<story><title>The Uber Conflation</title><url>https://stratechery.com/2017/the-uber-conflation/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>crabasa</author><text>&lt;i&gt;On the flipside, I, for one, view Uber’s regulatory maneuvering in a much more positive light. After all, thinking about the “spirit of the law” can lead to a very different conclusion: the purpose of taxi regulation, at least in theory, was not to entrench local monopolies but rather to ensure safety. If those goals can be met through technology — GPS tracking, reputation scoring, and the greater availability of transportation options, particularly late at night — then it is the taxi companies and captured regulators violating said spirit.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;I agree with this. Taxi regulations might have started with noble intentions, but quickly evolved into protecting a monopoly at the expense of consumers.</text></comment>
<story><title>The Uber Conflation</title><url>https://stratechery.com/2017/the-uber-conflation/</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>JoshTriplett</author><text>The most critical quote from the article: &amp;quot;Kalanick’s mistake was in not clearly defining, communicating, and enforcing accountability on actions that pushed the line but had nothing to do with the company’s regulatory fight. In fact, it was even more critical for Uber than for just about any other company to have its own house in order; the very nature of the company’s business created the conditions for living above the law to become culturally acceptable — praised even.&amp;quot;&lt;p&gt;This seems like an excellent description of the problem: if you&amp;#x27;re going to run a company that intentionally pushes the boundaries of specific regulatory restrictions (in order to demonstrate a better result that can only happen without them, to get popular backing for removing them), then you need to draw a clear internal dividing line between the risky actions taken in support of that goal and all the other areas in which the company should act as a model for upstanding behavior.</text></comment>