6/ So there is rigorous case to be made for distinguishing predictable, ordinary surges (rush hour) and emergency conditions
-
-
Replying to @vgr
7/ It is not fundamentally a "moral" question about whether surge pricing is "fair." It is a practical question of logistics.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @vgr
8/ You can rigorously quantify hazard/risk/ability-to-pay asymmetries and define thresholds that identify "emergencies"
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @vgr
9/ Once you've quantitatively bounded "emergency conditions", how do you design a market mechanism to deal with it?
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @vgr
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 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @vgr
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 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @vgr
12/ Once system has detected "emergency" conditions, people can hail with an urgency level indication as in "I broke my leg"
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @vgr
13/ Of course this can be gamed (think evil Billy Zane character in Titanic). But burden of proof mechanisms are possible.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @vgr
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 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
.@Theo_Clifford tuning variable. It's the same sort of policy design question that affects healthcare rationing/quality-of-life models
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.