For many goods (short term rental spaces, rideshares), there's a finite supply of quality at a given price point.

Both AirBnb and Uber/Lyft tried to over-scale their supply, to drive revenue, and quality suffered.

Now they're fishing for the Amazon-ian point where they maximize revenue without making people so unhappy they stop using the service.

The same way this sort of thing has always been accomplished: Government regulation.

Vote, write reps, donate to the ACLU and EFF, socialize.

Why do you think most people did in the first place? We (speaking for the majority of consumers) care more about free services than we do having our privacy protected.

The fact that there are a seemingly endless stream of cases of identity fraud and leaks of private data and we still continue to use all the services indicates that we don't value it very much.

Do I care that Google knows I went to Amazon after searching for a particular book title? Nope. Do I care that Google knows I went to the grocery store today? Still no. I would much rather get a great search engine, free maps, GPS, email, documents, storage, photo backups and more.

If I did care about the privacy of these things, I'd pay for it. Or, I'd use a dedicated account on a different service on a different device that can't be connected if I want to do something I don't want others knowing about, like buying naughty lingerie for my partner or something.

On a personal level I fully understand that.

On a societal level I’d say, maybe it’s helpful not to be completely segregated from a certain social class that seems to exist in your town and to be exposed to them, albeit briefly during a cab ride.

If this is the case then if Waymo is consistently cheaper than Lyft, it would totally suck the air out for Lyft. Whereas, Uber would still see use despite charging a little premium, for the reason I stated in the beginning.

It's a pretty delayed process because unless the Lyft hit a tree there's usually at least two vehicles involved in the crash and the insurance companies have to fight over fault. But they do eventually pay out.

Source: Got into an accident in a Lyft. They even paid my salary for the few days I was off work.

This. Uber can operate anywhere that has human drivers and cell service. Waymo needs (I think) high-precision maps that are frequently updated, and simple traffic behavior.

Traffic in Lima looks like absolute chaos to an American, with endless honking and lane markers treated as vague suggestions, but there are not constant crashes, because the (mostly professional) drivers know the local conventions and communicate with each other by horn, eye contact, hand signal, etc. Huaraz is full of blind 4-way intersections with no stop signs, so drivers honk as they get close to one, and there is a remarkable lack of fiery death.

Waymo can't work in most places until it either changes human driving, or achieves AGI. Uber works as soon as it can pay local drivers.

I think there's also the fact that if self-driving cars take off and price goes down, people will ultimately rely on taxis/delivery more than ever. Maybe there is a place for Uber to be the platform for that still, maybe not.

Also, why would Waymo, in the long term, use Uber for this?

They have the car, the driver, the app/software. They are not gonna share a big chunk of the profit with Uber in long term. The current partnership is probably just a tactical thing for both, not a strategic one.

The interesting thing is that uber loses money on every ride. Waymo charges Uber more than Uber charges the customer.

On Uber’s side, though, this is preferable to losing the entire ride. Uber loses much more slowly by controlling the distribution and losing a few dollars per ride than by losing the entire customer base with no revenue from these customers.

Street-side parking in downtown areas is far more wasteful than ridesharing cars.