Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Uber gets sued over alleged ‘Hell’ program to track Lyft drivers

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 228 posts

Re: Uber gets sued over alleged ‘Hell’ program to track Lyft drivers

#201

Post by Spooky23 »

jackgolding wrote: post #199
Spooky23 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not weird at all. It looks pretty obviously like a pump and dump scheme. This behavior is fraud, and i bet the juiciest stuff is yet to come. I'm sure the criminal complaint coming from some US Attorney will reveal that somebody was cashing out in private markets. This is no different than a boiler room.

Have you got any other example companies that have behaved like this? (case studies etc)

Enron and Global Crossing are great examples in the corporate world in different ways. In politics, former NYS Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver is a great example.

Very few companies or things are that unique in fundamental ways. When everyone accepts that the norms, rules, or laws don't apply to someone or something, people are temporarily accepting that those things are being broken. There is always a reckoning.

Look in this very thread. A poster says they disagree with my position, because Uber is a unique animal that is "psychotically competitve". WTF does that mean? A: Uber thinks that no rules apply to them.

Re: Uber gets sued over alleged ‘Hell’ program to track Lyft drivers

#202

Post by SamBam »

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #2

So, no one was really able to answer my question last thread. In fact, I mostly got snarky condescending replies. I've stopped caring about such things though, so hopefully good-faith questions are still welcome: What's wrong with Uber tracking Lyft drivers? What is wrong with using a competitor's API to get real-time tactical information about them? Not only did it not harm Lyft drivers, but it actually aided them:…

I gather this is a good-faith question, but it's a little boggling to me how you can be asking it.

One company secretly installed software on the phones of employees of its competitor, in order to track those individuals and perform corporate espionage on its competition, and you ask what's wrong with that?

You say it should be ok because some of those employees were offered payouts to switch?

Not only does that not remotely excuse the behavior described in my second paragraph, ask yourself: why is Uber engaging in these tactics against its competitor? It's definitely not to spur healthy growth and competition in the industry -- it's to help drive a competitor out of business and cement its monopoly. And if it becomes more of a monopoly... do you think that will be good for its employees in the long run?

Re: Uber gets sued over alleged ‘Hell’ program to track Lyft drivers

#205

Post by criddell »

anigbrowl wrote: post #133
cookiecaper wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lyft is making this information available to anyone who signs up and accesses it, there's no subterfuge going on. They didn't plant a mole in Lyft to send them secret internal documents. They didn't steal their code and copy its innovations. The mere fact that Lyft "would [try to] stop them" makes it immoral? How does that work? Is it immoral if I watch tapes of the competing team's last football game to figure out w…

Oh please, like Lyft doesn't have Terms of Service for their API and like Uber doesn't have a legal department full of people whose; job is to study such things. Is it immoral if I watch tapes of the competing team's last football game [...] No, because they can do the same withyour last game. It's called a level playing field, which is clearly a foreign concept to the people who work at Uber. What makes your competi…

> like Uber doesn't have a legal department full of people whose job is to study such things.

Uber certainly has people in the legal department to study such things. They also clearly have accountants calculating if the chance and cost of being caught is greater than the rewards of breaking the rules.

Re: Uber gets sued over alleged ‘Hell’ program to track Lyft drivers

#206

Post by andrewfromx »

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #2

So, no one was really able to answer my question last thread. In fact, I mostly got snarky condescending replies. I've stopped caring about such things though, so hopefully good-faith questions are still welcome: What's wrong with Uber tracking Lyft drivers? What is wrong with using a competitor's API to get real-time tactical information about them? Not only did it not harm Lyft drivers, but it actually aided them:…

I think u read https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14190719 it answers this question well. Even though the end result might have been good for Lyft Drivers, that's not the point. The point is this crossed a clear criminal line that we all want enforced for future cases like this. i.e. what if next time it's Pepsi Breaking into Coke etc etc and the group it benefits is different.

Re: Uber gets sued over alleged ‘Hell’ program to track Lyft drivers

#207

Post by workergnome »

thesmallestcat wrote: post #93
freewizard wrote: post #45

From the code name of these projects from Uber: Heaven(God View) / Hell, you can pretty much tell this company thinks it's playing god. This is terrifying and must be stopped!

Makes you think you should always choose the driest names possible, even for internal projects. That said, I agree, who would name a tool like this "Hell"??

Hell is "other people".

-- Jean-Paul Sartre

Re: Uber gets sued over alleged ‘Hell’ program to track Lyft drivers

#208

Post by dx034 »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #88
OedipusRex wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which includes what?

None of the sources I've read through itemize exactly what that means; they do mention that Uber was able to determine if a Lyft driver also drove for Uber, which means they knew the driver's personal details. Otherwise, if a Lyft driver did not also drive for Uber, I would assume they would not have personal information on the driver. We'll find out regardless through discovery.

If you have overlapping GPS info of Lyft and Uber you know it's the same driver. If not, you could still order a Lyft to get their phone number and make them an offer.

Re: Uber gets sued over alleged ‘Hell’ program to track Lyft drivers

#209

Post by metaphorm »

pikzen wrote: post #169
saghm wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why do people pay taxes, that are used to fund immoral actions? ... Typically, the answer is money. That seems like a stretch; people pay their taxes because they don't want to go to prison, not because of money. If anything, money would be an incentive not to pay your taxes, so it seems obvious that there's something stronger than money at play there.

Or, in not-libertarian-land, people pay taxes because they enjoy having access to public services such as police, fire departments, working roads, water, etc.

the two positions aren't even a little contradictory. people pay taxes BOTH because they want to comply with the law (avoid prosecution) and because they value public services (some of them anyway).

similarly, there is nuance in each position. self-preservation motivates avoidance of prosecution, but it doesn't prevent individuals and companies from seeking the most effective legal means to avoid taxes, which sometimes is in a grey area w.r.t law and ethics. as well we should consider that while some public services are considered good and desirable, many of them aren't, and which is good and which is not is a judgment that varies heavily between individuals.

this isn't libertarian-land "taxes are theft" stuff. this is the basic social contract that everyone, libertarians and their opponents, all abide by.

Re: Uber gets sued over alleged ‘Hell’ program to track Lyft drivers

#210

Post by metaphorm »

matt4077 wrote: post #48
nodesocket wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You think the same about United and now American? Perhaps it just that the outraged minority now have a louder voice. There is a financial benefit for them writing negative articles, outrage/scandal draws in viewers.

Not op, but: > You think the same about United... Yes. > ...and now American? Dunno, haven't heard of it. Probably. > Perhaps it just that the outraged minority now have a louder voice. I don't understand the mechanism you're proposing? You're insinuating that this "minority" is today no larger than it was for...similar scandals in the past, I guess? Then why would readership for news about said scandals rise? How do…

> I can no longer trust the baker! That corrupt flour-power-wannabe is taking money to make bread!

you jest now, but in past eras there was SIGNIFICANT political conflict about the role millers and bakers played in distribution of grain resources.

Post reply on HN