With Uber the driver can sit in his middle-of-nowhere house (or work on his garage, yard, etc.) for those 40 minutes with his driver app on, and get in his car only when the app alerts him that he has a fare. This will take the driver to a central location where there are short waits and frequent fares.
I see the point, but your example is unfortunate. It turns out it is healthy/protective to go to church (and thus have a large support system) in both the current research and the earlier research that under-reported atheists/non-theists.
I find your comment an important reminder of the original sense of the phrase, but I disagree that third world has nothing to do with economic prowess. You are referring to both the etymology and formal definition of the phrase "third world" country. Political journals will generally use third world in this restricted sense, and dictionaries may even list the original definition first. Nonetheless, in modern parlance it has everything to do with economic prowess. It is used--in developed countries at the very least--as the pejorative analog to "developing country".
As a first world resident I am not sure about the prevalence of this usage in developing countries. I know I would not be thrilled to have my country--and, by extension, culture--referred to as "third world". I wouldn't be surprised if it is common in developing countries to note this original sense to both blunt the pain of being dissed by denizens of rich countries and to establish a sort of reverse superiority by insisting on and noting the original sense of the word.
