A Twitter Data Scientist Hacks San Francisco's Subway Fares(fastcoexist.com)
fastcoexist.com
A Twitter Data Scientist Hacks San Francisco's Subway Fares
http://www.fastcoexist.com/3026711/a-twitter-data-scientist-hacks-san-franciscos-subway-fares
20 comments
I always thought it was pretty grim that Boston's "Charlie Card" was named after a man who was 'trapped' in the subway system because he couldn't afford to pay his way out.
Charlie is not a real person, it's a song.
Yeah, I should have made that clearer in my comment. I still think it's a bit morbid.
I wish Fast Company had written an article about me
at the time :(
The minimum balance required to enter is now $1.75, which I think is the minimum BART fare. (The minimums depend on which transit system you use.) You can't go negative at all, so you have to add your fare to the card before you can leave.
But a lot of this was due to the fact that they had no Clipper loading capability inside the fare gates as far as I can tell. The signs announcing the change seemed to come up at the same time the old add fare machines were retrofitted with Clipper.
On the bright side, BART does offer small discounts based on usage (which only makes sense for a distance-based fare, as opposed to weekly/monthly passes) so there's that.
But a lot of this was due to the fact that they had no Clipper loading capability inside the fare gates as far as I can tell. The signs announcing the change seemed to come up at the same time the old add fare machines were retrofitted with Clipper.
On the bright side, BART does offer small discounts based on usage (which only makes sense for a distance-based fare, as opposed to weekly/monthly passes) so there's that.
Hack grocery store self-checkouts by ringing up lobster as potatoes!
Looks like it risks $250 fine for:
(2) Misuse of a transfer, pass, ticket, or token with the intent to evade the payment of a fare.
See California Penal Code 640(c)(2) http://www.sacrt.com/penalcode.stm
(2) Misuse of a transfer, pass, ticket, or token with the intent to evade the payment of a fare.
See California Penal Code 640(c)(2) http://www.sacrt.com/penalcode.stm
But neither user that swaps is attempting to evade payment of a fare - they are both paying fares at the end of their trip.
Of course, a judge would probably laugh at you and find you guilty in 15 seconds with a "logical" argument like that.
Of course, a judge would probably laugh at you and find you guilty in 15 seconds with a "logical" argument like that.
> But neither user that swaps is attempting to evade payment of a fare - they are both paying fares at the end of their trip.
They are attempting to evade (part of) the fare for the trip they are actually taking.
They are attempting to evade (part of) the fare for the trip they are actually taking.
Person A is evading paying one fare and paying a seperate one which they were never asked to pay.
Hack the newspaper business by paying for one newspaper and then taking them all!
Hack the movie theater by buying one ticket but going into two movies!
I believe the hack is buying one ticket and then going to the back door and letting in 10 of your friends.
When I was young, those crazy kids would buy two tickets and enter the theatre. Then, one person would exit with both stubs, give one to a friend waiting outside, and then repeat the process for as many friends as one had.
Now that is a true hack. Brilliant!
Why not just jump the turnstile? There really is no difference between this and his "hack".
This is quite possibly the most silicon valley headline I've ever seen.
Twitter data scientist uses ONE WEIRD TRICK to rip off public good.
Looks like it was generated using this: http://grantslatton.com/hngen/?lookback=2
I like the technical ingenuity, but do we really need to hack this system? I'm not debating the legitimacy of BART's cash flows, but IMO, the distance based system is the fairest system I can think of, closely correlating usage of resources with payments
Agreed. Also on the personal level, while it could save you some money, you're not only offsetting mass transit funds to the taxpayers (or other passengers), but also taking a risk that the card you are trading for is from where they say it was from and that it contains the amount of money the other person claimed.
You're also potentially (haven't thought through all of the details yet) losing out on the convenience to tie your Clipper card with your credit card, take advantage of BART high value cards ($64 value for $60), and being able to take advantage of paying for transit in pre-tax dollars.
And unless this could be made very simple, you're going through a lot of daily stress just to save a very small amount of money which can distract you from doing things that give you more value.
You're also potentially (haven't thought through all of the details yet) losing out on the convenience to tie your Clipper card with your credit card, take advantage of BART high value cards ($64 value for $60), and being able to take advantage of paying for transit in pre-tax dollars.
And unless this could be made very simple, you're going through a lot of daily stress just to save a very small amount of money which can distract you from doing things that give you more value.
>Also on the personal level, while it could save you some money, you're not only offsetting mass transit funds to the taxpayers (or other passengers)
I know people felt personally slighted with the Google Bus protests, but with stuff like this it's too easy to criticize "valley behaviour".
I know people felt personally slighted with the Google Bus protests, but with stuff like this it's too easy to criticize "valley behaviour".
There isn't even much technical ingenuity here. I'm not sure how this is even noteworthy. You save $1 between two people? So you split it for a lousy $0.50 or maybe $100 per year? Just stop drinking lattes and you'll save that in a month.
Not to mention if you live further away, you deserve to pay more to make up for the extra resources needed to move you around, as nchuhoai said.
Not to mention if you live further away, you deserve to pay more to make up for the extra resources needed to move you around, as nchuhoai said.
The best route appears to save $2.05 each direction according to https://github.com/asifhaque/transit-arbitrage/blob/master/d...:
[orinda => pittsburg] + [walnut-creek => pleasant-hill]: 2.05 (35.6522%)
[orinda => pittsburg] + [walnut-creek => concord]: 2.05 (35.6522%)
[orinda => pittsburg] + [pleasant-hill => concord]: 2.05 (35.6522%)
I must not understand his methodology, because if you're willing to meet at an interim stop (as in the examples above), then it's easy to save quite a bit more than $2.05 just by swapping with someone who is taking almost exactly the opposite route as you.
For example, if you're making the long trip from San Bruno to North Concord / Martinez, that'll cost you $6.95. If someone is traveling from Pittsburg to South San Francisco (almost exactly the opposite route), then that would normally cost them $6.70. But if you notice that their destination is one stop from your starting point, and vice versa, then you can meet up at any station in between and swap tickets, so the ticket you started with travels from San Bruno to South SF ($3.10) and their ticket travels from Pittsburg to North Concord / Martinez ($1.85). Instead of paying a combined $13.65, you pay a combined $4.95.
What am I missing? Are those twitter data scientists just not that bright? ;)
For example, if you're making the long trip from San Bruno to North Concord / Martinez, that'll cost you $6.95. If someone is traveling from Pittsburg to South San Francisco (almost exactly the opposite route), then that would normally cost them $6.70. But if you notice that their destination is one stop from your starting point, and vice versa, then you can meet up at any station in between and swap tickets, so the ticket you started with travels from San Bruno to South SF ($3.10) and their ticket travels from Pittsburg to North Concord / Martinez ($1.85). Instead of paying a combined $13.65, you pay a combined $4.95.
What am I missing? Are those twitter data scientists just not that bright? ;)
Orinda => Pittsburg is going the same way and on the same line as Walnut-Creek => Pleasant-Hill, Walnut-Creek => Concord and Pleasant-Hill => Concord (the East-bound Pittsburg Bay Point train). There is no need to get off the train in order to swap tickets.
You are of course right though that you can save far more money if you do get off and swap with someone going the opposite way, but then you have to wait for another train. If you already get off the train in order to transfer (say you commute from Pittsburg to Fremont), then swapping cards with someone going the opposite direction is easy.
You are of course right though that you can save far more money if you do get off and swap with someone going the opposite way, but then you have to wait for another train. If you already get off the train in order to transfer (say you commute from Pittsburg to Fremont), then swapping cards with someone going the opposite direction is easy.
It assumes that everyone has the same starting balance also, so the most efficient would be a crosspairing of commuters within the turnstiles at each destination. Way too complicated but maybe a fun thought experiment.
[deleted]
In the UK train fares are not a metric. Specifically, sometimes travelling A to B then B to C is cheaper than getting a ticket direct from A to C. For example ...
Just about two years ago I had a return journey from near Liverpool in the North West of England to Exmouth, in the extreme South West. The simple return ticket was about £115. However a return Liverpool to Cheltenham was about £50, and a return Cheltenham to Exmouth was about £45, so I saved about £20, and didn't even have to change trains.
It's against the terms and conditions to scrape the official web sites for fare and timetable information, so clearly I wouldn't write a script to do that and then search for optimally priced combinations, even though I spend about £9000 every year on rail travel and could save about £3500 a year.
Just about two years ago I had a return journey from near Liverpool in the North West of England to Exmouth, in the extreme South West. The simple return ticket was about £115. However a return Liverpool to Cheltenham was about £50, and a return Cheltenham to Exmouth was about £45, so I saved about £20, and didn't even have to change trains.
It's against the terms and conditions to scrape the official web sites for fare and timetable information, so clearly I wouldn't write a script to do that and then search for optimally priced combinations, even though I spend about £9000 every year on rail travel and could save about £3500 a year.
"clearly I wouldn't write a script to do that and then search for optimally priced combinations"
Another thing you wouldn't do is go to:
http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/split-cheap-train-tickets/
Another thing you wouldn't do is go to:
http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/split-cheap-train-tickets/
The two passengers are going in opposite directions, so when would they ever have a chance to switch passes?
Are they supposed to get off their trains and meet each other on the platform, then wait for another train? Sounds like a stupid amount of work to steal 85 cents.
Are they supposed to get off their trains and meet each other on the platform, then wait for another train? Sounds like a stupid amount of work to steal 85 cents.
The article is wrong. The two people are going the same direction on a Richmond-bound train which travels from Milbrae through Glen Park to Embarcadero and onto Berkeley.
There is also an example of doing the same thing on DC's Metrorail.
There is also an example of doing the same thing on DC's Metrorail.
I was confused when I read that at first, too. The second person is coming from the opposite direction, which means they are already on the train when you get on.
[deleted]
This, he writes, might force "monopolistic" public transit
systems to become more efficient by eliminating the
possibility of route swapping--like by charging a flat
rate per trip, as New York City’s Metropolitan Transit
Authority does.
Alternately, if they switched to an unmarked electronic ticket, so you couldn't tell if someone was offering you a valid or invalid ticket, the information asymmetry could cause bad tickets to drive out the good.
Swapping clipper cArds makes no sense as you typically have money stored on it.
In high school taking Bart during summer to Berkeley (cus I'm a nerd who took optional summer school at cal) I would clone my Bart cards. The magnetic stripe is redundant horizontally. Take one hard with a nickel on it and rub off its magnetic strip with an exacto knife. Take another with $20 on it, use the knife to cut its and the aligned 5c stripe in half, then swap and place a single scotch tape stripe in the back to affix them. Pop it in the machine, add 10cents, and out pops a new card with $20.10.
In high school taking Bart during summer to Berkeley (cus I'm a nerd who took optional summer school at cal) I would clone my Bart cards. The magnetic stripe is redundant horizontally. Take one hard with a nickel on it and rub off its magnetic strip with an exacto knife. Take another with $20 on it, use the knife to cut its and the aligned 5c stripe in half, then swap and place a single scotch tape stripe in the back to affix them. Pop it in the machine, add 10cents, and out pops a new card with $20.10.
Little off topic.
When I first moved to SF @ 19 I looked quite young and carried my laptop in my backpack. I didn't have much cash and would pay the student/child fare to have enough $ for food.
I even knew the name of a couple local high schools and their teachers so that when I would eventually get called out I wouldn't get caught in the lie. I felt pretty bad about this "hack" for awhile, but I wouldn't have been able to eat without it. Thanks MUNI for subsidizing me.
When I first moved to SF @ 19 I looked quite young and carried my laptop in my backpack. I didn't have much cash and would pay the student/child fare to have enough $ for food.
I even knew the name of a couple local high schools and their teachers so that when I would eventually get called out I wouldn't get caught in the lie. I felt pretty bad about this "hack" for awhile, but I wouldn't have been able to eat without it. Thanks MUNI for subsidizing me.
"Out of 60,334 of these route pairs, Haque says that switching mid-route for 4,666 of them could save at least $1 together."
Two things.
First, that's an awfully low number of people who could take advantage of this hack.
Second, You're going to save $1??? Not sure the savings to effort ratio on this one really makes sense.
Two things.
First, that's an awfully low number of people who could take advantage of this hack.
Second, You're going to save $1??? Not sure the savings to effort ratio on this one really makes sense.
If saved both ways that's $2/day. Assuming you worked 40 hours a week and got two weeks vacation (which most minimum wage people don't, and part timers don't get any paid vacation), you'd save $702 a year, or about 4% of the post-tax income for a minimum wage worker in San Francisco.
Not everyone gets to work 40 hours a week. A recent study showed as many as 39,000 San Franciscans could be getting paid below minimum wage (which is the highest in the nation) [1]. Even if you did, this map[2] shows how many minimum wage jobs you'd need to rent in San Francisco (hint: more than 3)
Still think it's not worth saving a couple bucks a day?
[1] http://sfpublicpress.org/news/2013-04/sfs-minimum-wage-highe...
[1] http://sfist.com/2013/09/18/map_youd_need_to_work_5_minimum_...
Not everyone gets to work 40 hours a week. A recent study showed as many as 39,000 San Franciscans could be getting paid below minimum wage (which is the highest in the nation) [1]. Even if you did, this map[2] shows how many minimum wage jobs you'd need to rent in San Francisco (hint: more than 3)
Still think it's not worth saving a couple bucks a day?
[1] http://sfpublicpress.org/news/2013-04/sfs-minimum-wage-highe...
[1] http://sfist.com/2013/09/18/map_youd_need_to_work_5_minimum_...
Waaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too many points in this argument to address so I'll try to keep it on point to my assertion its now worth the effort:
So you save $2/day for a week = $14 (I was generous and gave you all 7 days even though most people I know work 5 days and even minimum wage workers don't work 7 days a week, every week, for a full year)
$14 x 3 remaining weeks in a month = $42 $42 x 11 remaining months of the year (this means they're doing this every day without fail, both ways, for a full year and successfully finding some to trade with everyday. Not sure those odds are in your favor, but whatever.) = $462
Considering you pointed out the high cost of living in San Francisco (I'm going to skip over the fact of why minimum wage workers would live in such a high rent area, but that's a different argument), I would expect $14 wouldn't go very far.
As such, having to hustle every single day, without fail for a full year to save what I consider a minimal amount of money that could be saved either by sharing a BART pass, biking, using a hybrid car, or a myriad other means that don't require a constant effort on my part. I would simply look to other ways to save money. Like someone once told me, "Work smarter, not harder, fool."
So you save $2/day for a week = $14 (I was generous and gave you all 7 days even though most people I know work 5 days and even minimum wage workers don't work 7 days a week, every week, for a full year)
$14 x 3 remaining weeks in a month = $42 $42 x 11 remaining months of the year (this means they're doing this every day without fail, both ways, for a full year and successfully finding some to trade with everyday. Not sure those odds are in your favor, but whatever.) = $462
Considering you pointed out the high cost of living in San Francisco (I'm going to skip over the fact of why minimum wage workers would live in such a high rent area, but that's a different argument), I would expect $14 wouldn't go very far.
As such, having to hustle every single day, without fail for a full year to save what I consider a minimal amount of money that could be saved either by sharing a BART pass, biking, using a hybrid car, or a myriad other means that don't require a constant effort on my part. I would simply look to other ways to save money. Like someone once told me, "Work smarter, not harder, fool."
Sorry, I miscalculated. I counted whole weeks instead of work days, which is 250 days, so really it should be $520 for $2 a day for 260 days with 2 (full) weeks vacation.
Your logic is strange, though. You mention that considering the high cost of living, $14 won't go very far. The insinuation, I guess, is that because it doesn't go very far, it isn't worth much? When really the fact is that since goods and services in SF have much higher value, each dollar you save is that much more important to being able to afford even the basic necessities (like rent, much less food and transportation!)
"What you consider" to be a minimal amount of money is what some people consider %3 of their annual income. For you that's probably what, $3,000? You can probably afford to lose that and it doesn't really affect your life much, which is why you have such a skewed view on what is minimal or worthwhile and what isn't. For a lot of people, $56 a month is the difference between having to borrow money from family to pay the rent or not, or having to decide between feeding everyone in their family for the week or not.
Hybrid car? Okay, I get it, either this is a troll or you seriously just don't consider anyone other than yourself to matter, and thus this idea of saving money is nonimportant to you. But it could be life-saving to other people. Like someone once told me, "Hey fool, this ain't no football game!"
Your logic is strange, though. You mention that considering the high cost of living, $14 won't go very far. The insinuation, I guess, is that because it doesn't go very far, it isn't worth much? When really the fact is that since goods and services in SF have much higher value, each dollar you save is that much more important to being able to afford even the basic necessities (like rent, much less food and transportation!)
"What you consider" to be a minimal amount of money is what some people consider %3 of their annual income. For you that's probably what, $3,000? You can probably afford to lose that and it doesn't really affect your life much, which is why you have such a skewed view on what is minimal or worthwhile and what isn't. For a lot of people, $56 a month is the difference between having to borrow money from family to pay the rent or not, or having to decide between feeding everyone in their family for the week or not.
Hybrid car? Okay, I get it, either this is a troll or you seriously just don't consider anyone other than yourself to matter, and thus this idea of saving money is nonimportant to you. But it could be life-saving to other people. Like someone once told me, "Hey fool, this ain't no football game!"
>>>> The insinuation, I guess, is that because it doesn't go very far, it isn't worth much?
Not at all. The point is in a high rent area, everything is more expensive. Simply put, $14 won't go very far. It doesn't mean that $14 is worthless.
>>>> You can probably afford to lose that and it doesn't really affect your life much, which is why you have such a skewed view on what is minimal or worthwhile and what isn't.
Whoa! Pump yo brakes there playah. First of all, you don't know me from a hole in the wall. You shouldn't start swinging wildly like that when you don't even know where I came from or where I've been. I have a crystal clear view on what's worthwhile, but at the same time, it's relative to your own life. I've been in a gutter, I know what its like to live on food stamps and have to bootstrap yourself to get somewhere in life. Nobody needs to tell me I don't know the value of money. I've been there, and I know.
>>>> Hybrid car? Okay, I get it, either this is a troll or you seriously just don't consider anyone other than yourself to matter, and thus this idea of saving money is nonimportant to you.
Quite the opposite actually. My whole point in the first place is there are better, less arduous ways of saving $56 a month than trying to find someone to trade a train ticket with every day for a full year. Hell, you could probably skip the $6 Starbucks every day for a few weeks and save that. You could bike to work two days out of five and save it in gas. You could start a side business and MAKE an additional $56 per month. That was my point to begin with. I'd rather be doing something that's enjoyable to save or earn that money instead of hounding some stranger to swap tickets with me so I can save some money.
Does that make sense??
Not at all. The point is in a high rent area, everything is more expensive. Simply put, $14 won't go very far. It doesn't mean that $14 is worthless.
>>>> You can probably afford to lose that and it doesn't really affect your life much, which is why you have such a skewed view on what is minimal or worthwhile and what isn't.
Whoa! Pump yo brakes there playah. First of all, you don't know me from a hole in the wall. You shouldn't start swinging wildly like that when you don't even know where I came from or where I've been. I have a crystal clear view on what's worthwhile, but at the same time, it's relative to your own life. I've been in a gutter, I know what its like to live on food stamps and have to bootstrap yourself to get somewhere in life. Nobody needs to tell me I don't know the value of money. I've been there, and I know.
>>>> Hybrid car? Okay, I get it, either this is a troll or you seriously just don't consider anyone other than yourself to matter, and thus this idea of saving money is nonimportant to you.
Quite the opposite actually. My whole point in the first place is there are better, less arduous ways of saving $56 a month than trying to find someone to trade a train ticket with every day for a full year. Hell, you could probably skip the $6 Starbucks every day for a few weeks and save that. You could bike to work two days out of five and save it in gas. You could start a side business and MAKE an additional $56 per month. That was my point to begin with. I'd rather be doing something that's enjoyable to save or earn that money instead of hounding some stranger to swap tickets with me so I can save some money.
Does that make sense??
> Hell, you could probably skip the $6 Starbucks every day for a few weeks and save that. You could bike to work two days out of five and save it in gas. You could start a side business and MAKE an additional $56 per month.
Aside from biking to work (which is sometimes feasible but sometimes not, such as with people with disabilities, the elderly, people who live far away, people who don't own a bike, people who don't have a shower at work, people who work long hours at manual-labor jobs and are constantly tired, and you know, all the other ways this might not work) I don't think those are options that most minimum-wage workers have. Buying Starbucks every morning is not something minimum-wage workers typically do. Being able to start a business is a privilege usually of the middle class, or businesses passed down through families, or require certain education or other resources, not to mention the barriers of being either non-white, non-male or not a native english speaker... Not to say it can't be done. But most minimum wage workers can't do these things.
There's a lot of people who don't have a better way to save money because they're already saving everything they can. This technique provides a new way to save.
Aside from biking to work (which is sometimes feasible but sometimes not, such as with people with disabilities, the elderly, people who live far away, people who don't own a bike, people who don't have a shower at work, people who work long hours at manual-labor jobs and are constantly tired, and you know, all the other ways this might not work) I don't think those are options that most minimum-wage workers have. Buying Starbucks every morning is not something minimum-wage workers typically do. Being able to start a business is a privilege usually of the middle class, or businesses passed down through families, or require certain education or other resources, not to mention the barriers of being either non-white, non-male or not a native english speaker... Not to say it can't be done. But most minimum wage workers can't do these things.
There's a lot of people who don't have a better way to save money because they're already saving everything they can. This technique provides a new way to save.
[deleted]
Why is the perceived outcome of the publication of this strategy or "fare sharing apps" a realignment of fare rates?
I think a negative outcome like biometric fare cards is equally as likely.
Note that I don't think either outcome is probable and also find the entire publication and article entirely ridiculous.
I think a negative outcome like biometric fare cards is equally as likely.
Note that I don't think either outcome is probable and also find the entire publication and article entirely ridiculous.
The effects of a nonlinear, with respect to distance, fare structure.
In other news, a rich and poor person could save a lot on taxes by 1099'ing a middle class person, taking the tax deduction, and paying for the middle class person's increased taxes. Just as illegal of course.
In other news, a rich and poor person could save a lot on taxes by 1099'ing a middle class person, taking the tax deduction, and paying for the middle class person's increased taxes. Just as illegal of course.
can we all agree to stop using the term "hack" like this?
Why? This was a novel way of doing something, a hack.
Wow this is an awful title and a fairly pointless article.
They mention game theory then completely ignore that this scheme only works if both parties work together perfectly.
They mention game theory then completely ignore that this scheme only works if both parties work together perfectly.
1. Some people put a month of fares on their Clipper card.
2. People will think you are a bum if you approach them on Bart trying to swap your tickets.
2. People will think you are a bum if you approach them on Bart trying to swap your tickets.
Why do I think the time spent on this will never, ever be made up by BART savings, theoretical or otherwise.
I wish Fast Company had written an article about me at the time :( (and this was "legal" too, whereas the technique described in the article is illegal since you're not allowed to transfer payment titles, per BART's/Muni's policies)
(I believe you can't do that anymore - that the maximum negative balance that you can get to is now the same as the price of a new Clipper card)