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

Uber faces criminal probe over software used to evade authorities

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 596 posts

Re: Uber faces criminal probe over software used to evade authorities

#81

Post by j2kun »

nostromo wrote: post #74
dragonwriter wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm not a fan of Uber, but it seems like it's their right to decide who is allowed to use their service. It's not their right to operate where they are prohibited, and it's also not their right to feed people believed to be enforcing that prohibition false information to prevent themselves from being busted for violating that prohibition.

We have a tool for this -- the government asks for a subpoena from a judge to force Uber to provide their data. It's all out in the open and Uber can argue against the subpoena if they choose. Scraping APIs with fake profiles isn't the right way to go about this.

I was under the impression it's illegal to intentionally mislead any federal employee, subpoena or not, in any communication whatsoever. Whether it's the "right" way or not, it seems like an API counts as a form of communication.

Re: Uber faces criminal probe over software used to evade authorities

#82

Post by [deleted] »

nostromo wrote: post #74
dragonwriter wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm not a fan of Uber, but it seems like it's their right to decide who is allowed to use their service. It's not their right to operate where they are prohibited, and it's also not their right to feed people believed to be enforcing that prohibition false information to prevent themselves from being busted for violating that prohibition.

We have a tool for this -- the government asks for a subpoena from a judge to force Uber to provide their data. It's all out in the open and Uber can argue against the subpoena if they choose. Scraping APIs with fake profiles isn't the right way to go about this.

[deleted]

Re: Uber faces criminal probe over software used to evade authorities

#83

Post by mstodd »

stepitup wrote: post #46

What's really strange is that I bet a good percente of the people reading this comment will know exactly what I mean when I refer to a: "Startup that employs mafia tactics and forces businesses to pay a protection fee, or actively fucks them up and attempts to hurt them." Why aren't the authorities going over the ACTUAL, honest-to-god mafia startup? Sorry, I realize it's off topic here, but my first thought when I re…

I was confused because I really thought you were referring to the federal government

Re: Uber faces criminal probe over software used to evade authorities

#85

Post by defen »

nebabyte wrote: post #77
defen wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know, I remember posting on this site years ago that the Uber CEO was a terrible person (Based on a few interactions I had with him back when UberCab had about 5 employees) and being told by some prominent people that I was wrong. This was back when YC was talking about how "niceness" was a key quality in successful founders. Feels good to have my instincts vindicated.

You should dig that up! Sounds like an interesting read.

Unfortunately I think I substantially edited/deleted it because I didn't want to post personally identifiable information, but that meant my post was effectively an anonymous attack on a person's character. So in that regard I don't begrudge people for not believing me / not thinking I should post it.

Re: Uber faces criminal probe over software used to evade authorities

#86

Post by bogositosius »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #76
bogositosius wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but for evading city taxi regulators?!?

Nationwide? Yes (at least arguably). At that point, it's a nationwide conspiracy. (Note: I do not know if this probe is about more than one city. If it's only about Portland, my argument does not hold.)

The mafia-like, protectionist taxi regulations should be considered the true conspiracy, IMHO.

Re: Uber faces criminal probe over software used to evade authorities

#87

Post by verbify »

nostromo wrote: post #74
dragonwriter wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm not a fan of Uber, but it seems like it's their right to decide who is allowed to use their service. It's not their right to operate where they are prohibited, and it's also not their right to feed people believed to be enforcing that prohibition false information to prevent themselves from being busted for violating that prohibition.

We have a tool for this -- the government asks for a subpoena from a judge to force Uber to provide their data. It's all out in the open and Uber can argue against the subpoena if they choose. Scraping APIs with fake profiles isn't the right way to go about this.

A subpoena is not the only way the government collects evidence of wrongdoing.

Re: Uber faces criminal probe over software used to evade authorities

#88

Post by nebabyte »

terribleplan wrote: post #34

Ok, what's the over under on the people who coded this getting used as scapegoats? I'm at about 40/60 against. Morality and legality in software is a massive frontier we hardly pause to think about.

0/100 (or 100/0 or whatever). "Above my pay grade"

The code is the property of the company. Whoever ordered it be created and/or used would be culpable.

Re: Uber faces criminal probe over software used to evade authorities

#89

Post by sushid »

pvg wrote: post #56
nostromo wrote: post #44

I'm not a fan of Uber, but it seems like it's their right to decide who is allowed to use their service. (Baring protected classes, of course.) If a regulator started creating fake user accounts in order to scrape Uber's data, I don't see why Uber can't put a stop to that. And if a legislator is a vocal critic of Uber, I don't see why Uber should be forced to allow them to use their service.

Nobody was forcing Uber to do anything. They were trying to deny agents of public regulatory bodies the ability to assess them. That isn't any kind of 'right'.

I'm no fan of Uber, but if there are LEOs trying to use your product fraudulently (e.g. fake data, ordering an Uber not for a ride but to impound cars), doesn't it make sense to try and stop this sort of operation?

If you had LEOs peering into your office windows (legal, but undesirable), wouldn't you want to at least have a blind to try and stop them from peeking?

Re: Uber faces criminal probe over software used to evade authorities

#90

Post by dragonwriter »

bogositosius wrote: post #2

Evading local regulators is a federal matter?

If any of the false information presented to local regulators feeds into reports those local officials file with the feds (such as for funding or other purposes), yes. Didn't​ we just have the discussion about how lying to the feds, even indirectly, is a crime?

It might also fit into the federal wire fraud statute (which would also potentially get it into RICO territory.)

Post reply on HN