The complication is that &quot;wrongdoing&quot; is in the eye of the beholder.  Is Uber committing wrongdoing?  The taxi companies certainly think so.  Many municipalities think so.  A lot of folks on Hacker News think so.<p>But the folks who had a few too many beers and missed the last Caltrain and would otherwise drive home drunk if Uber didn&#x27;t exist?  The innocent folks that would otherwise have been killed by a drunk driver if Uber didn&#x27;t exist?  The folks who drive for Uber to pick up some spare cash in their spare time, or the ones who do it because they can&#x27;t find any other income and would otherwise be destitute?  The folks who drive for Uber to meet interesting new people?  The Uberpreneurs who pitch their wares to a captive market for the duration of a ride?  They all benefit significantly from Uber&#x27;s existence.<p>That&#x27;s why this &quot;get big fast and then hope you can avoid the consequences for your wrongdoing&quot; strategy exists.  The consequences will oftentimes not be known at the time an idea is conceived.  Sometimes they will be much, much worse than is apparent at the time (look at the environmental pollution and global warming caused by heavy industry), while sometimes they will be a lot better (look at the liberalization and toppling of many totalitarian regimes since Facebook and Twitter came out).  Oftentimes they will be both worse and better at the same time; someone killed in a revolution has clearly suffered, while someone who can open up a business that would previously have been shuttered by the government has benefitted.