Talk:Real-time ridesharing

message: I am a bit concerned that this page diverges quite far, in my estimation, from the traditional use of the term "ridesharing" in transportation studies. For one thing, "real-time" or "dynamic ridesharing" should be a subcategory of ridesharing, but there is no page covering ridesharing in general. Second, and this is quite serious, several of the for-profit services listed as examples on this page are not traditionally considered ridesharing, because the drivers operate for a profit, and take riders on routes that the driver would not have taken otherwise. While it is true that these companies adopted the term "ridesharing" for legal purposes, they are not considered true ridesharing by scholars.
I would propose altering the text to either a) remove references to for-profit ridesharing companies, or b) include a section noting how these are different from traditional ridesharing services. I can't help but note that:
-- Very close to the beginning, there is a statement that ridesharing is provided by "Transportation Network Companies," yet the State of California invented that category specifically as a rejection of the argument that the companies involved were, in fact, "ridesharing." This is laughable and should be corrected.
-- Not until far down the page does the distinction between "TNCs" and traditional ridesharing services get mentioned, at the end of a paragraph. If reference to TNCs is kept, this point should be brought further to the front, where TNCs are first introduced.
Squidface tony (talk) 20:57, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I think they're the subject of the article in that they represent the state of the field. At the very least they are a significant development or evolution, or something that springs partly from the earlier ad-hoc ride sharing. In the early days, and in places outside California, their legal justification is that someone happens to be driving around in their car, and the service matches them with someone who happens to want to go from point A to point B. That shares some attributes and probably overlaps both with taxi services and with noncommercial ride sharing. Is there a separate article on the subject? - Wikidemon (talk) 16:01, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misrepresentation of ridesharing 

message: Currently the article says "Examples include Lyft, Uber, Sidecar and Wingz." But none of these are ridesharing in any meaningful sense. They all offer cars that go where the paying customer directs, and then perhaps travel empty back to the source of rides. This does not reduce car miles any more than taxis do. They are nice services, but hardly a way to "better utilize the empty seats in most passenger cars, thus lowering fuel usage." I lean toward removing these examples.
Tomday (talk) 15:10, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I think they're the subject of the article in that they represent the state of the field. At the very least they are a significant development or evolution, or something that springs partly from the earlier ad-hoc ride sharing. In the early days, and in places outside California, their legal justification is that someone happens to be driving around in their car, and the service matches them with someone who happens to want to go from point A to point B. That shares some attributes and probably overlaps both with taxi services and with noncommercial ride sharing. Is there a separate article on the subject? - Wikidemon (talk) 16:01, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Include Non-ridesharing Companies? 

message: I propose we rename this to Real-time ridesharing.  This gets almost three times as many Google hits  as the current title .  It is a more precise term.  Also, alliteration.  MakeBelieveMonster (talk) 13:25, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Seeing no objections, I will rename it. MakeBelieveMonster (talk) 05:20, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rename proposal 

message: I removed the following text from the lead, as it seemed too specific for a broad article like this:
::In 2013, San Francisco International Airport began issuing cease and desist letters to numerous rideshare companies. Airport officials also began to admonish and make citizen arrests of drivers for trespassing.http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2013/07/29/sfo-citizen-arrests-internet-rideshare/ Taxicab companies also cite the lack of regulation on rideshare drivers as a reason that the practice needs to be regulated.http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2013/07/30/cab-drivers-hold-noisy-rally-at-san-francisco-city-hall-to-protest-rideshare/
This material probably would fit nicely on the pages of the particular companies involved, though.  MakeBelieveMonster (talk) 23:32, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: There have been a lot of cases of regulatory agencies shutting down ridesharing services, generally the agencies dealing with taxis and limousines.  The article would probably benefit from a summary of these various obstacles - that would be better than simply pointing out a single case.  MakeBelieveMonster (talk) 02:10, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

text: Not done: the requested edit appears to be of a promotional nature, and the link has per WP:ELNO not been added. Please also read Wikipedia:Other stuff exists. Sam Sailor Sing 10:23, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  San Francisco situation 

message: I suggest the following simultaneous changes to this and some other pages:
As I understand it, we need these separate pages:
(1) Ride-hailing: This should be the term that encompasses what are currently called "Transportation Network Companies" -- that's a term that those companies have successfully advanced, and it should re-route to Ride-hailing. Note that serious researchers use ride-hailing (e.g., UC Davis ITS - https://itspubs.ucdavis.edu/wp-content/themes/ucdavis/pubs/download_pdf.php?id=2752, and the Shared Use Mobility Center - http://sharedusemobilitycenter.org).
(2) A (mostly new) separate page for genuine ride-sharing, probably under that label. There are apps that do genuine sharing, and we should feature them as a separate category. Lyft, Uber, and other so-called TNCs (or ride-hailing apps/companies) aren't really engaged in _sharing_ of any kind, unless one specifically orders a shared ride. (A previous comment has noted this.)
I don't want to sound dogmatic here; there are other coherent paths forward:
(a) Instead of ride-hailing (which is accurate and evocative, I think), we could say ride-sourcing (similarly accurate and evocative).
(b) "Peer-to-peer transportation platforms" and "Transportation as a Service" (an example here: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/585c3439be65942f022bbf9b/t/591a2e4be6f2e1c13df930c5/1494888038959/RethinkX+Report_051517.pdf) both work well.
I would be happy to chip in, but I don't have the authority to make these changes. Also, I'm generally not sure how to move this conversation forward. Let me know how I can help!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oregonskov (talk • contribs) 18:23, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rename this entry to represent recent research on transportation