Uber Doesn't Decrease Drunk Driving, Finds New Study (washingtonpost.com) 72
"A new study casts doubt on Uber's claim that ride-sharing has reduced drunken driving," reports the Washington Post. An anonymous Slashdot reader quotes their report:
Researchers at Oxford University and the University of Southern California who examined county-level data in the United States before and after the arrival of Uber and its competitors in those markets found that ride-sharing had no effect on drinking-related or holiday- and weekend-related fatalities. One reason could be that, despite the soaring popularity of Uber and other ride-sharing services, there still may not be enough ride-share drivers available yet to make a dent on drunken driving, the authors said.
They also suggest that the tipsy riders who now call Uber are the ones who formerly would have called a taxi. For others, the odds of getting a DUI are still so low that many would prefer to gamble rather than lay out money for a ride-sharing service. Drunks, after all, are just not rational.
One reason for the low number of Uber drivers may be that the 10-year study only examined data through 2014. While other studies have found a decrease in drunk driving arrests associated with Uber -- for example, in California -- the Post's article suggests that ridesharing drivers may just be a drop in the bucket. "Although approximately 450,000 people now drive for Uber, there are 210 million licensed drivers in the United States -- and an estimated 4.2 million adults who drive impaired, the study says."
They also suggest that the tipsy riders who now call Uber are the ones who formerly would have called a taxi. For others, the odds of getting a DUI are still so low that many would prefer to gamble rather than lay out money for a ride-sharing service. Drunks, after all, are just not rational.
One reason for the low number of Uber drivers may be that the 10-year study only examined data through 2014. While other studies have found a decrease in drunk driving arrests associated with Uber -- for example, in California -- the Post's article suggests that ridesharing drivers may just be a drop in the bucket. "Although approximately 450,000 people now drive for Uber, there are 210 million licensed drivers in the United States -- and an estimated 4.2 million adults who drive impaired, the study says."
It's true (Score:4, Funny)
Every Uber I've taken, the driver has been wasted. I just push him out of the car and drive myself. Then I have the car towed in the morning.
Re: (Score:2)
Dude, you gotta quit drinking.
Austin Chased Uber and Lyft Out (Score:2)
Drunk driving arrests increased....Fact. [keyetv.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Woah, woah, WOAH!!!! No facts man! This is /.!
Seriously though, drinking impairs judgement. And not just the judgement you use on the road once you are driving, but more importantly, the judgement you use to decide if you are too drunk to drive in the first place. Those that are too impaired to make sound decisions will, if given the opportunity by friends or bystanders, choose to drive drunk regardless of how many options you give them. And, it is those individuals that are so blasted they end up kill
Opposite of my experience (Score:5, Informative)
Since Uber hit the streets I can't remember the last time I drove even a little bit tipsy. There's just no need for it when for $5-6 bucks I can get home at a moments notice with zero risk of a DUI. Its incredibly affordable "insurance".
Re: (Score:3)
Since Uber hit the streets I can't remember the last time I drove even a little bit tipsy. There's just no need for it when for $5-6 bucks I can get home at a moments notice with zero risk of a DUI. Its incredibly affordable "insurance".
Before Uber you didn't use this same logic and take a cab?
Re:Opposite of my experience (Score:5, Informative)
No. Because where I live (Fort Worth Suburbs) a cab could take as much as an hour to show up and cost $50 bucks. Uber brought us something we never had before. Quick access and affordability.
Re:Opposite of my experience (Score:5, Interesting)
Ride Sharing is hype. (Score:1)
No. Because where I live (Fort Worth Suburbs) a cab could take as much as an hour to show up and cost $50 bucks. Uber brought us something we never had before. Quick access and affordability.
Uber is about $40 - $100 where I live to do the same - metro Atlanta suburbs.
Uber and a lot of their investors proclaim ride sharing to be the innovative next great thing. I see GM and other car companies throwing billions at it and I just don't see where they expect to make their returns. IF it were to become what they expect it to be, it would mean they'd sell less cars.
I don't get it. It's just a (slight) discount taxi service with a lot of hype. This BS of folks don't need a car anymore is complete
Re: (Score:2)
Kennesaw seems to be a decently distant suburb of Atlanta. From there to Downtown is 26 miles (31 minutes according to Google Maps). Uber claims it costs $23-30 on UberX. UberPOOL isn't available. That makes a big difference. A similar trip (in time and distance) where I am costs $32-40, but right now on POOL it would be $20.80. Back of the envelope math means the Atlanta trip would be $15-20 for on POOL, if it was available. That's pretty cheap when you consi
Re: (Score:2)
To my mind, what you experience is just confirming what the article is talking about. Logical folks with the means to use taxi services would have used their local system if it had been as convenient and affordable as uber and lyft. There is nothing unique to lyft or uber to truly differentiate themselves from taxi services in terms of reducing drunk driving, if taxi services chose to implement their features.
You are not the impaired driver this article is talking about.
This is talking about the people who
Re: In theory and in reality (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Your comment is quite silly to me. The affordability and the convenience / higher level of service are the reasons uber would lower DUI. Your viewpoint is like saying there is nothing special about a car vs walking when it comes to being able to get from point A to point B except that it's faster and easier to carry things with you.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Taxis will not take you everywhere. Especially as the bars are closing, they will ask you where you're going and keep driving if it's not going to maximize their profit. That is part of the reason Uber does not allow drivers to know the destination until after accepting the ride.
Re: (Score:2)
I expect most drunk drivers are not planning on getting drunk. So they have their car at the destination so while inebriated you need to think of a way to get home and a way to get your car back the next day.
Let me guess (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Let me guess (Score:4, Interesting)
Most drunks are indeed on the lower end of the social curves, they spent all their money on booze and rarely if ever get caught. Most other people getting caught don't even recognize they are impaired, the limits are set so low in my state that you could get arrested after a single apple cider.
That's how DUI lawyers make their money though, you pay them $2k and you're pretty much off the hook if it's your first offense because there are so many loopholes and problems with the system. Second offenses will net you a 2y record and require state-sponsored religious classes (10 step program).
Re: (Score:3)
We've seen an increase in drunk driving incidents since Uber and Lyft left Austin a couple of months ago. http://keyetv.com/news/local/d... [keyetv.com]
That "study" is an abhorrent abuse of statistics. It tells us nothing.
Re: (Score:2)
So is this article. I don't understand how you can see problems with the Austin stat (not a study) and yet somehow not see the problem with interpreting this study to mean there is evidence of no effect.
Re: (Score:2)
I stand by my statement that the previous study is an abhorrent abuse of the data. I also think, if it helps you, that Uber very possibly could be reducing drnk driving. That doesn't change my opinion of the ametuerish attempt at proving it, nor should it yours.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes I saw both of your comments and that's why I replied. On its face this article is bullshit and confuses no evidence for an effect for evidence of no effect.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, that is correct. Humans have an insatiable desire for evidence and proof and prediction, but science and statistics are limited in their ability to deliver on that demand. My generation in particular "fucking loves science" but doesn't actually understand the first think about the philosophy behind science, leading to a much more religious view of it, relying mostly on the opinions of authority figures. Unfortunately most of those authority figures are in the media or in politics and have a terrible un
Re: (Score:2)
"Although approximately 450,000 people now drive for Uber, there are 210 million licensed drivers in the United States -- and an estimated 4.2 million adults who drive impaired, the study says."
And I love the numbers with no context. Are these 4.2 million people driving drunk daily? Weekly? Monthly? Ever?
You can't simply compare total numbers of drivers or even drunk-drivers versus that of Uber drivers. A single Uber driver can service *many* customers. This is basic logic, which seems to escape some.
Re: DWI arrests spike after Uber/Lyft leave Austin (Score:1)
Just pointing out that Austin did not kick these companies out -- they left on their own free will because Uber/Lyft chose to not follow the same ordinances for driver background checks as all other companies in the same market are required to follow.
As for that news report, I love how they neglected to say that drunk driving arrests were also increasing while Uber/Lyft were operating in Austin. The number of arrests are increasing regardless of Uber/Lyft being here or not. Chalk that up to the city's pol
Truth in Advertising (Score:2)
Drunken Monkey Boxer Style Kung Fu (Score:2)
Well, I am a longtime fan of excellent ridiculous Kung Fu films from the Hong Kong Shaw brothers from the 70's for years.
One of their theme was "Drunken Boxer Style" : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
The hero gets tanked up . . . or pretends to get tanked up, and then defeats the bad guy with his unpredictable movements.
What works for Kung Fu, should also work on the road . . . so Drunken Driver Style is definitely in!
Could it be that ... (Score:3)
Could it be that outside of a small number of big cities on the east coast (NYC, Boston, DC, ???) the vast overwhelming majority of US adults drive automobiles to go practically everywhere? Combine that with our inability to plan ahead (simple human nature), and it is not a stretch to think of something like this being extremely common:
The way to make something like uber have a dent in impaired driving is for the party organizer/host to "enforce" it. For example, I attended a party a while back where one of the hosts was the entry/exit summoning ubers/taxis for people as they left if they had been drinking or didn't have a designated driver with them. Sadly, that's the only occasion where I witnessed that sort of diligence.
The places where uber does really well are also the places where people are accustomed to and want to get around without driving themselves or owning their own cars. This sort of thing directly correlates with population density. Certainly that some suburban areas where uber does OK and provides a good service, but the vast majority of the American population is spread out over much larger and less populous areas. In a town of 1200 people with 8 bars on a downtown strip, I doubt that you will find 50 uber drivers ready to drive people home from the bars.
The fact is, humans suck at assessing risk. We are either wilfully ignorant of the risk (i.e., we do nothing to educate ourselves) or we don't care (i.e., I can do what I want, regardless of the impact/consequences to myself and others). This is why phishing, malware, and social engineering are such problems. This is also why people die of coronary diseases from a lifetime of poor diet and poor fitness, from smoking-related illnesses, and why people still drive impaired and get themselves and/or others killed.
Re: (Score:2)
When an Uber Driver sees an indication that you want to be picked up near a bar, he has a few shots before he shows up. That would explain why Uber doesn't decrease drunk driving....
Seems to be a lot of information missing (Score:2)
Further more, I think we really need to know how many are riding around midnight, or other times when people are most likely to be driving drunk.
If all Uber drivers are working when almost nobody was driving drunk anyway it's very unlikely they affect the statistics very much.
It may also be that many people riding with Uber are people who used to be the designated driver, now think
Failed to detect change != conclusion (Score:2)
This is another misinterpreted result. Probably intentionally to get clicks. Not finding an effect is different from finding no effect.
Logically, it's quite silly to claim that everyone who calling an uber would have called a taxi. Taxis have a cost and ubers have a lower cost. This is like saying the opening of a McDonald's doesn't increase burger consumption because everyone patronizing would have previously patronized the 100% hippie-bullshit-fed $20 burger shop next door. Of course MOST people calling a
Selection bias (Score:2)
The majority of who I know that ride share, ride share intra-city. The odds of being picked up while driving drunk in the city are much lower than someone who commuted 20 miles into the city, gets drunk, then has to drive 20 miles back home.
In addition you still have the issue of getting back down to your vehicle the next day. So you're ride share back? That means you're paying double. I think with the impairment of already being drunk they just decide to chance it probably deal with that back and forth hea
Re: (Score:2)
Re: odds... That depends entirely on enforcement priorities of police.
And unless you're s total moron, you take the uber TO the bar/party.
Uber won't take you if you're too drunk to drive (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Horse shit. There's a huge difference between slobbering hammered and simply having had enough to drink that you'd get arrested due to the draconian MADD sponsored alcohol laws. When I still drove, I used Uber all the time when drinking. I probably COULD have gotten away with driving in those situations, but I'd prefer not to risk my freedom.
Now I live and work downtown and walk everywhere. I still use Uber to get places outside walking distance, but sometimes I'll use it to get home if I don't think I'm sa
Re: (Score:3)
Why do you come here just to make shit up? Is it a game to see who believes you?
Uber drivers are heavily influenced by surge pricing, which would cause people to decide to deal with drinks to get 3x normal fare if what you say were true. But the worst surge ratio I have seen here in Austin as the bars are closing is 1.8x, and it's usually 1.2x. That means there is enough supply to service almost everyone who wants in uber in whatever timeframe uber sets as its service level goal.
Two Ifs... (Score:2)
If alcohol doesn't increase the rate of accidents, for example because tipsy drivers drive more carefully to avoid being pulled over, then these statistics mean nothing.
If people's motivation for driving home drunk instead of getting a cab, uber or lyft is because their car is parked in limited time parking where it would be subject to fines and/or towing when left overnight, then the availability of cabs is moot.
Statistics isn't hard if you do it right. Observational studies of rare events are highly likel
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
You're right that it isn't ride sharing, but not for the reason you say. It's ride sharing if you charge the person no more than the IRS mileage reimbursement rate.
Because Uber spent millions (Score:2)
I for one... (Score:2)
Not ride sharing! (Score:3)
Why do people call it that? It is merely an app-driven unlicensed taxi service.
Re: (Score:2)
Why do people call it that? It is merely an app-driven unlicensed taxi service.
Well, in most places to call yourself a taxi service you need a license. And most people don't do taxi-service in their spare time like many Uber drivers do.
"Ride-sharing" isn't quite right, but it's probably called that for political reasons.
Uber punishes drivers not using Uberpool (Score:1)
This sounds great in theory, the Uber cab driver can carry more riders, but the downsides are several. First, the cab driver has to go out of their way to pick up the second (or third) rider, this leads to the second issue where the rider "experience" is degraded because the other riders might be undesirab
Could be lower, but perhaps insignificant (Score:2)
There is a level of false confidence driver have to recognize to go "okay, I shouldn't drive." I started using Uber and it only costs about $7 without surge to get home. I had a few drinks the other night and I Uber'd home, picked up my car the next day. I get caught over the limit, I lose my job (company car) and perhaps my career (licensed medical personnel). I'm just one guy and there were a -lot- of people at that pub.
One thing to consider: how many drunk drivers actually get caught? Go to a averag
No, but AutoPilot will (Score:2)
What I still don't understand is ... (Score:2)
Or have sme countries so distorted their city plans so that a car is an absolute necessity (like air and water - and food in alternating months) instead of a luxury. What weird priorities.