In Video, Uber CEO Argues with Driver Over Falling Fares • Hacker News Board

Re: In Video, Uber CEO Argues with Driver Over Falling Fares

#281

Post by KirinDave » Wed, Mar 01, 2017, 1:59 AM UTC

erdojo wrote: post #90

KirinDave wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How is this video not illegal, especially in California? You agree to surveillance when you enter the car. Just like a taxi, a bus, a train or a trolley. You actually don't have an "expectation of privacy" in these spaces either. So a drone cam or telephoto lens is okay too. That's where state law is interesting. California is actually surprisingly permissive for photographers and videographers.

Unless Uber has that in its terms of service, that may be open to interpretation. Even if an Uber is considered a public space, that's not the sole determining factor in two-party consent cases. http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/california-recording-law

Not sure why you're being downvoted. Your read is absolutely right.

Re: In Video, Uber CEO Argues with Driver Over Falling Fares

#282

Post by KirinDave » Wed, Mar 01, 2017, 2:01 AM UTC

ddrmaxgt37 wrote: post #85

KirinDave wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How is this video not illegal, especially in California? You agree to surveillance when you enter the car. Just like a taxi, a bus, a train or a trolley. You actually don't have an "expectation of privacy" in these spaces either. So a drone cam or telephoto lens is okay too. That's where state law is interesting. California is actually surprisingly permissive for photographers and videographers.

Doesn't California require 2 party consent? So all parties have to consent to the recording for it to be lawful. Which state laws are you reading?

2 party consent is the case when you're in a private space with someone else and have a "reasonable expectation of privacy."

This is not an absolute thing. For example, a shoe cam to look up skirts doesn't fly just because you're in a public space.

Re: In Video, Uber CEO Argues with Driver Over Falling Fares

#283

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Mar 01, 2017, 2:12 AM UTC

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #16

To me this illustrates one of the biggest problems we have in america which is the crazy firewall between rich and poor. Kamel wanted to have a serious discussion with Kalanick about how his decisions as CEO were affecting Kamel's life and Kalanick gets upset about this. That's your job! At least it should be. If you can't even handle light criticism from the people you employ, you shouldn't be at the top.

[deleted]

Re: In Video, Uber CEO Argues with Driver Over Falling Fares

#284

Post by jzl » Wed, Mar 01, 2017, 2:20 AM UTC

jimmywanger wrote: post #277

jzl wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sure, but keep in mind that in this situation he is a guy in his private life who has been blindsided and accused of ruining this guys life, with, what it seems like from other posts here, lies. Oh come on, he's the CEO of Uber and he took an Uber. Probably every single Uber driver in the country if not the world knows who he is. If he doesn't have an expectation of being recognized and asked about the business he…

> Oh come on, he's the CEO of Uber and he took an Uber. And if he took a Lyft, a private limo, or drove himself, that would be even worse publicity. Right now no matter what he does he'll get people sniping at him, just like on this board. It's a herd mentality where you pick on perceived weakness, and it's always ugly. > Probably every single Uber driver in the country if not the world knows who he is. Does every si…

> And if he took a Lyft, a private limo, or drove himself, that would be even worse publicity. Right now no matter what he does he'll get people sniping at him, just like on this board. It's a herd mentality where you pick on perceived weakness, and it's always ugly.

I'm not saying he shouldn't take Ubers. I'm responding to the comment "he is a guy in his private life who has been blindsided". He should have every expectation that any driver he gets might ask him about the business, even harshly. It's completely fair game. It's his job to deal with it without losing his cool.

> Does every single McDonald's worker in the world know what the CEO looks like?

The cult of personality around Kalanick is huge, and he is making daily decisions in a volatile industry that directly affect the lives of tens if not hundreds of thousands of drivers. They are very likely to be following his every move in the news. In any case it doesn't matter how many drivers recognize him, all I'm saying is that he should have no expectation of privacy if he takes an Uber. Drivers are very likely to recognize him and should have every right to ask him tough questions.

Re: In Video, Uber CEO Argues with Driver Over Falling Fares

#285

Post by seizethecheese » Wed, Mar 01, 2017, 2:22 AM UTC

matt4077 wrote: post #172

seertaak wrote: post #46

This will probably be an unpopular opinion, but I actually thought the driver was exceedingly rude. He clearly took advantage of Kalanick being in the public eye, and thus a "target". Filming him without acknowledging it was totally immoral, it should reduce any fair person's bayesian priors as to the credibility of the driver. I'm no fan of Kalanick, but I thought he comported himself reasonably, taking the time to…

Kalanick's opinions and behaviour are obviously of interest to the public right now. There are quite a few anecdotes that, taken together, paint the picture of a thoroughly chauvinistic CEO with a bit of social darwinism thrown in for good measure. His comments here further that impression: he throws around jingoism in his awkward attempt to impress his companions ("every year is hard for Uber...") and is either unin…

> "Kalanick's opinions and behaviour are obviously of interest to the public right now.

Not really. Uber's actions are, certainly, but the opinions and actions of the CEO in his personal life are only of interest here because technology executives are the celebrities of Hacker News readers.

Re: In Video, Uber CEO Argues with Driver Over Falling Fares

#286

Post by Spooky23 » Wed, Mar 01, 2017, 2:25 AM UTC

seertaak wrote: post #46

This will probably be an unpopular opinion, but I actually thought the driver was exceedingly rude. He clearly took advantage of Kalanick being in the public eye, and thus a "target". Filming him without acknowledging it was totally immoral, it should reduce any fair person's bayesian priors as to the credibility of the driver. I'm no fan of Kalanick, but I thought he comported himself reasonably, taking the time to…

There's a different standard for public figures.

A relative of mine was a chief of a fire department. During a nasty contract battle, he had people picketing his home -- a miserable experience for his family at the time.

But... he was a public figure and the protestors were on a public sidewalk.

When you're a public figure that carefully nurtures a bad-boy, asshole image and attitude of privacy bordering on contempt, you shouldn't expect kid gloves.

Re: In Video, Uber CEO Argues with Driver Over Falling Fares

#287

Post by xapata » Wed, Mar 01, 2017, 2:36 AM UTC

st3v3r wrote: post #254

xapata wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> reject Uber rides ... kick off the system I believe it simply sets you to inactive temporarily, because you're obviously not picking up rides and you're slowing down the rider matching process.

Which is absolutely wrong. They're deciding, as a contractor, to not take jobs which are not worth their time. As a contractor, they're supposed to be able to do that without punishment. If Uber is doing this, it is a punishment.

> punishment

There's some balance between punishment and keeping the rider experience pleasant. I don't want to wait 10 minutes to get matched because of nearby lurking Uber Black cars passing on my Uber X request.

If a driver ignores several requests in a row, they're clearly taking a break. It's a feature, not a punishment.

Re: In Video, Uber CEO Argues with Driver Over Falling Fares

#288

Post by dragontamer » Wed, Mar 01, 2017, 2:41 AM UTC

st3v3r wrote: post #251

dragontamer wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Kalanick is the CEO. And the driver is not an employee. Yeah, I know this has been discussed a lot of times, but the way Uber is set up, there's absolutely no reason for Kalanick to give an Eff about the driver's situation. And indeed: the loyalty cuts both ways. Uber drivers can immediately drop Uber and simply work for Lyft. They have complete and utter independence from the Uber company. Its just the nature of h…

"there's absolutely no reason for Kalanick to give an Eff about the driver's situation." Considering that, without the drivers, Uber doesn't have a product, I cannot agree with that statement. "Its just the nature of how Uber has been set up. I understand the driver's frustration, but what more does the driver expect?" For the CEO of Uber to act like a human being. But given the news recently, that's far too much for…

> For the CEO of Uber to act like a human being.

For the greater majority of Human History, slaves and concubines were normal. I have very little faith in what a "human being" can and should do.

Re: In Video, Uber CEO Argues with Driver Over Falling Fares

#289

Post by dragontamer » Wed, Mar 01, 2017, 2:42 AM UTC

rhizome wrote: post #199

dragontamer wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Kalanick is the CEO. And the driver is not an employee. Yeah, I know this has been discussed a lot of times, but the way Uber is set up, there's absolutely no reason for Kalanick to give an Eff about the driver's situation. And indeed: the loyalty cuts both ways. Uber drivers can immediately drop Uber and simply work for Lyft. They have complete and utter independence from the Uber company. Its just the nature of h…

If you agree that the driver is not an employee, how do you think that would have played out if TravisK had blown him off on video? Do you think everybody would see it your way, and would that be fair of them to do?

Honestly? If TravisK just walked away without discussion? Then there wouldn't be any story here.

The story is that TravisK raised his voice while being secretly filmed by one of the drivers. There's no story about a CEO just leaving a cab.

Re: In Video, Uber CEO Argues with Driver Over Falling Fares

#290

Post by kqia040 » Wed, Mar 01, 2017, 2:51 AM UTC

wybiral wrote: post #144

dandelany wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure you're right, legally speaking. At the very least it's a grey area. I certainly have the "reasonable expectation of privacy" (the legal test) in a hotel room that I don't own - a hired car doesn't seem that different to me. When you see an actor get into a car to avoid the paparazzi - they rarely own the car, and reasonably expect the driver not to film them and upload to TMZ or something. (IANAL, TINLA)

Uber cars aren't technically owned by a business like a hotel is though. If you stay the night at my house, there's a DVR system in some of the rooms. Deal with it. Edit: Also, you probably are being filmed elsewhere in any major hotel (lobby, halls, etc). And I've seen plenty of that footage end up on TV.

Technically most hotels don't own their buildings either...