afford to penalize drivers all that
| much.
| humanistbot wrote:
| No, drivers don't see the destination until they arrive
| and the trip begins.
|
| I'm often on one side of the Bay Area trying to get to
| the other and had many drivers pull up, then cancel or
| try to get me to cancel when they see I'm going across
| the Bay.
| isaacremuant wrote:
| I don't know about lyft but with Uber this depends on the
| country (gov regulations might force to be transparent
| with the drivers beforehand).
| shawabawa3 wrote:
| My assumption was that most drivers are using 3+
| different apps, so if they get an Uber request while
| they're driving a Lyft route they just don't accept it,
| hence the bouncing around "finding another driver"
| because all the drivers are already busy
| panarky wrote:
| Also, _riders_ are using two or three different apps, so
| if Uber promises a 2-minute wait and then confirms with a
| 6-minute wait and Lyft is promising a 3-minute wait,
| cancel the Uber ride and now that driver is available
| again.
| mulmen wrote:
| Doesn't that incur a cancellation fee?
| 1_1xdev1 wrote:
| Usually not in my experience, as long as it's within a
| short time (5 minutes?) since booking.
| minhazm wrote:
| That's at least not true for Lyft as of October last
| year. But there are many factors, like other apps,
| traffic, getting offered something better from another
| app, etc.
|
| > With upfront pay, drivers can now see ride information
| and what they'll earn before accepting a ride. Drivers
| will have access to trip details including the pickup and
| drop-off locations, estimated time and distance to
| complete the ride, and a map view of the full ride in
| addition to the fare.
|
| https://www.lyft.com/blog/posts/upfront-pay-and-the-next-
| cha...
| pimlottc wrote:
| > Pick up time predictions are garbage
|
| This boils me to no end. Google Maps estimates often make
| rideshare look like a timesaver compared to transit, but
| when you add five, ten, even fifteen minutes to the pickup
| estimate, it really changes things.
| uneekname wrote:
| Lyft is one of the biggest contributors to OSM. Here is a list
| of OSM accounts related to Lyft [0]. In many places where I've
| edited OSM, Lyft employees have contributed quality data where
| there wasn't any before.
|
| How (and, how respectfully) companies should contribute to OSM
| is an ongoing debate. But corporate influences are often a good
| thing, and I think nearly anyone would agree that Lyft's
| contributions to OSM have been resoundingly helpful.
|
| [0] https://github.com/OSM-DCT-Lyft/US/wiki/OSM-Team-Members
| bri3d wrote:
| Isn't this the driverless car team, vs. the ride-mapping
| team?
|
| Regardless, it's good to see that they are contributing back
| to OSM. I agree that overall the use of OSM by anyone "lifts
| all ships" as long as users continue to contribute back. OSM
| is one of the most positive projects around lately in terms
| of taking something that used to be extremely expensive and
| highly restricted and democratizing it.
| ninja3925 wrote:
| I used to work for Lyft and I can confirm that both teams
| (driverless and ride-share) contribute. Ride-share scaled
| later which may give you that false impression.
|
| And Yes, it's a big investment for Lyft for the open source
| community.
| uneekname wrote:
| That may be true. But as a whole, it is worth noting that
| Lyft hires a significant number of people to edit OSM. Here
| is an interesting 2021 post by Jennings Anderson discussing
| paid edits on OSM, and how companies compare in their
| contributions:
|
| https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Jennings%20Anderson/diar
| y...
|
| I agree about how successful OSM has been recently. In an
| age where Wikipedia for example seems relatively mature,
| it's fun to see OSM grow at such a pace.
| mistrial9 wrote:
| Jennings Anderson is a lead on Digital Twins
| standardization now
| acslater00 wrote:
| Yes - Lyft contributed the overwhelming majority of the new
| data back into OSM. The only exceptions were layers that didn't
| meet OSM community standards for various technical reasons.
|
| Source - I led this team
| NelsonMinar wrote:
| Thanks for making the contributions, we all benefit!
| idiotsecant wrote:
| If you had any pull in that decision, well done. You made the
| world a little bit better for everyone. Can't ask for much
| more than that sometimes.
| mistrial9 wrote:
| your team contributed more OSM changes than .. who? everyone
| else in the whole world?
| bri3d wrote:
| They're saying "we contributed the overwhelming majority of
| the data we collected and corrected, except for that which
| wasn't eligible for contribution." It really seems like
| Lyft operated in good faith here, they just didn't mention
| it in the blog post.
| jaywalk wrote:
| I'm pretty sure he meant that Lyft contributed the
| overwhelming majority of the changes _they made_ to OSM.
| endisneigh wrote:
| some people's reading comprehension...
| piebro wrote:
| Here is an overview of which corporation contribute how many
| edits based on the osm account names affiliated with the
| corporations: https://piebro.github.io/openstreetmap-
| statistics/#b34d Lyft is the eleventh most active company by
| edit count with a total of 4M edits and 1.5M edits in the last
| year.
|
| Disclaimer: I created the stats and website.
| ccooffee wrote:
| > By late 2019, Lorimer and Justin Moore, then the head of
| engineering, were ready to form a team to "do the impossible" --
| create a home-grown mapping system.
|
| THE IMPOSSIBLE: A "home-grown" mapping system built on
| OpenStreetMaps?
|
| Lyft seems to really lack any imagination if _that_ was
| considered impossible.
| imbusy111 wrote:
| It was impossible a few years ago, when the OSM data wasn't
| good enough and the cost of acquiring the data themselves was
| too high.
| babyshake wrote:
| If the managers and ICs agree that something is impossible
| but they will do or have done it anyways, then that makes a
| pretty good case for them getting promotions.
| bredren wrote:
| I have thought that some major service migrated to OSM by
| 2019. I can't remember which, or even if it was a success.
| But I didn't realize the data was that bad just three years
| ago.
|
| Then again, Apple Maps started getting sorted out around then
| too iirc.
| 29083011397778 wrote:
| > Then again, Apple Maps started getting sorted out around
| then too iirc.
|
| And we assume completely coincidentally? Not that Apple
| Maps, like Google Maps, pulls in data volunteered by the
| OSM community (both corporate and personal members),
| packages and improves (sometimes "improves") it, then locks
| it away behind paid API calls?
|
| In this case and many others, the free and community built
| project enabled, assisted, or powered the multi-billion
| dollar tech conglomorate.
|
| I recognize I might sound bitter or dismissive of companies
| mapping the world and giving it away to consumers for free,
| but so much is built on openness that so many companies
| just eat without giving back.
| itake wrote:
| Grab has been using OSM for years and they contribute back. I
| don't see where the innovation is here?
|
| https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Grab
| KaiserPro wrote:
| > Lyft seems to really lack any imagination if _that_ was
| considered impossible.
|
| Depends on how you are making the maps. If you're paying
| someone to trudge around/trace out satellite photos, then yes,
| its not very imaginative.
|
| If you are using SLAM to generate maps automatically, then
| thats a different beast entirely. Only a handful of companies
| were able to do that in 2019, two got bought by meta (who then
| fucked up the tech, well done zuck) two went bankrupt and one
| was aquired by lyft.
| sushid wrote:
| What's more shocking is that they decided using 250 high paid
| EPD workers to not pay a Google Map licensing was the way to
| go.
|
| They could have incubated at least 10 different products during
| this critical time.
| lowbloodsugar wrote:
| Given that Lyft's only rival, Uber, is partnering with
| Google's Waymo, seems like a prescient move to get out from
| Google's thumb.
| twelve40 wrote:
| it's not about not paying Google Map licensing. There are, as
| mentioned, geo features like pickup ETA, trip ETA and cost,
| drop-off location photos and features that Google doesn't
| provide at all.
| everybodyknows wrote:
| > removing the distracting clutter of irrelevant stores,
| restaurants
|
| This much at least makes strategic sense, with Google continuing
| to ratchet up intrusive advertising. How long I wonder before we
| see, say, animated icons for "selected" cell phone stores?
| otterley wrote:
| The tone of this article is troubling.
|
| First, the focus is on savings to Lyft, and not how this
| innovation benefits customers in any way.
|
| Second, it is highly antagonistic to Google - who is probably
| still a partner to Lyft in many other aspects (advertising etc).
| Taking shots at your partners is generally considered bad for
| business.
| heed wrote:
| Cost savings was definitely a factor, but this is the key point
| from the article:
|
| "And yet, until very recently, Lyft had limited control over
| that navigation experience, which was built using Google Maps.
| "For our entire existence, we couldn't fundamentally change
| that product," says director of project management Ben Schrom."
|
| I've worked in the mapping space for more than 20 years and I
| can tell you one of the biggest annoyances with using third
| party mapping data is that you are beholden to their cadence
| and tooling for making updates to the map - you have virtually
| no control over the data. This is a big reason both Google and
| Apple built their own map.
|
| The benefit of using OSM is that you are provided decent
| tooling and a relatively streamlined process for making
| updates. Map data quality is incredibly important, especially
| for navigation and it's really hard to manage because the map
| is always changing - it's not a static thing.
| thelittlenag wrote:
| I was part of a startup whose entire point was opening up
| that control. Sadly we failed to gain traction. At least our
| idea is still around and we may pick it back up if we find
| the time and energy.
| LeFantome wrote:
| The article I read talked a lot about the benefits to drivers.
| That translates fairly directly to the service being offered to
| customers. Having your driver more easily figure out where to
| pick you up or drop you off is a huge service win for
| customers. Keeping your driver more focussed on navigation
| translates not only to better trips but safer ones as well. The
| statement was that they did not want to rely on a 3rd party to
| generate 90% of the pixels your customers are looking at. How
| did you miss all this customer focus? I am not sure it is fair
| to say this was all about profit juicing for Lyft.
|
| My issue with the article is just the mind-boggling premise
| that leveraging an Open Source mapping project is "the
| impossible" vs using Google Maps. Also, there are lots of other
| options including of course ESRI.
| acdha wrote:
| Savings benefit Lyft customers directly by keeping the company
| solvent - since the rides aren't being heavily subsidized, the
| rates are going to go up and things like this will reduce the
| sting.
|
| It also helps indirectly by giving them control. Google doesn't
| do product development well and Maps has been stagnant or even
| regressing for years. Lyft can always flub it but now they have
| the incentives lined up where the only party needed to make
| what Lyft users want is Lyft.
|
| As for Google, they're a big company and they can take
| criticism. It's certainly not like they're shy about canceling
| products or changing the terms any time some MBA thinks it'll
| help their bonus, and I'd be quite surprised if they didn't
| pass on the opportunity to keep a customer multiple times
| before now.
| uneekname wrote:
| It may be antagonistic, but Google Maps really isn't the one-
| stop shop it used to be in the mapping world. Companies like
| Lyft have been looking for alternatives for a while now.
| neurostimulant wrote:
| > Second, it is highly antagonistic to Google - who is probably
| still a partner to Lyft in many other aspects (advertising
| etc). Taking shots at your partners is generally considered bad
| for business.
|
| Wasn't it Google that significantly raised their map api price
| a few years ago that prompted ride sharing apps to pursue open
| source solutions to replace google maps? Google took the first
| shot here. Other ride sharing apps are doing this. Grab is
| another ride sharing app that invest heavily in open street
| map.
| zitterbewegung wrote:
| Great can someone at Lyft either comment on if they will
| contribute what they made on top of OSM or if it is even useful
| to contribute back ? I think the answer is No and this is HN
| clickbait.
|
| I really want to be wrong.
| timerol wrote:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36127623 claims that they
| did contribute back most of the data they gathered
| dpflan wrote:
| Thanks for pointing this out.
| cdbattags wrote:
| So which open source routing project do we believe they're using
| along with it? Valhalla?
|
| Edit:
|
| I'm co-founder and CTO of a heavy haul/oversize routing SaaS
| called Triple Axle (https://tripleaxle.com). We using OSM and
| Valhalla.
| q7xvh97o2pDhNrh wrote:
| Cool startup! I did some work for a client in the trucking
| space a while back, and I came away with a new appreciation for
| what a fascinating vertical it is.
|
| If you don't mind me asking, how'd you end up in the space? It
| feels like the vertical has so much esoteric/specific
| knowledge. We ran into a few companies that were founded by
| truckers (or by people who had truckers in the family), and it
| seemed like already having all this knowledge gave them a big
| leg up.
| DoctorOW wrote:
| This is yet another "We found a community project providing us
| with billions of dollars in free work but don't find it worth the
| effort to contribute anything back"
| elliotto wrote:
| This is capitalism's only strategy.
| iLoveOncall wrote:
| I may get downvoted, but if OSM was not fine with this exact
| situation happening, then they shouldn't license it the way
| they do.
|
| Nothing seems to indicate so far that they're not fine with the
| situation so it looks like everyone is happy.
| rPlayer6554 wrote:
| I think both sentiments can be valid. If OSM really needs
| those contributions they need to take responsibility for
| updating the license. But we as a community should encourage
| companies to give back to the OSS projects they benefit from.
| pietervdvn wrote:
| Well, it is not as if the OSM-community is a monolithic one.
| Some people are hardline anti-corporate and don't like this;
| others are part of a big corporation and see this as business
| as usual.
|
| Even if Lyft would not give back in some form (spoiler: they
| do, see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lyft), it spreads
| awareness and drivers will figure out they can fix issues
| themselves.
| refulgentis wrote:
| You think they wanted to own more of their product, integrated
| OSM, and now if there's complaints or things to change they're
| like "sorry nah"?
|
| That doesn't sound right to me, I'm curious if you have any
| examples or sources
| reaperman wrote:
| I think GP is saying they expect Lyft respond to complaints
| or things to change by fixing them in their internal OSM
| database, but maybe not propagate those changes back to
| canonical OSM for everyone else to enjoy.
| Ajedi32 wrote:
| Couldn't that become hard to maintain after a while though,
| once the OSM map changes and they start getting conflicts?
| I think that's often the biggest reason why corps
| contribute back to open source projects rather than
| maintaining internal forks for everything.
|
| I guess it's possible though they could just deal with that
| if they feel like having better maps is a significant
| competitive advantage, but if the goal is just to not be
| dependent on Google upstreaming the edits sounds like a
| better idea.
| hinkley wrote:
| I really wish that companies had a donation program where
| employees get to vote on their favorite project, and the
| company cuts a check every time a project hits 50 votes
| (including things that got 20 votes each for the last 3
| election cycles)
| codethief wrote:
| We have something like this at our firm (IT consulting shop).
| Every Christmas, everyone gets to propose & vote on projects
| (software and otherwise) that we should fund.
| hinkley wrote:
| Any good literature on how to convince companies to do
| this?
| minhazm wrote:
| Microsoft does this, though not sure if the program is still
| active.
|
| https://github.com/microsoft/foss-fund
| squokko wrote:
| If OSM doesn't want this to happen then OSM can use different
| license terms.
| shp0ngle wrote:
| Big corps that use OSM are actually contributing a lot back
| into OSM by actually fixing data issues. I have seen that
| first-hand; at a Corp that was using OSM, they had a big team
| doing just that the whole working day. Just fixing issues in
| OSM that the customer have reported.
|
| I think they in the end decided to fork OSM and make it
| proprietary to keep the data in-house; but I might be wrong. I
| was not there anymore.
|
| edit: maybe I am wrong. It was Grab, "uber for Asia". They
| still edit OSM it seems...
|
| https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Grab#Grab_Data_Team
|
| edit2: the users seem to be inactive now, so maybe I was right.
| I don't know.
|
| edit3: when I look at the corporate members, lots of them seem
| to be taxi companies. I guess it makes sense. I see Gojek, Grab
| and Bolt.
|
| https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Corporate_Members
| piebro wrote:
| Looking at all edits done by osm member affiliated with Grab
| from that wiki list (https://piebro.github.io/openstreetmap-
| statistics/#b34d) it seems they contributed a lot of edits
| (21M in total, sixth largest company contributor). The amount
| of edits slowed down on the last year though.
| lefuturiste wrote:
| If they fork it and use the data publicly, it need to be
| shared in the same license (ODBL)
| acslater00 wrote:
| Lyft contributed essentially everything back to OSM
| Twirrim wrote:
| So this is another example of HN commenters getting up on
| their high horse before gathering facts? Say it isn't so!
| RobotToaster wrote:
| Honestly you would think Lyft would be more explicit about
| contributing back in their article.
|
| This isn't the first time I've seen a company contributing
| back to open source but completely neglecting to mention it
| in their post about it. It's weird, usually companies love
| to virtue signal about any tiny thing they do for society.
| hackernewds wrote:
| should we commend them for doing that or pull them down?
| ikawe wrote:
| The ODbL requires Lyft to contribute back any edits they make.
|
| https://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/summary/
|
| > Share-Alike: If you publicly use any adapted version of this
| database, or works produced from an adapted database, you must
| also offer that adapted database under the ODbL.
| NelsonMinar wrote:
| "Lyft contributed the overwhelming majority of the new data
| back into OSM" according to this comment posted after yours:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36127623
| AlbertCory wrote:
| Good for them (and I say this as someone who was actually in
| Google Maps, both in monetization and in regular development).
|
| Maps has been losing money for literally decades. I don't know if
| they've finally turned that around or not. In some parts of the
| world, they were still paying a 3rd party _per lookup_ because
| they didn 't own the data.
|
| I also don't know the numbers for their API charges, but I
| wouldn't be surprised if the totals are mostly symbolic, for VP's
| to defend themselves as "Hey, look, we're getting all we can out
| of it!"
| nneonneo wrote:
| Lyft and Uber have been very disappointing at the local airport
| lately. Lyft pickups from the airport are supposedly cheap but
| the last time I tried getting one it let me wait for 20 minutes;
| I eventually gave up and got a taxi.
|
| Uber from the airport regularly surges, usually right after a
| flight lands, and their surge price puts them well above the
| price of the taxis that are ready and waiting to pick people up.
| I'm not even sure why anyone would take an Uber at surge prices -
| and it's not like their regular price is that much cheaper than a
| taxi anyway.
|
| Also, the taxi companies have gradually been getting better at
| the app game. They're still a ways off from Uber/Lyft's
| usability, but they're also less likely to be flaky and they
| never surge.
| maerF0x0 wrote:
| Can you please share what taxi apps you'd recommend?
| endisneigh wrote:
| i'm very curious what's stopping someone from simply replicating
| Google map data into OSM. do you have to have provenance when
| sending over data?
| dpflan wrote:
| The title here is missing a key word from Lyft's post: "secret",
| for the "secret plan". I thought map ownership/dominance was a
| key idea, like a decade ago, when Lyft and Uber started.
| Interesting that the issue was OSM wasn't robust enough until
| now. Was Lyft actively assigning engineers to work on OSM (or
| waiting?); couldn't that have accelerated OSM's path to
| robustness? This idea certainly takes time to develop into
| reality, but it seems like a lackluster idea to post now, in
| hopes of making Lyft more robust itself, but it's hard to not be
| cynical about stock price bump PR releases.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-05-30 23:01 UTC)