Live data from Hacker News

Uber’s Anthony Levandowski out as Advanced Technologies lead amid legal fight

techcrunch.com

61–70 of 224 posts

Re: Uber’s Anthony Levandowski out as Advanced Technologies lead amid legal fight

#61
post #52

Anthony is overrated and a complete psychopath. He doesn't understand it's basic right from wrong. In his mind IP is boundless and his, not Googles. This comes from 5 years of working in fairly close contact. Zero morals. He is what's wrong with Silicon Valley - on equal grounds to Travis from Uber. I can completely see this all being planned for years just like circumventing the iPhone App Store rules. As a Google s…

litigation is a civil complaint not a criminal one. nobody goes to jail for that. you may have some justified reasons for disliking him but you sound unhinged in this comment. get a grip.

Well said!

Re: Uber’s Anthony Levandowski out as Advanced Technologies lead amid legal fight

#62

Is there any reason not to be suspicious that Levandowski will just work on them unofficially?

he'll work for them _officially_. >Levandowski will remain at Uber, despite his role change

That's precisely what I meant. He's supposedly working in a completely unrelated position; what's to stop him from helping out on LIDAR stuff?

Re: Uber’s Anthony Levandowski out as Advanced Technologies lead amid legal fight

#63
post #52

Anthony is overrated and a complete psychopath. He doesn't understand it's basic right from wrong. In his mind IP is boundless and his, not Googles. This comes from 5 years of working in fairly close contact. Zero morals. He is what's wrong with Silicon Valley - on equal grounds to Travis from Uber. I can completely see this all being planned for years just like circumventing the iPhone App Store rules. As a Google s…

But he must be good. $120M+ in compensation.

Yep. That's Juicero level money.

Re: Uber’s Anthony Levandowski out as Advanced Technologies lead amid legal fight

#64
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's all the more interesting because Google makes it ridiculously easy to ask for that permission and get a legally unambiguous go or no go for any side projects. It's not like this would have been murky waters.

And it's also fairly clear that this would have been a 'no'.

[deleted]

Re: Uber’s Anthony Levandowski out as Advanced Technologies lead amid legal fight

#65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Consider Google's investment in Uber! "The $258 million is an 86 percent chunk of Google Ventures’ $300 million dollar a year fund, and it’s unclear whether the firm will continue to make such sizable investments." - https://techcrunch.com/2013/08/22/google-ventures-puts-258m-...

Uber could really play that to their advantage: "Your Honor, Google is just trying to soften us up because they don't get their way in the boardroom..." Having two roles in a lawsuit is a very dangerous thing, no matter how much their ex employee is at fault here they could easily make a lot of smoke out of that.

How does that actually play out? Google Ventures and Google's self-driving car were both "Google" when that investment was made, but now Waymo and GV are ostensibly separate entities. Is Alphabet suing Uber, or is Waymo suing Uber?

Re: Uber’s Anthony Levandowski out as Advanced Technologies lead amid legal fight

#66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That and Uber pissed off the wrong people by stealing Levandowski after Google had bought his company. And that after Google had invested in Uber.

No Levandowski pissed off the wrong people by stealing core technology from Google. Stealing employees is OK. Technology is not. It is the law.

Not all legal things are right. Not all illegal things are wrong.

To be clear, I am not saying Lewandowski's actions are right; I'm saying your argument does not sufficiently justify its wrongness.

Re: Uber’s Anthony Levandowski out as Advanced Technologies lead amid legal fight

#67

Worth remembering that Google paid this guy over $120 Million in compensation. He is a tech "1%"er, which really is saying a lot. That is hedge fund money. I'm not certain, but I think the average engineer would feel more loyalty to a company that has given them multi-generational wealth. I'm all for engineers getting paid, but in this case the guy didn't even have to do what most wealthy engineers do: deliver an act…

I really don't understand how people get greedy after earning that much money. Is it just the high/excitement the comes from it? Seems like money would no longer be motivating.

If you're motivated by money, you're really motivated by having the most of it. And in that sphere, $120MM isn't actually that much.

Re: Uber’s Anthony Levandowski out as Advanced Technologies lead amid legal fight

#69
post #52

Anthony is overrated and a complete psychopath. He doesn't understand it's basic right from wrong. In his mind IP is boundless and his, not Googles. This comes from 5 years of working in fairly close contact. Zero morals. He is what's wrong with Silicon Valley - on equal grounds to Travis from Uber. I can completely see this all being planned for years just like circumventing the iPhone App Store rules. As a Google s…

litigation is a civil complaint not a criminal one. nobody goes to jail for that. you may have some justified reasons for disliking him but you sound unhinged in this comment. get a grip.

The current litigation is civil, however, he or uber could be potentially criminally liable as well...

Re: Uber’s Anthony Levandowski out as Advanced Technologies lead amid legal fight

#70

Worth remembering that Google paid this guy over $120 Million in compensation. He is a tech "1%"er, which really is saying a lot. That is hedge fund money. I'm not certain, but I think the average engineer would feel more loyalty to a company that has given them multi-generational wealth. I'm all for engineers getting paid, but in this case the guy didn't even have to do what most wealthy engineers do: deliver an act…

Sure, but whatever he was or wasn't able to negotiate in compensation shouldn't drive the outcome here. He and his (former) employer came to a mutually agreeable deal; how much or how little that number was doesn't change the facts in this case unless I'm missing something?

I'm pretty sure they were making a moral argument, not a legal one.
Post reply on HN