221–228 of 228 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow, you're a real piece of work.
If you can explain why it's so bad somebody's medical info gets leaked out, I'm all ears. As far as I can tell HIPAA makes medicine more expensive. That's bad! What if you could opt in to healthcare that was 20% cheaper, but was only subject to contractual promises of medical privacy, not the HIPAA. Would you take the deal?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This sounds ultimately like a political question and not an ethical one. Meaning, public opinion needs to spar with private interests on numerous related matters in order to arrive at a conclusion, because no one person is going to be able to figure it out themselves. Until then the area is a frontier where you must tread carefully and keep your wits about you. What makes the US a good place for business is its very…
I wish I could agree, but I can't. The court of public opinion is fickle and monstrous. You don't have to go far to see examples: https://www.reddit.com/r/instant_regret/comments/67g6lj/moun... Many of those people probably would've preferred the horse kill that guy instead of just bump him a little. Half of them probably feel that he deserved it, and they were happy to see him get hit. It's easy to feel like the cou…
What would you be hoping to accomplish? To never step on anyone's toes or piss anyone off? A lot of these questions just don't have easy answers, no one has all the information.
Even when there's law available to draw from, you still have to have a court case or settlement negotiation or something because every situation is really different and nobody has all the facts.
There's no template because these are humans we're dealing with. They're smart, and not all of them care. If all you ever had to deal with were other ethical people, then you wouldn't need the law at all, you could just agree on things and nobody would try to abuse it.
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:…
If you read this article ( https://techcrunch.com/2017/04/12/hell-o-uber/ ) you'll find it goes much futher then just accessing Lyft's public API. They created fake customer accounts, spoofed their locations and even linked the data about drivers they got from this to their own drivers. So what's wrong with this? To quote the article, possibly: "breach of contract, unfair business practices, stealing trade secrets an…
At worst this should result in tortious interference as a trespass to chattels case with damages calculated at the cost of the computing services that Lyft was denied.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The CFAA is absurdly broadly worded, so much so that it's extremely easy to wield against people accused of violating it. The DoJ uses it as their hammer, if they targeted everyone who violated it the jails would be overflowing.
It would be nice if they'd target someone -- like Uber -- who really deserves to be punished for it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you can explain why it's so bad somebody's medical info gets leaked out, I'm all ears. As far as I can tell HIPAA makes medicine more expensive. That's bad! What if you could opt in to healthcare that was 20% cheaper, but was only subject to contractual promises of medical privacy, not the HIPAA. Would you take the deal?
Do society a favor and remove yourself from the industry.
One after the other. To put a conspiracy/playful hat on - seriously this is not my serious opinion - could it be that Uber is getting set up? Not necessarily framed but "oops, this just got leaked" set of dominoes. Apparently quite a few people are mad at Uber, like Apple, and Google, and the taxi drivers ...
The far more simple answer is that this is who Kalanick and Uber are.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
I worked at a big corporation. The legal department was not a morality watch dog. Accounting would have a cow and decide x needed to be changed, legal would try to come up with justification for how we can defend this in a court of law if sued.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.