Posts Tagged ‘pink’

Silicon Valley Photobook: Google’s Sergey Brin in Google Glass Driving a Pink Tesla Model S Batmobile at LinkedIn HQ

Friday, April 5th, 2013

Remind me again why we subsidize Telsa Motors?

Via iPhone 5 owner – click to expand

 

Lyft Taxi Driver Manages to Drive Her Under-Regulated Cab / Private Vehicle Without the Use of Hands – Hurray!

Monday, February 11th, 2013

Let’s see here, the right hand is holding an electronic device, you know, the better to Lyft with.

And the left hand, well that’s acting as a cup holder for a beverage.

That means that some Lyft drivers steer with their knees.

Click to expand

Hey Lyft! Why don’t you tell your taxi drivers to not violate VC 23123, you know, like every fucking minute of every fucking day they’re on the clock?

Oh you do?

But enforcing the law isn’t your job.

Hey, I know, why don’t you mount cameras on your taxis, you know, the way the SFMTA does with its vehicles?

How about a GoPro facing forward and another one mounted aimed towards the driver, so that he won’t be attempted to break any laws?

The “sharing economy” demands it, I’d say.

Pink Hello Kitty Limousine Spotted in SoMA – Dream or Nightmare?

Wednesday, December 26th, 2012

I’m going with nightmare:

Click to expand

Heh: “Laws Don’t Exist Merely to Frustrate the Business Ambitions of Coastal Hipsters” – Writer Paul Carr vs. Uber Taxi

Thursday, October 25th, 2012

Via Monika Bauerlein comes this take-down of Uber Cab, and Lyft and Side Car and the like as well, I suppose.

A quote of a quote:

Matt Kochman… served as Uber’s founding general manager in New York before he left last year. Kochman left Uber to do consulting for transportation brands and startups, fed up with Uber’s irreverent attitude toward regulators. “Discounting the rules and regulations as a whole, just because you want to launch a product and you have a certain vision for things, that’s just irresponsible,” Kochman said.

Yep, pretty much.

Love Pink, San Francisco

Thursday, October 11th, 2012

Financial District, San Francisco, USA:

Click to expand

San Francisco City Hall: The Largest Classical Dome in the Western Hemisphere, Lit in Blue, Yesterday Night

Friday, September 21st, 2012

This is the scene at the end of Dreamforce 2012, one of San Francisco’s largest events in recent memory.

89,999 registrants had moved on at this point last night – here’s the last one:  

Click to expand

Yes, the fifth biggest classical dome in the world and first biggest in the New World.

Yes, bigger than the U.S. Capitol. On purpose.

Dreamforce 2012 from Salesforce.com Turns City Hall Blue and Pink – Gala Tonight with the Red Hot Chili Peppers

Wednesday, September 19th, 2012

This is what the 2012 Dreamforce Gala will look like. Deets here and below:

Click to expand

“Salesforce.com Welcomes 90,000 Registered Attendees to Dreamforce 2012, the World’s Largest Vendor Technology Conference

10th annual Dreamforce grows a record-breaking 96 percent year-over-year — 90,000 registered to attend, including more than 3,000 C-level executives

Additional 100,000 people expected to view Salesforce Live on Facebook

Global leaders Sir Richard Branson, General Colin Powell, Jeff Immelt and Tony Robbins to join Marc Benioff in keynote sessions

Sponsorships rise by 40 percent as Dreamforce partner ecosystem grows to more than 350 companies with a combined market cap of more than $1.3 trillion

Red Hot Chili Peppers to rock Dreamforce Gala

Dreamforce integrates philanthropy with 3rd annual benefit concert for UCSF Benioff Children’s Hospital, featuring Lady Antebellum, Dana Carvey and an after-party featuring DJ MC Hammer

SAN FRANCISCO, Sept. 18, 2012 – DREAMFORCE 2012 — Salesforce.com (NYSE: CRM), the enterprise cloud computing company, will welcome more than 90,000 registered attendees to Dreamforce2012, now the world’s largest vendor technology conference, taking place from Sept. 18-21, 2012.

Dreamforce Gala is Red, Hot and Social
For the first time in Dreamforce history, the Dreamforce Gala will be held in San Francisco’s Civic Center Plaza with seven-time Grammy award-winning and Rock and Roll Hall of Fame inductees the Red Hot Chili Peppers performing on the steps of City Hall.

The Concert for UCSF Benioff Children’s Hospital
Continuing the tradition of integrated philanthropy at Dreamforce, the Salesforce.com Foundation is thrilled to announce the third annual Concert for UCSF Benioff Children’s Hospital at Bill Graham Civic Auditorium on Thursday, September 20(th) at 6:30 p.m. PDT. The benefit concert will feature Lady Antebellum, Dana Carvey, and an after-party featuring DJ MC Hammer. To purchase tickets or for more information, please visit http://www.theconcertforucsfbch.com/.

About salesforce.com: Founded in 1999, salesforce.com is the enterprise cloud computing leader. Using salesforce.com‘s social and mobile cloud technologies, companies can connect with customers, partners and employees in entirely new ways. Based on salesforce.com‘s real-time, multitenant architecture, the company’s platform and apps give customers the tools to create a social front office and revolutionize the way they sell, service, market, collaborate, work and innovate.”

And thank Gaia that this event has nothing to do with Larry Ellison, cause, you know, the 415 is sick of that dude.

Hey Lyft Drivers! Do You Know You’re Not Allowed to “Profit” by Driving Like a Taxi? Why Lyft Thinks It’s Legal

Friday, September 7th, 2012

Here you go, just match up the Lyft Company’s “Terms” for its drivers with the recently passed California Insurance Code Section 11580.24.

The legislation Lyft reps refer to isn’t legislation at all – it’s a law that’s in effect now.

So, just as a massage parlor only takes a cut for massage service and is “unaware” of its sex workers profiting from sex, Lyft takes a cut (20% currently, but look for that to rise soon) for app service and is “unaware” of its drivers profiting from driving around like a taxi.

So, how much can people earn in a year with Lyft and still not “profit?” $10k? $30k? It depends. It depends on the car and how far people want to push things.

Anyway, read the bold. Enjoy.

By using the Service, a Driver represents, warrants and agrees that:

  • Such Driver is at least 23 years of age.
  • Such Driver possesses a valid driver’s license and is authorized to operate a motor vehicle and has all appropriate licenses, approvals and authority to provide transportation to third parties in all jurisdictions in which such Driver uses the Services.
  • Such Driver owns, or has the legal right to operate, the vehicle such Driver uses when accepting Riders, and such vehicle is in good operating condition and meets the industry safety standards and all applicable statutory and state department of motor vehicle requirements for a vehicle of its kind.
  • Such Driver has a valid policy of liability insurance (in coverage amounts consistent with all applicable legal requirements) for the operation of such Driver’s vehicle to cover any anticipated losses related to such Driver’s provision of rides to Riders.
  • Such Driver will be solely responsible for any and all liability which results from or is alleged as a result of the operation of the vehicle such Driver uses to transport Riders, including, but not limited to personal injuries, death and property damages.
  • In the event of a motor vehicle accident such Driver will be solely responsible for compliance with any applicable statutory or department of motor vehicles requirements, and for all necessary contacts with such Driver’s insurance carrier.
  • Such Driver will obey all local laws related to the matters set forth herein, and will be solely responsible for any violations of such local laws.
  • Such Driver will not make any misrepresentation regarding Lyft, the Lyft Platform, the Services or such Driver’s status as a Driver, offer or provide transportation service for profit, as a public carrier or taxi service, charge for rides or otherwise seek non-voluntary compensation from Riders, or engage in any other activity in a manner that is inconsistent with such Driver’s obligations under this Agreement.

California Insurance Code Section 11580.24 (from 2010):

(a) No private passenger motor vehicle insured by its owner pursuant to a policy of insurance subject to Section 11580.1 or 11580.2 shall be classified as a commercial vehicle, for-hire vehicle, permissive use vehicle, or livery solely because its owner allows it to be used for personal vehicle sharing as long as all of the following circumstances apply:

(1) The personal vehicle sharing is conducted pursuant to a personal vehicle sharing program.

(2) The annual revenue received by the vehicle’s owner which was generated by the personal vehicle sharing of the vehicle does not exceed the annual expenses of owning and operating the vehicle, including depreciation, interest, lease payments, auto loan payments, insurance, maintenance, parking, fuel, cleaning, automobile repair, and costs associated with personal vehicle sharing, including, but not limited to, the installation, operation, and maintenance of computer hardware and software, signage identifying the vehicle as a personal sharing vehicle, and any fees charged by a personal vehicle sharing program.

(3) The owner of the private passenger motor vehicle does not knowingly place the vehicle into commercial use, as defined by Section 675.5, by a personal vehicle sharing user while engaged in personal vehicle sharing.

(b) For purposes of this section the following definitions apply:

(1) “Personal vehicle sharing” means the use of private passenger motor vehicles by persons other than the vehicle’s owner, in connection with a personal vehicle sharing program.

(2) “Personal vehicle sharing program” means a legal entity qualified to do business in the State of California engaged in the business of facilitating the sharing of private passenger vehicles for noncommercial use by individuals within the state.

(3) “Private passenger motor vehicle” means a vehicle that is insured, or is subject to being insured, under a personal automobile liability insurance policy insuring a single individual or individuals residing in the same household, as the named insured, or meets the requirements of Section 16058 of the Vehicle Code, but does not include a vehicle with fewer than four wheels.

(c) A personal vehicle sharing program shall, for each vehicle that it facilitates the use of, do all of the following:

(1) During all times that the vehicle is engaged in personal vehicle sharing, provide insurance coverages for the vehicle and operator of the vehicle that are equal to or greater than the insurance coverages maintained by the vehicle owner and reported to the personal vehicle sharing program. However, the personal vehicle sharing program shall not provide liability coverage less than three times the minimum insurance requirements for private passenger vehicles. Compliance with the terms and conditions of this paragraph shall be deemed to avoid the application of the limitation on damage recoveries set forth in Section 3333.4 of the Civil Code.

(2) Provide the registered owner of the vehicle with a Department of Motor Vehicles Form REG 5085 or other suitable proof of compliance with the insurance requirements of this section and the requirements of the California Financial Responsibility Law in Section 1656.2 of the Vehicle Code, a copy of which shall be maintained in the vehicle by the vehicle’s registered owner during any time when the vehicle is operated by any person other than the vehicle’s owner pursuant to a personal vehicle sharing program.

(3) Collect, maintain, and make available to the vehicle’s owner, the vehicle owner’s primary automobile liability insurer on file with the Department of Motor Vehicles, and to any other government agency as required by law, at the cost of the personal vehicle sharing program, verifiable electronic records that identify the date, time, initial and final locations of the vehicle, and miles driven when the vehicle is under the control of a person other than the vehicle’s owner pursuant to a personal vehicle sharing program.

(4) Provide the vehicle’s owner and any person that operates the vehicle pursuant to a personal vehicle sharing program with a disclosure that contains information explaining the terms and conditions contained in this section.

(5) Not knowingly permit the vehicle to be operated for commercial use by a personal vehicle sharing user while engaged in personal vehicle sharing.

(6) Use only private passenger vehicles.

(7) Facilitate the installation, operation, and maintenance of computer hardware and software and signage, necessary for a vehicle to be used in a personal vehicle sharing program, including payment of the cost of damage or theft of that equipment and any damage caused to the vehicle by the installation, operation, and maintenance of that equipment.

(d) Notwithstanding any other provision of law or any provision in a private passenger motor vehicle owner’s automobile insurance policy, in the event of a loss or injury that occurs during any time period when the vehicle is under the operation and control of a person, other than the vehicle owner, pursuant to a personal vehicle sharing program, or otherwise under the control of a personal vehicle sharing program, the personal vehicle sharing program shall assume all liability of the owner and shall be considered the owner of the vehicle for all purposes. Nothing in this section limits the liability of the personal vehicle sharing program for its acts or omissions that result in injury to any persons as a result of the use or operation of a personal vehicle sharing program.

(e) A personal vehicle sharing program shall continue to be liable pursuant to subdivision (d) until both of the following occur:

(1) The private passenger motor vehicle is returned to a location designated by the personal vehicle sharing program.

(2) The earliest of one of the following occurs:

(A) The expiration of the time period established for the particular use of the vehicle.

(B) The intent to terminate the personal vehicle sharing use is verifiably communicated to the personal vehicle sharing program.

(C) The vehicle’s owner takes possession and control of the vehicle.

(f) The personal vehicle sharing program shall assume liability for a claim in which a dispute exists as to who was in control of the vehicle when the loss occurred giving rise to the claim, and the vehicle’s private passenger motor vehicle insurer shall indemnify the personal vehicle sharing program to the extent of its obligation under the applicable insurance policy, if it is determined that the vehicle’s owner was in control of the vehicle at the time of the loss.

(g) In the event that the owner of the vehicle is named as a defendant in a civil action, for a loss or injury that occurs during any time period when the vehicle is under the operation and control of a person, other than the vehicle’s owner, pursuant to a personal vehicle sharing program, or otherwise under the control of a personal vehicle sharing program, the personal vehicle sharing program shall have the duty to defend and indemnify the vehicle’s owner, subject to the provisions of subdivisions (d) and (f).

(h) Notwithstanding any other provision of law or any provision in a vehicle owner’s automobile liability insurance policy, while a private passenger motor vehicle is used by a person other than its owner pursuant to personal vehicle sharing facilitated through a personal vehicle sharing program, all of the following shall apply:

(1) The insurer of that vehicle on file with the Department of Motor Vehicles may exclude any and all coverage afforded pursuant to its policy.

(2) The primary and excess insurer or insurers of the owners, operators, and maintainers of the private passenger motor vehicle used in a personal vehicle sharing program shall have the right to notify an insured that it has no duty to defend or indemnify any person or organization for liability for any loss that occurs during use of the vehicle in a personal vehicle sharing program.

(i) No policy of insurance that is subject to Section 11580.1 or 11580.2 shall be canceled, voided, terminated, rescinded, or nonrenewed solely on the basis that the private passenger motor vehicle has been made available for personal vehicle sharing pursuant to a personal vehicle sharing program that is in compliance with the provisions of this section.

More Details on Why That New Zimride “Lyft” Pink-Mustache-on-a-Car Taxi Service Might Not Be “100% Legal”

Thursday, August 30th, 2012

Oh, here we see that Bob Scoble has the deets on Lyft.

“New competition, new technology has the ability to disrupt… People who already have an interest are confused by modern technology and there’s nothing we can do. But we’ve had several transportation lawyers  give us their opinion that what we’re doing is 100% legal.”

OH, WELL, WHY DIDN’T YOU SAY SO BEFORE, DUDE? BECAUSE, OF COURSE, IF TWO LAWYERS SAY THAT SOMETHING IS LEGAL, THEN THAT MEANS THAT IT’S 100 PERCENT LEGAL. OF COURSE! AND DUDE, PERHAPS PEOPLE WHO HAVE A VESTED INTEREST IN NOT HAVING TOO MANY EMPTY TAXIS DRIVING AROUND SAN FRANCISCO AREN’T “CONFUSED” AT ALL? MAYBE THEY LIKE THE PRESENT SYSTEM.

“So by making that an optional donation at the end, we’re allowed to make certain exceptions within the legislation.”

WTF, DUDE? WHAT “LEGISLATION?” DO YOU MEAN “LAWS?” YOU SOUND LIKE A TYPICAL CEO, ONE WHO’S TRYING TO MAKE A MURKY SITUATION INTO A CRYSTAL CLEAR SITUATION. IT AINT WORKING, DUDE. NOT ON ME. PERHAPS IT WORKS ON YOUR MONEY PEOPLE, BUT IT DOESN’T WORK ON ME.

“We would eliminate people that are not safe drivers.”

ARE YOU GUARANTEEING THAT YOUR DRIVERS ARE “SAFE?” NOT EVEN THE SFMTA DOES THAT. SEEMS AS IF YOU’RE BEGGING TO GET SUED IN CIVIL COURT.

Oh, here we go, the video.

(Robert Scoble says “cool” waaaay too much, like he’s working on his second six-pack of the day.)

Now let’s check in with Cyrus Farivar of Ars Technica:

“I ran the idea past the former deputy director of the San Francisco Taxi Commission, Jordanna Thigpen. Despite what the companies say in their own legal documents, the judicial system may have its own view. “Sometimes in the law, judges will interpret a statute [in this way]: if it looks like a duck, if it walks like a duck, it’s a duck,” said Thigpen, now an attorney with Cotchett, Pitre, and McCarthy.

OH, WHAT’S THIS? IT APPEARS WE’VE FOUND A “TRANSPORTATION ATTORNEY” WHO THINKS WHAT LYFT IS DOING IS _NOT_ NECESSARILY 100% LEGAL. IMAGINE THAT!

“In her former position as enforcement and legal affairs manager for the taxi division of the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Authority, Thigpen said that she would focus largely on safety. She frequently checked (among other things) not just that the vehicle in question had insurance at the time of inspection, but that there was continuous coverage—as the law requires of taxi companies.

LYFT HAS INSURANCE AND SAFETY ISSUES, THAT’S FOR SURE.

“Under the San Francisco Municipal Code, Section 1105, Paragraph A, Subsection 1, if a court finds either service to be a “Motor Vehicle For Hire,” they would likely be required to obtain permits issued by the SFMTA.

I’D SAY SO. IN FACT, I’ll GO AS FAR TO SAY THAT IF A COURT FINDS THAT A SERVICE IS A VEHICLE FOR HIRE, THEN IT WOULD SUPER-DUPER UBER-LIKELY BE REQUIRED TO OBTAIN PERMITS.

[Lyft and SideCar] are trying to put themselves in this netherworld of regulation,” Thigpen said. “The determination is: how is a court going to interpret the definition of ‘for hire’ vehicle?” For now, company representatives insist they are not a “vehicle for hire.”

YEP. THAT’S WHAT THEY’RE SAYING.

“We’ve worked with transportation legal experts who confirm we are abiding by current laws,” said John Zimmer, the founder of Zimride, in an e-mail sent to Ars. “Lyft is a community based ride-sharing service that is an extension of our existing long distance ride-share model. We use optional donations as a way for drivers to reimburse the costs associated with owning and operating a vehicle.”

WHATEVER YOU SAY, DUDE. BUT IRL THE “DONATIONS” AREN’T OPTIONAL. YOU SAY THEY ARE BUT THEY AREN’T. YOU SAY THE DRIVERS ARE TRYING TO OFFSET COSTS BUT REALLY THEY ARE TRYING TO TURN A PROFIT WITH THEIR CARS, RIGHT?

OK, we’ll just have to wait and see how thyngs go with Lyft, you know, lyng-tyrm…

Pink Mustaches? Attention Zimride “Lyft” Owners/Employees: You Are Operating an Illegal Taxi Service in San Francisco

Wednesday, August 29th, 2012

WTH: Is this an illegal taxi waiting to pick up random passengers arriving at the CalTrain station at 4th and King in SoMA? Looks that way.

Per some sleuthing from Kevin Montgomery of Uptown Almanac, I’d say it’s safe to say:

 THAT “LYFT” COMPANY IS OPERATING AN ILLEGAL TAXI SERVICE IN SAN FRANCISCO RIGHT HERE RIGHT NOW

But these “sharing economy” pirates don’t fly the Jolly Roger, no no, a pink mustache is what they use when they steal food from the mouths of the kids of all the taxi drivers and impoverished SFMTA MUNI  DPT workers about town.

Let’s let Ryan Lawler of TechChrunch ‘splain:

“It’s been just eight weeks since Zimride’s ride-sharing service, Lyft, was launched in beta, providing San Francisco users a low-cost alternative to cabs and Ubers. Since then, the service has grown a tremendous amount: It’s got more than 100 drivers operating in the area, who together are taking hundreds of riders a day.

Lyft works like other car transportation apps: You open it up and the app searches for available cars nearby. Difference is, those cars are driven by regular folks, not your usual surly taxi driver or buttoned up Uber driver. Users can rate their drivers, and at the end of the ride, there’s a suggested donation, which is typically about 80 percent of your average taxi fare. Drivers also rate their passengers….”

And Tomio Geron of Forbes, for one,  thinks that the private auto will soon be a thing of the past, so great this “new” idea is. Check it:

“The companies say they enable ride sharing–essentially a form of carpooling–and take voluntary donations so they aren’t taxis. But Lyft and SideCar rides aren’t exactly like carpools. Carpools are for people who are already going somewhere and pick someone up along the way. People who drive for Lyft and SideCar generally aren’t going anywhere. Some drivers may be using it to pick someone up, but many are driving around the city looking to pick up riders, like taxis do. So services like Lyft and Carshare may force San Francisco and other government agencies to rethink what a ride share is.”

All right, but until that time that the City and County of San Francisco does a rethink, Lyft aint legal.

Why? Well let’s see. Insurance? Registered paint scheme? Medallion? Taxi license? Stickers on the outside of your ride? “SAN FRANCISCO TAXI” written somewhere on the car? Waybills filed daily? 

Lyft dispenses with all of this because passengers simply “donate” the fare to the hack.? Yeah, I don’t think so.

Hey, how about this? What if Zimride next opened a cut-rate cathouse, one where Johns would have to put up a deposit upon entrance? And then he’d “donate” money to the sex worker, who would then immediately afterwards rate him as a John. And then if the rating weren’t high enough, he’d get banned and lose his deposit. Wouldn’t that work the way Lyft works? And, my, wouldn’t that “disrupt” the local prostitution biz?

And would the donated income be considered income by the IRS? Or not, I don’t know.

Ooh, here’s one, prowling the Western Addition just yesterday:

Click to expand

“License plates front or rear? No thanks, not for me. But my pink carstache is an offer for you to flag me down.” Or maybe this non-hipster-looking dude is an actual kicky hipster, just having fun decorating his car?  I can’t tell.

Or, let’s say you want to kidnap somebody. Don’t go to the trouble of obtaining a car what looks like a taxi, just put a pink mustache on your econocar and soon you’ll have kidnappees flagging you down? Mmmmm.

Hey, SFMTA! How much money are you making from Lyft?

Absolutely nothing. I’ll say it again, absolutely nothing. Lyft, what is it good for?

Hey SFMTA! What driver is going to want to pay a 50% tax(!) on a taxi medallion if thousands of pink mustached cars disrupt the highly regulated taxi industry of the 415?

Hey SFMTA! You “manage” everything else in town, why not Lyft too?

‘Cause right now, this pink mustache company is drinking your milkshake. 

They drink it up:

This will not stand, this aggression against the cabdrivers of San Francisco.