In real sharecropping, the landlord & sharecropper share the risk and share the rewards, with the landlord taking on an additional risk if the crop fails. In real sharecropping, the landlord fronts the money for owning the property & for planting the next crop, the sharecropper does the work, and the landlord & sharecropper share in the proceeds of the crop sale. If the landlords proceeds from the crop sale does not cover the landlords costs, he absorbs the loss. The sharecropper does not incur any debt. Obviously the goal is for both the landlord & sharecropper to make money and this system has them co-invest in the crop, albeit in different "currencies", and share the investment risk.
The digital sharecropper economy ah la Uber, Doordash or Airbnb, is vastly more abusive to the "sharecropper" than in real sharecropping. In the digital sharecropper economy, the "digital landlord" takes on zero risk and simply skims cash off the cash flow. The "digital landlord" thus makes money regardless of the profit & loss of the "digital sharecropper". The "digital sharecropper" takes on 100% of the risk both in terms of capital investment (owning & maintaining a car or property) and in terms of operating profit/loss.
The "digital sharecropper economy" is vastly more abusive to the sharecropper than in real sharecropping, and so the digital versions are giving the real version a bad name.