评论
打印
Everybody loves disruption, except the people who are being disrupted. As Uber, the app-based ride-hailing service, has spread rapidly from its San Francisco home to cities around the world, it has repeatedly faced resistance from incumbent taxi operators, who are often politically influential. Regulators and legislators from Brussels to Beijing have moved to restrict Uber’s operations.
每个人都热爱破坏，除了那些受到破坏影响的人。随着基于应用的叫车服务优步(Uber)迅速从其大本营旧金山扩张至全球各地，它也不断面临来自通常拥有政治影响力的现有出租车运营商的抵制。从布鲁塞尔到北京的监管者和立法者已开始对优步的运营加以限制。
Some of the fiercest opposition has come in Europe, where the culture clash between the remorseless competition of the US tech industry and the locals’ respect for tradition and deference to established interests is especially stark. While Uber’s operations give rise to legitimate questions about safety and congestion, the public interest issues used as pretexts for cracking down on the company are often spurious. The proposed new restrictions in London, which would put Uber at a competitive disadvantage against the city’s black cabs, are a case in point.
优步面临的一些最强烈的反对来自欧洲，在那里，美国科技业的冷酷竞争与当地对传统的尊重和对既得利益的顺从之间的文化冲突尤其明显。尽管优步的运营引发了关于安全性和交通拥堵的合理问题，但那些被用作打击优步之借口的所谓公众利益问题常常站不住脚。伦敦新提出的限制就是一个典型的例子，这些限制使优步相对于伦敦的“黑色”出租车陷于不利的竞争地位。
Uber has often not helped its own cause. Concerns about the company’s use of data on customers’ movements, allegations that an executive had talked about smearing unfriendly journalists and complaints about its tax planning have made it harder for Uber to win the battle for hearts and minds.
优步却常常自毁长城。人们对该公司利用顾客出行数据的担忧、关于一名高管谈论搞臭不友好记者的指控、以及对其税务筹划的抱怨，使优步更难在这场人心争夺战中取得胜利。
It has been seeking to bolster its soft skills by hiring experienced political operators and has sharpened up how it presents its arguments. London is a chance to show that the investment has been worthwhile.
优步一直在努力通过雇佣老练的政治操手提升自己的软技能，并已改进了提出论点的方式。伦敦是一次证明优步的这些投资物有所值的机会。
As in other cities, the proposals of Transport for London, which regulates the city’s taxis, are dressed up as measures to protect public safety. The details of the measures reveal how flimsy those justifications are.
与其他城市一样，管理伦敦出租车行业的伦敦交通局(Transport for London)的提议被粉饰为保护公众安全的措施。措施的具体细节表明了这些理由是多么不堪一击。
For example, one idea is to make riders wait at least five minutes before being picked up after hailing a ride through Uber or another similar service, even if there is an available driver close by, an obstruction that will provide nothing but irritation for passengers. Another suggestion is that drivers should be allowed to use only one ride-hailing app, which would impede one of the most effective checks on any abuses by Uber: competition between a number of different services.
例如，其中一个主意是让通过优步或其他类似服务叫车的乘客在被接上之前至少等待5分钟，即使可提供服务的司机就在附近。这种障碍除了激起乘客的愤怒什么作用也没有。另一个建议是司机只应被允许使用一种叫车应用，这只会使遏制优步的任何过度行为最有效的方式之一——让多种不同叫车服务展开竞争——受到阻碍。
In this somewhat random set of ideas, it is hard not to see an attempt by Boris Johnson, London’s mayor, to restore relations with the city’s black cab drivers. Many of them backed him when he was voted into office in 2008, and plenty are natural supporters of his Conservative administration, but his perceived reluctance to clamp down on Uber has led to angry protests against him.
在这套或多或少有些随意的想法中，不难看出伦敦市长鲍里斯约翰逊(Boris Johnson)试图与该市出租车司机修复关系的想法。2008年约翰逊当选伦敦市长时很多出租车司机投票支持他，而且很多司机是其保守党政府天然的支持者，但约翰逊却给人以不愿打压优步的印象，结果招致了愤怒的抗议。
Transport for London has opened a consultation on its proposals, and may not adopt any of them. For an ostensibly pro-market Conservative administration, it will be hard to justify restraints on innovation simply because it creates losers as well as winners. Uber has right on its side — consumers, not regulators, should decide which transport options are best for them — but that may not be enough. Its campaign to block the proposals has started well: an online petition had by this weekend received more than 132,000 signatures. But while its business relies on a technological solution for navigating a city’s streets, there is no such fix for finding a route through its politics.
伦敦交通局已经就其提议启动了咨询，但或许不会通过其中任何一条提议。对于表面上为亲市场派的保守党当局来说，很难找到合理的理由仅仅因为创新同时产生了赢家和输家就加以限制。优步手握一定的正义——应该由消费者（而非监管者）来决定何种交通方式是最好的——但这或许不够。优步阻挠这些提议的活动已经打下了很好的开局：一项网上请愿到上周末已经收集到了逾13.2万个签名。但是，尽管优步的业务依赖于提供城市街道导航的技术解决方案，但它没有同样的解决方案为自己提供“政治导航”。
If it wants to continue to grow in London and around the world, Uber needs to be able to persuade politicians that it is worth facing down the established taxi operators who are resisting change. If vested interests prevent its innovations in service from reaching their full potential, it would count as an enormous missed opportunity.
要想在伦敦及全球各地继续增长，优步需要说服政客相信，挫败那些抵制改变的现有出租车运营商是值得的。如果既得利益最终阻止优步的服务创新实现其最大潜能，优步将错过一次巨大机遇。
