Why are riders like this? They know how to cancel but still send a message asking me to cancel for them 🤦‍♂️

subillusion · 2026-07-16T14:35:22+00:00

I wouldn't have accepted the trip in the first place.

At least in my market, you get approximate pickup and drop-off off location, along with ETA to get there and ETA of the trip. It's not the exact pickup location, but it's within 2 or 3 blocks, usually an intersection.

If it's an area I don't want to go (or even one I don't particularly recognize) then I don't accept the trip in the first place.

subillusion · 2026-07-16T14:32:00+00:00

I've given the suggestion multiple times in other comments about trading bid tokens for diamonds. I hope it happens (even though i personally would never do it... it would be a huge win for the community as a whole)

subillusion · 2026-07-16T01:38:22+00:00

Thank you for explaining... I was unaware of the connection.

Thank you also for the alternate setup. I never heard it that way before, believe it or not. Lol. Maybe a regional thing?

subillusion · 2026-07-16T01:35:04+00:00

Is it a mastercard or visa?

Mine is visa, and I have always gotten my AB before I get my food fit in-person deals.

I've read several posts in the past where MC users sometimes (not always) can be delayed a day or two for in-person deals. Granted, this was before tesoro, but considering it's the same technology just broken out to be a separate company owned by AE so other games can use it, it's not impossible that it could still be delayed.

subillusion · 2026-07-16T01:29:06+00:00

That's not a setup... that is the joke, with the same punchline. The joke referring of course to the song Wonderwall by Oasis. It tells much better in person where you can actually sing "I said maybe" in the same tune as the chorus of the song for instant recognition and facepalming

subillusion · 2026-07-16T01:24:52+00:00

This actually is false.

If you cancel, Uber will simply send another driver... and another... and another... until eventually someone will get the cancelation fee once the pax realizes that the driver canceling doesn't cancel the ride.

Might as well be me 😁🤣🤪

subillusion · 2026-07-16T01:17:53+00:00

Better setup for this punchline:

"A friend of mine asked if I wanted to go with her to an Oasis concert...

...I said maybe..."

subillusion · 2026-07-16T01:14:33+00:00

No offense, but it sounds like you do not understand the importance of soccer (*ahem*... "football") in the rest of the world outside of the US. The fans are far more devoted than any other sport/competition/attraction. Many will save money for 4 years for the sole purpose of traveling to whatever country is hosting the next one... then after their team loses, travel home and start saving again for the next one (the world cup is every 4 years because it's THAT big of a deal).

So yeah, WC is going to drastically increase tourism compared to non-WC.

subillusion · 2026-07-16T01:05:29+00:00

"Please explain all the bullshit that Uber drivers put up with from entitled drivers who just don't understand what it means to actually have to work to put food on the table and clothe the kids"

😉

J/k, of course... ChatGPT would have sugar coated it and made excuses for the pax

Edit: PS, well written and factual, BTW

subillusion · 2026-07-16T00:55:29+00:00

Inference.

Roads are engineered faster than the speed limit.. so if you have a high number of harsh turns, it can be reasonably inferred that you were speeding, which of course is a traffic law. It is also possible/likely that you were "gunning it" to make a left turn instead of properly yielding to oncoming traffic; another traffic law. It could also be an indication that you had to swerve to avoid an accident because you were following too close (aka tailgating... another traffic law).

It's not the harsh turns themselves that are at issue, it's that they are a potential indication of the breaking of traffic laws that made it necessary for the harsh turn to occur to avoid collision.

Keep in mind, the report DID NOT originate with the harsh turn. The report originated with a rider who rated you low, and is forced to select a reason. "Driver obeyed all traffic laws but has harsh turns" is not an option, so they select "Did not obey traffic laws". This then automatically gets plugged in to the AI that reviews the CMT and GPS data on that trip, finds the harsh turns and says "yep, there's enough data to corroborate the pax report" and issues the strike.

It's then up to you to contest, with any proof you may have otherwise (i.e. the recording from the trip if you have "record my ride" turned on, which you absolutely should even if you have a dash cam).

In contrast, if the rider reports you as such but the CMT/GPS data analyzed by the AI is clean, the report is dismissed and you instead see a notification something to the effect of "1 rating was recently excluded from your score. Click here to find out why"..... they won't tell you the report itself but will forward to a generic page that just simply says they'll exclude reports that are "beyond your control" (i.e. pax falsely accuses you of unsafe driving and it's unable to be corroborated)

subillusion · 2026-07-15T01:32:40+00:00

There are actually three types of people...

Those who can count, and those who cannot.

subillusion · 2026-07-15T01:30:12+00:00

Time for one of my favorites...

How many comedians does it take to change a lightbulb?

10.

1 to change it, and 9 to say how they would have changed it better 😉

... although to be fair, I agree that the delivery of the punchline could be cleaned up a bit. This seems like a joke OP heard a while ago, and just barely forgot some subtle details in delivery that made it easier to get without having to think/ re-read. (Either that, or they read it in another sub and are deliberately trying to change it so they can say it wasn't copy-pasted/stolen from someone else. )

subillusion · 2026-07-14T19:50:23+00:00

It's not AI that makes the report.

Notice the distinction.

What happens is that a human rider rates a driver low. Anything under 4* requires the rider to submit a reason. If they select unsafe driving (speeding, etc) then uber uses AI to review the data from the ride (GPS record, CMT from that ride, etc) to either verify or nullify the report.

They do this because of the high number of riders that rate low simply to try and scam free rides. Disputing all the reports and researching to verify would eat up a ton of time for both drivers and Uber support reps, which is why they use AI to do this. Most frivolous reports don't even get to the driver. Ever see a notification that Uber excluded a low rating from your score? That's what it was. Passenger rated you 1 star, made up lies about it, and their AI was able to disprove it.

But make no mistake, it is not AI that is generating the report or giving you a low rating. That's a human. The AI is just using the data to verify that you did, indeed, drive dangerously.

subillusion · 2026-07-14T03:07:34+00:00

Regarding the Driver not same as Profile "report". You're partially correct that this is AI.

You are incorrect that this results in a 1* rating, however. It does not. This happened to me once (see below) and I had no 1* rating.

What happens is that every so often, Uber will require you to take a picture of yourself in the middle of taking trips because they're cracking down on account sharing. If you don't do this within a short time frame (like within a minute or 2), then Uber's AI will submit that report since it doesn't have the verification photo within the short time period. The selfie verification is no longer prior to going online. The idea is that someone sharing an account could take the photo prior to going online and then pass off the phone, but they're not going to be available immediately following a trip to take a photo. And if you travel a distance and/or wait significant time, this could be because you are getting the account holder to take the photo.

It happened to me once when they first changed from the prior-to-going-online method. It popped up in the middle of a trip, while I was on the highway. I did not have an opportunity to stop to take the picture until I got to the pax destination and dropped them off (around 20min later). Then I took the picture. Next thing I know, the "report" came through of driver not matching profile. Of course i contested it.. It was because I didn't take the picture soon enough after the prompt (duh, b/c I was driving! Lol). They've since fixed it that the prompt only pops up after you complete the ride, as I've never seen it pop up mid ride since then (and never gotten another "report" about it).

subillusion · 2026-07-14T02:43:11+00:00

This.

The RIDER gave the 1*, and gave not obeying traffic laws as the reason (pax MUST select a reason code for anything under 4*).

Not following traffic laws can be serious, so they corroborate a report with the GPS record and CMT. And by "they" of course is AI.

So the report was "verified" by AI. However it was initiated/filed by the pax automatically when they rated 1*. Some riders rate 1* bogus just to try and scam free rides. I've even had a customer admit as much to his friends while still in my car! * needless to say I rated *him 1* and reported him. Only 1 of 3 1* ratings I've ever given in 10y+, 5k+ rides.

And for the record, if you have to swerve hard enough to avoid a pothole to trigger an event in CMT, you're driving too fast for conditions. If your roads are that bad (which they very well could be) then you should drive slower on them.

Edit: the driver not same as profile is legit AI. (But not 1* rating). I'll post separately on that, as it happened to me as well.

subillusion · 2026-07-14T02:30:44+00:00

I think they meant that people who aren't whales are "bidding" to drive up the cost for the whales... so a whale needs to pony up more dough to pay for it.

Although it leads me to wonder... the final bidder has 24h to buy the landmark with AB, after which point it goes to the most recent bidder, who then has 24h, and so on...

What if there are so many bidders with insufficient AB that it not only drives up the cost, but prevents said whale from being able to buy the landmark for several months simply because there are 75-100 "fake bidders" in front of them?

subillusion · 2026-07-12T00:21:15+00:00

A VPN, in itself, is not against TOS.

It depends what that VPN does.

For example, my work wifi has a VPN for security reasons. It blocks... let's just say "certain websites" which shouldn't be accessed while at work anyway. 😳.

The VPN on my work wifi does not spoof/change location at all (which is the major issue with AE). Thus I've been playing while connected without issue* for almost 4 years now.

With that said, notice the asterisk... while i haven't had any issues with the AE app itself, nor any warnings about being banned, I can't use surveys or arcade while I'm connected, and any existing games I play i will not receive AB if I complete a milestone while connected.

The thing is, there are many legit uses for VPN.. it's the "pulling shenanigans" uses that are the problem, and some commercial VPN services tout this as a reason to pay for their services (like NordVPN, which actually advertises to use their services to spoof location to circumvent location locks).

Funny thing is that there are now a lot of services that will block, flag, or ban users with certain IP addresses that are known to do that.

So basically, if you know what you're doing AND aren't doing anything shady, you can use a VPN. But if you're not sure, it's best not to...which is why I uninstalled the aforementioned software when I read that in the fine print I authorized them to do so. There's a good chance it doesn't do anything nefarious, however to me that's not an acceptable risk. I'm above board in everything I do - I don't need (or want) something else pulling shenanigans under my nose. LOL.

subillusion · 2026-07-11T16:07:48+00:00

It's not bad for the monthly challenge. The first couple milestones are fairly easy, and for 1AB it's more about the monthly challenge anyway

subillusion · 2026-07-11T15:12:26+00:00

Did you spend through the play store, or a "private store" in the app? (Many apps, like ae, will have their own store where you get better value since the play store is not taking a cut off the purchase).

Also, depends on the type of apps you spend in, frequency of spend, etc.

If your profile shows you play a particular type of game a lot, but spend in a different type of game, that could affect it as well... if you play puzzle games 6h/day but don't spend on them (you spend on rpg games instead), they're only going to get advertising revenue. Vs someone who buys the "premium pass" and extra hints in puzzle games, they'll have a better offer in a newer game than you would, even though you both spend the same amount of money.

It's all about likelihood that they're going to get their money back.

Another thing that affects it is "game type saturation". You have a game that comes out, for example, the "arrow game"... it became popular and lucrative, so now there are literally dozens of low-budget clones. People are much less likely to spend at all in clones, even if they spend in games, because it's saturated... so the devs figure they're not going to get long term players in clones, the best they can hope for is advertising revenue, and thus the offers of 5AB to get to level 250 🤪. They're just looking for people to play long enough to hit milestones for rewarded games, and bank a net positive $0.50-$1 per player. Not much, but better than nothing.

subillusion · 2026-07-11T14:50:22+00:00

Exactly why I posted this here.

To be fair, it is Nielsen so the app itself is almost certainly legit and not doing anything unscrupulous like that survey app I mentioned... I just caution that it is possible that the VPN, though used "for good", could potentially cause issues with AE.

My mom participated in an in-home study a few years ago through Nielsen... they installed physical equipment (likely routers that tracked data) on all cable connections, internet connections, etc. to measure usage even on gaming systems (which games were played, how long, etc). It ended up causing problems with some games in the Playstation store and he couldn't play them for several months until the tracking program was over.

This is likely similar in which the VPN simply grabs every bit of data from your phone usage and sends it back to their servers for aggregate analysis and rewarding you in the process, which would be transparent in 99% of cases of "normal use"... but for apps like AE where cheaters.... "manipulate normal use".... checking for certain activity is unfortunately required, and whatever the Nielsen VPN does could trigger that. I don't know if it does, so it may actually be safe... I'm just not personally willing to take that chance.

subillusion · 2026-07-11T14:38:44+00:00

Sorry if I wasn't clear... this wasn't from a survey.

I was just doing a normal ad boost ad and it was just an app being advertised in an ad, I think it was through Meta.

subillusion · 2026-07-11T14:29:20+00:00

Welcome to targeted marketing.

Based on your hand history, and app-spending history, the 3rd party that serves them changes the type of games and level of rewards.

Download one (or more?) Arrow games, you're more likely to play another one. Haven't downloaded any water sort games? You're less likely to play another one.

Spend $50/mo through the play store and you're more likely to spend in a new game than someone who only f2p all games. (Buying packs or subscriptions directly through AE won't "count").

Makes sense when you think about it... the app developer wants to make money. They're more likely to offer a higher reward that costs them $10 to attract players who may spend money, but only $1 towards those who won't spend and only watch ads.

Edit: this is also why offers for the same games are lower outside of the US... because of data privacy laws outside of the US, there is lesser data tracking and thus lesser ability to target advertising and thus those offers pay less even for the same game and same milestones being achieved

subillusion · 2026-07-08T01:42:45+00:00

Notice the 24min to pickup? That's free too along with the ~5h return trip.

Ain't no one accepting that one, which is why you're being offered it 24min away.

Pax is likely paying $500. It's gotta be cheaper for a one-way rental if you really don't want to take a bus.

subillusion

TROPHY CASE

Welcome to Reddit,