> Facebook is much worse for that
I take it you haven't read Prof. Damodaran's article? He makes a very insightful analysis of the company, and of the car sharing industry in general.
In any case, I have to disagree with you in that "Facebook is much worse." Facebook has two valuable assets: lots and lots of personal information of people all over the world, and lots of eyes on their webpage. Both are a marketer's wet dream, but importantly, they require few if any assets on the ground, so short of blacklisting Farcebook at the network level, there is nothing to stop them from reaching everyone with an internet connection. They can also accommodate local competitors better, where those (co-)exist.
On the other hand, Uber (no umlaut?) has a very fragile business model, in the sense that it is almost completely at the mercy of local forces, as they have found out in China and India. They would have probably been Ok, if they had focused on the States only, which is a market that presumably they do understand. Indeed this is what their competitor Lyft (sic) have done.
Lastly, and from a purely personal and subjective point of view, what is it with their name? What was their marketing guy thinking? Maybe in San Francisco or wherever they come from it has a more innocent connotation. Über, in German, is a common preposition (and prefix) meaning things like over, above, etc., nowt wrong there¹, except that from an English-speaking point of view I have always associated it with the Nietzschean concept of Übermensch in its latter, manipulated form that became a fundamental tenet of a certain first half of 20th century German political movement that I need not name.
At least Lyft sounds illiterately hipster, as opposed to emphatically sinister.
¹ Though even in Germany, the first line of their hymn ("Deutschland über alles") is rarely sung these days as it has all the wrong connotations.