https://uk.news.yahoo.com/san-franci...warhol#5cCZ1W1
I believe SF will suffer a bit over this. Think of the circling time avoided if you know when someone else plans to vacate a space (public space at that). I can see ways the practice would be abused and that is what should be addressed SF rather than outright banning something that would most likely be a benefit.
If the apps just told nearby users when a parking spot becomes available, it would be a lot less of an issue (it might still run afoul of state law about use of mobile devices while driving though). But it's not, it's setting up unregulated secondary markets of a public service. I don't often say this but the City of San Francisco is absolutely right in the ban.
It's the same practice as scalping, only this time with public property. Yeah, a ban is okay.
Freely giving info about public spaces you could make an argument for, or selling info on private ones - with the owners permission - but without the permission of the owner this is nothing but extortion. I'm shocked that you'd back the private rorting of a public good. Even if it were free rather than exploitative there's the very serious issue of potentially encouraging extremely dangerous and illegal actions (using a mobile while driving).
Even worse sounds the description of Parkmodo which sounds positively like Mafioso protection money. Pay us to get public parking because we've parked in it?
I agree in general; I do think, however, that this problem has been brought about by municipal subsidies for parking - I assume most street parking is either free or way below the market rate. If there was no premium between public parking spaces (e.g. on streets) and private ones (parking garages), you wouldn't get significant secondary markets springing up. 'Free' parking drives a lot of congestion and pollution in urban centers. These apps are obviously not the solution to the problem, but they're just symptoms of an underlying dysfunction in the market.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy
In a city near my hometown, municipal parking is more expensive than the private parking places, by the way. Yes, even those who aren't attached to a supermarket or mall with a "buy for 5€ and your get 1 hour of free parking."
Same in downtown tampa. Place has even earned a few nickanmes about being a parking lot because there are so many private lots because the city parking is so much. Its worth more to buy a business, bulldoze it, and pave it into a lot instead of renting or leasing out office space.Quote:
Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro
Well, that's probably more due to this US-American insistence on going everywhere by car ;)
None of the cited apps were limited to free or city-controlled parking, even if those spots might be the most desirable. The congestion and general lack of parking is the issue and it's not one that would be fixed by higher parking prices. Reduced a bit sure, but S.F. just doesn't have the space. But the City has less power over how private parking is sold. I don't think it would be able to ban such apps if they weren't trying to make a profit off the City's good/service.Quote:
Originally Posted by wiggin
The abuse issue was addressed in the OP. Along with the recommendation that SF focus on that.
If SF focused on the problems they claim deserve an outright ban on information exchange then there would be no need for a ban.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy
Being, there are plainly multiple apps in the area of finding parking spaces. SF has targeted one of them, one which is engaged in a plainly unlawful market practice, and has warned two others engaged in very similar, if not identical, unlawful endeavors. It has not and presumably will not place any outright ban on information exchange.
Well the article references 3 targets directly.
The article references three apps, yes. One has been hit with a cease and desist *the one I say has been targeted* and the other two have been warned that they'll be hit with cease and desists if they continue, which I aptly and accurately call a warning. All three are trying to turn a profit on the use of City-provided parking.Quote:
Originally Posted by Being
Agreed.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
In Brussels, parking is just as expensive as a ticket (IIRC 25€ for half a day), so the smart thing to do is not pau for parking - if they don't check, you're better off, if they do, it's just as expensive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro
That would not be the case in San Francisco. The current cost of a downtown parking citation in SF is $72, more than twice as much as in Brussels. Parking prices would usually be between $30-45.
So, here's the next thing in SF: Reservation Hop.
They already found a name for such shenanigans: JerkTech.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro
Restaurant Reservations -- Easiest to exploit
Uber -- next easiest
Parking -- Unless you are planning on financing a fleet of vehicles and many drivers you're not going to make much profit at $5 a pop. I'm sure you can't reserve a spot by standing in it. And what did the first minute of parking cost? IMO this is much less likely to be exploited than the others. This will be beneficial to timing of traffic, ie. private citizens exchange their schedule information and somebody doesn't have to drive as long to find a space.
And don't forget that for Google's autonomous vehicle this app will exist everywhere.
Huh, funny you and I might disagree on this from unusually sides of the issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by Being
This issue reminds me of the first tech boom, when parking was highly limited in Pac Heights and the tech companies hadn't created their apparently-imperialist shuttle bus system. Folks would park their cars on sidewalks because the cost of tickets was minuscule compared to the cost of parking. I could never figure out why the city didn't tow the cars. Maybe too hard to pull them off the sidewalks without risking damage to other parked cars.
Down here if all 4 wheels are off the street the meter maids can't even ticket you. If you're blocking public access a full blown officer has to come out, but generally its the right/responsibility of the property owner.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreadnaught
Abused the hell of that when I worked downtown. Currently parking under a lovely tree at work thanks to it too.
