I think that anyone who refers to User/Lyft as ridesharing (quote above the article"[Editor's note: for further information about the ridesharing business model of Uber and Lyft ..." is being intellectually lazy or dishonest.
The main article refers to them correctly as taxicabs.
@yojimbo @GuerillaOntologist It was the fiction of "ride sharing" that allowed them to ignore city ordinances in many communities by claiming that they weren't cabs. Madison did stand up to them, but then the legislature (with Democratic support) changed the law and gutted local control. Sadly (and an insult to injury) one of the lead Dems to do this was the son of the key lobbyist for the transportation companies!
@GuerillaOntologist @johnnymac So, for a little more context, while the users of Uber use it like a taxicab service, the "ridesharing" phrase is used to suggest that the driver might just be an ordinary person travelling to work, who decides to see if anyone is going the same way ... (I actually know one person who sometimes does this!)
Unfortunately the obligations placed on drivers are so high that the casual, co-operative aspect of ridesharing is overwhelmed by the gig economy work-like-a-slave environment.
One of the biggest differences between ridesharing and taxicabbing, is that in ridesharing there are no extra vehicles on the road, and they have higher occupancy; in taxicabbing there are more vehicles on the road waiting for work, and for much of the time they only have a driver.
https://www.poparide.com/blog/ridesharing-vs-ridehailing/ has a more detailed similar take on the subject.
And, fwiw, we've had a real ride-sharing board at our local Uni forever. Plenty of students, and some non-students, do actually share rides (generally long distance, going home for holidays, etc) and it looks nothing like Uber.
We're all agreed, I think, Uber sucks and is not "sharing."
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!