News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.2K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 4.5K     0 

Burlington, but close enough ...
I've never seen Burlington Taxi at Oakville GO, where they are doing this trial.

I'm also confused on how this would be at someone's apartment - the Lyft sexual assault was in a moving vehicle.

There's always examples of everything. But I don't think I've seen near as many as extreme reports about taxis compared to Lift and Uber - https://money.cnn.com/2018/04/30/technology/uber-driver-sexual-assault/index.html

Perhaps the remote corporate foreign ownership is part of the issue?
 
I included the Burlington example because you mentioned local companies, and it's close to Oakville. And my point is what you said, there are always examples of everything so despite you never having heard of anything, there are examples. No company is perfect. Since Lyft (and Uber) are much larger entities than Oakville Taxi there will be more incidents. It's an option being provided, people can choose to use it or not.
 
Pretty sure there are enough horror stories about taxis to fill a book, so it's not like the alternative to Uber/Lyft is much better.

The most comprehensive analysis I saw was in London a couple of years ago when they banned Uber's.

Coles notes --- the taxi industry may be spreading false information that Uber's are worse than taxis. When in fact they are equal to taxi's.
 
^My sense is, most taxi companies haven’t moved beyond traditional phone hailing where you call, give your location, their dispatcher voice takes the request and then radios out to cabs, maybe the address gets transmitted correctly, cab is dispatche using broad zone “who’s first” work rules (and not closest car), eventually the cab turns up. Some have gone to slicker systems, but few are near as good as Uber etc.
GO first/last mile needs to look more like Uber than taxis, even if the drivers are equally sketchy and the vehicles equally unreliable. And it needs to look a lot more like Wheeltrans than a traditional bus route. Lots more advance booking, or at least 30 minutes’ notice. Uses an app, stores your address. More like Airport Limo than a cab company.
Knowing that exactly 37 people have boarded the 16:43 at Union, and will arrive at Clarksville at 17:07, is hugely valuable and can be used to plan. More so if peopleindicate their destination. Which is a big improvement over the “there are people waiting at the depot” broadcast that I regularly hear over that scratchy cab radio.
It needs to be more than one rider per cab, too. Pretty easy to do if people use an app to book their ride before they go to bed the night before. Or even when they give their destination after boarding the 16:43.

- Paul
 
Last edited:
Lyft is doing the same in Florida with Brightline. There you are getting a $5 discount code if you are getting to or from the train station. For denser areas I don't think is its great to have car sharing running the service bringing people to the station. That creates too much traffic.
 
As a deafie, I like pushbutton hail.

I've had more than one taxi driver struggle to communicate with me while driving. It is massively unnerving when that happens, trying to communicate a destination for a 2nd or 3rd time even though I already did at the beginning of the ride.

With ride-hail apps, no spoken words are needed.

I just press a button. I step into a car. I ride. I exit when I arrive.

No doors locked, I can tip long after I exit the car by pressing a button on the app. And I can leave a bad review for any driver that is more inconvenient than this. (Fortunately, I never had to). Pushbutton ridehail service, is on average, feels safer for me as a deafie.
 
Lyft is doing the same in Florida with Brightline. There you are getting a $5 discount code if you are getting to or from the train station. For denser areas I don't think is its great to have car sharing running the service bringing people to the station. That creates too much traffic.
Ridehail It should be density-optimized:

[rural continuum]
GO station without any municipal transit: Solo-occupant ridehail
GO station with bad transit for your first mile: Pooled ridehail. (kind of like a 4-person or 7-person bus)
GO station with good rapid transit for your first mile: Take transit.
[urban continuum]

There's room for automated "DIAL-A-BUS-REBORN" services where the area is too rural for a full-size bus, but too urban for solo-occupant ridehail. Basically flexi-route minibuses that will veer off its normal route to pick up nearby suburban occpants. Modern "UberPOOL" style services does an "automatic-fit-the-nearest-active-carpool-route" when you press the button, so a pool service can be a good "between a taxi and a bus" service that is faster than bus but slower than taxi, while costing only a few dollars.

GO ran a UberPOOL-like van service in the 1970s.
It was called GO Transit DIAL-A-BUS.

Brqj5vk.png


Back then, these were operated by telephone call centres and CB radios.

Today, we have pooled ridehail (UberPOOL etc) and they could theoretically grow into a middle-transit service. Basically a pooled taxi+bus hybrid that roughly follows mostly-predefined routes that will spontaneously deviate to pickup later hailers that appear on the radar near the current route.

That's essentially what UberPOOL is, their algorithms does a matchmakering to the nearest currently-active carpool route that is about to pass by. Very clever use of technology. Though usually limited to 2, 3 or 4 people. Now, assuming sufficient pool frequency, and route deviations become smaller, it can easily scale to 10 people -- which is useful when suburban densities sometimes is unable to warrant full sized buses in certain areas.

This fills a gap if you need fewer solo occupant vehicles, and also can cost much less per passenger -- e.g. paying only $6 instead of $15 -- with sufficient passengers per vehicle. Urban subsidy mechanisms can actually push this to busfare-league, and nowadays some municipalities subsidizes pooled ridehail -- and still save taxpayer money compared to having to deploy buses. Regardless of the contentious detail of international organizations -- 0and which ridehail service a municipal service allies with -- or a city building their own pooled ridehail taxibus hybrid service as a "fill-the-gap-between-taxi-and-bus" solution.
 
Last edited:
As a deafie, I like pushbutton hail.

I've had more than one taxi driver struggle to communicate with me while driving. It is massively unnerving when that happens, trying to communicate a destination for a 2nd or 3rd time even though I already did at the beginning of the ride.

With ride-hail apps, no spoken words are needed.

I just press a button. I step into a car. I ride. I exit when I arrive.

No doors locked, I can tip long after I exit the car by pressing a button on the app. And I can leave a bad review for any driver that is more inconvenient than this. (Fortunately, I never had to). Pushbutton ridehail service, is on average, feels safer for me as a deafie.
Do they never call you? My husband has significant hearing loss and phone calls are difficult for him. Every time he uses Uber (he's never used Lyft), they call him back to confirm something or even just to verify location or whatever (although it's very clear on the app). It's so annoying.
 
Do they never call you? My husband has significant hearing loss and phone calls are difficult for him. Every time he uses Uber (he's never used Lyft), they call him back to confirm something or even just to verify location or whatever (although it's very clear on the app). It's so annoying.
Just use the Messenger built into Uber. If Uber tries to call, just text back via the Uber app to tell them you are deaf and give specific instructions as needed (Note: this is one-way texting unless they've stopped their car). I don't even have a ringer on my device, so I only get voicemail notifications -- I subscribe to Rogers Enhanced Voicemail which converts all my voicemails to transcribed text messages.

Being born deaf, I don't use phones without a relay service, and I prefer not to touch telephones with a 10-foot pole unless there is no alternative (e.g. having to call to fix a billing issue). Texting, no problem. Ridehail messengers, no problem. BTW, my first phone call I made by myself was at age 15 when my parents got me my first TTY. I could finally call taxis, but it was so time consuming with relay operators -- back in the 1990s and 2000s the relay callcentres sometimes took 10-15-20 minutes before a human voice-to-text interpretor was available to help me do a TTY phone call. 20 minutes to do a 1 minute call. Such a pain.

Deafie Tip: Tell your husband to install one of the new modern continuous-transcription app like Google Live Transcribe and Otter.ai, (no 1-minute limit like Siri). First time I can do reliably transcribe good-enough multispeaker continuous captions without a $100/hour steno-captioner! You can kinda even use them with phones -- just have a 2nd phone or iPad pointed at the speaker of a speakerphone. And you get realtime captioned telephone. They are a godsend for phone captioning & dinnertable captioning & seminar/classroom captioning. Just park the phone on the dinner table and it automatically captions everything for the next hour. Very great tool for the deaf! And for a third coveted app I'm waiting for -- watch the Google Live Relay which is automated voice-to-text telephone relay service without a relay operator, using the best of cloud transcription.
 
Last edited:
In our backyard is the Innisfil Transit experiment (Ubers as transit) -- kind of a rebirth of DIAL-A-BUS in a Uber format.

I think that experiment is being done quite inefficiently. If they are hell bent on doing this, then they should incentivize larger pooled vehicles as part of this experiment -- even the city purchasing them for city-trained Uber drivers.

Say, 7 to 10 person minivans (sub-$100K stuff). Innisfil is using some 6-person vehicles already but there's just not enough of them. So incentivize the bigvan:smallcar ratio! Even city-paid vans for some select city-trained Uber drivers -- would potentially pay for themselves when used on peak pool routes in reduced subsidies to Uber.

Then add one bus route along the main spine once enough ridership on pooled Ubers are occuring along a route, to take some load off.

They are spending a bit more than expected on the Innisfil Transit experiment than if they did the original proposed 3 bus routes. While much more convenient than those original 3 bus routes for the users, and it has given some boom to Innisfil economy (some local people apparently happy earning money as Uber drivers -- there is a $100 bonus incentivized here) -- there are unintended consequences such as more cars on roads, and the attendant damage to environment.

Electrification + Inclusion of bigger vehicles is probably key in future trials of these kinds of experiments (by any rideshare system, not just Uber, even one that a municipal government may roll-their-own in the future). The solo vehicles will still be needed offpeak and rural feeder but the larger Uberpool vehicles would ply the high ridership routes. And other optimizations such as requiring people to walk 1-2 blocks to the corner of the nearest feeder road unless they've applied for an accessibility/senior exception. Uber automatically tells people to walk to a more efficient stop or pre-defined stops in some cities (e.g. Las Vegas), so the software infrastructure to handle this efficiency increases is already invented.

Many optimizations can be be utilized in a good efficient transit-rideshare system that might be 3x-5x more efficient passenger-mile than Innisfil Transit, but a good focus must be had on deploying attractive transit (e.g. frequent bus in bus lane, BRT, LRT, metro, etc) once ridership becomes 0dense enough along a specific corridor.

Rideshare doesn't scale well beyond rural-ish, first miles, last miles, etc. There is a clear moral hazard here -- becoming addicted to door-to-door transportation. Pollution. Political pressures. Resistance to Uber's will (e.g. enforcement of certain rules that increase efficiency). Mentality against combining transit+ridershare as being one non-mutually-exclusive problem. Etc.

But, as these experiments will continue at least elsewhere in the world, in a probable relentless way, it is humankind responsibility to push for optimizations. It is likely still an option in solving transportation problems if the devil-in-details are adjusted properly.

So it is futile to dismiss these experiments as ridiculous, even as I am a transit advocate worried about potential environmental impact. Rather, I have to think pragmatically and realistically. How do we integrate municipal ridehail+transit in an efficient way?

In 10, 20 and 50 years, future descendants of Innisfil Transit experiment will probably include:
(A) municipal large-vehicle transit routes along the main spines;
(B) larger pooled ridehail along the popular ridehail journey routes;
(C) driverless operation for the smaller vehicles to cut costs;
(D) electrification requirements to cut carbon;
(E) incentivization/penalization to prevents empty vehicles going over long distances (deadheading);
(F) Incentivization of prepositioning driverless vehicles in unused resident driveways (whether owned by them, by other, or by city) nearer ridehail clusters, to reduce congestion and deadheading;
(G) Incentivization of a reasonable dwell period (~60 seconds) at peak at major stops to fill vehicles.full of riders who ridehail moments later;
(H) other efficiencies now made possible by mathematical magic on historical ridehail data.

Theoretically, GO Transit / Metrolinx could someday attempt a rebirth a DIAL-A-BUS equivalent in this modern ridehail era -- incorporating such efficiencies. If that ever happens, Metrolinx should not spend a Presto-style amounts of money to try to reinvent Uber from scratch, but partnering with a more domestic ridehail system (even one that comes out later thanks to driverless vehicles). To serve low-density and more rural areas outside urban cores (Toronto/Mississauga/Scarborough/etc.).

More realistically it would probably be other firms that does this sort of stuff, but relevant here as a "DIAL-A-BUS reborn" thought exercise.
 
Last edited:

Service updates for the weekend here: https://www.gotransit.com/en/trip-planning/go-service-updates/train-schedule-changes

Someone remind me what's on this weekend that I forget to get tickets to!

So they didn't add all that service for Indy............but yet the following weekend merits this very substantial service increase? ?

Don't get me wrong, I'm all in favour............just genuinely curious.
 

Back
Top