Conversation

Replying to
3/ ..because such isolated cases can be handled as exceptions while surge pricing deals with the default demand matching
1
Replying to
4/ But in a snowstorm or emergency, those most at risk of being thrown into an urgent emergency are *least* likely to be able to pay
1
Replying to
5/ And the incidence of such urgent-need cases will be too high to be handled as exceptions. The *default* needs to shift.
1
Replying to
6/ So there is rigorous case to be made for distinguishing predictable, ordinary surges (rush hour) and emergency conditions
1
Replying to
7/ It is not fundamentally a "moral" question about whether surge pricing is "fair." It is a practical question of logistics.
2
1
Replying to
8/ You can rigorously quantify hazard/risk/ability-to-pay asymmetries and define thresholds that identify "emergencies"
1
Replying to
9/ Once you've quantitatively bounded "emergency conditions", how do you design a market mechanism to deal with it?
3
Replying to
10/ First, you can expect supply to increase out of altruistisms, rather than just financial motives. So you can surge to a lower price
1
Replying to
11/ Second, you can tweak the dispatching system. Instead of a FIFO queue, explicitly create a moral luck game weighted by urgency of need
1
1
Replying to
12/ Once system has detected "emergency" conditions, people can hail with an urgency level indication as in "I broke my leg"
1
Replying to
14/ For example, hail a rideshare along with a photo of broken leg to get higher priority. And driver can say "screw you" if you lied.
2
2
Show replies