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

Senator Al Franken's Letter to Uber [pdf]

franken.senate.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 147 posts

Re: Senator Al Franken's Letter to Uber [pdf]

#111

Post by perlgeek »

spoomor wrote: post #96
w4 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This was my reaction as well. Yes, Uber's behavior here is reprehensible. But it's also kid stuff compared to what other entities (including the Federal Government itself, whose behavior we never agreed to in a TOS agreement) are engaged in, and I have to wonder what, if any, authority the government could exert in these circumstances (disregarding the appropriateness of the use of said authority, or any potential le…

> including the Federal Government itself, whose behavior we never agreed to in a TOS agreement You voted for them, which is their way of saying "see, it's in the fine print, hahaha"

Not everybody who lives in a country has the right to vote.

Re: Senator Al Franken's Letter to Uber [pdf]

#112

Post by trhway »

Uber has graduated into Big League - got attention of a Senate committee, even if of such a minor, "public feel good, no real money/power" one, yet still...

As the bumper sticker says "Government doesn't like competition" and the Uber exec clearly voiced intention to venture into typical government territory - illegal usage of private info against the ones whom you don't like.

Re: Senator Al Franken's Letter to Uber [pdf]

#113

Post by quanticle »

peteretep wrote: post #47
lmg643 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

agreed. my first thought in reading this: "Dear Mr. Kalanick - how dare you allow your staff to announce an idea to spy on the American people and use the information you learn against them? Didn't you know that privilege is exclusively for the US government? You know we will partner with you to abuse the vast information available on the habits of Americans through your service when the time is right - no need to ge…

The biggest thing that will disenfranchise your political weight is dismissing the government as a homogenous mass, moving in lock-step, that "they're all as bad as each other". Uncle Sam is _people_. Good people, bad people, influential people, less influential people.

That said, I do think it is valuable to point out that while Al Franken is admonishing Uber with one hand for tracking people without permission, he's giving the NSA pats on the back with the other for doing the very same thing [1]. If anything, the NSA tracking is worse. Uber can't send me to Gitmo, but the federal government sure can.

[1]: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/11/al-franken-nsa_n_34...

Re: Senator Al Franken's Letter to Uber [pdf]

#114

Post by ewood »

paulannesley wrote: post #98
srs0001 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the condescending tone is necessary—there are actually about ten million links if you spell organization correctly. https://www.google.com/search?q=%22People%2C+Organisation%2C... EDIT: Removed quotes.

s/correctly/in the corrupted American form/

s/corrupted/alternate/

I favour (!) British spelling too but 'organization' is more correct in the etymological sense as it derives from the latin 'organizo'. The British form is in a way a corruption itself because it favours 'ise' as it is easier than learning the etymology. 'Oxford Spelling' is an etymologically correct variant of British spelling.

Re: Senator Al Franken's Letter to Uber [pdf]

#115

Post by yummyfajitas »

wpietri wrote: post #104
001sky wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First, Uber did this brazenly and, one could argue, openly The reported quote was couched in the hypothetical; reported out of an 'off the record' private event; by a reporter that was the +1 of an invite. Those are major caveats. While they don't excuse anything, they also (frankly) answer several of the senators questions. I find it un-imaginable that Franken (or anyone) has never articulated views in the hypotheti…

> The reported quote was couched in the hypothetical; reported out of an 'off the record' private event; by a reporter that was the +1 of an invite. The man laid out a detailed plan to harm reporters while talking to reporters. That it's hypothetical doesn't matter. If a mob boss told journalists about how easy it would be to make journalists disappear, that it was hypothetical and off the record wouldn't matter. Sen…

The man laid out a detailed plan to investigate and anonymously report facts about reporters while talking to reporters.

ftfy

If we want to make hyperbolic analogies, the closest one might be a mob boss suggesting hiring hit men to kill other hit men while talking to a hit man.

Re: Senator Al Franken's Letter to Uber [pdf]

#116

Post by paul7986 »

These dudes are uber drunk and blinded by their success.

Hopefully, such lack of humility doesn't make them end up dead in a bath tub like Whitney Houston. Success went to her head and as she noted in an interview the high she felt after her hit, "I Will Always Love You," could never be matched. Thus she snorted everything up her nose and then some to try and match that high. Eventually, leading her to a downward spiral and dead at 48.

Uber to become Whitney Houston possibly...

Re: Senator Al Franken's Letter to Uber [pdf]

#118

Post by mipapage »

downandout wrote: post #38

This is officially the most blown-out-of-proportion story in the history of the Internet. When was the last time the US Senate got involved after you went on a rant at a party? I'm certain that Sarah Lacy is enjoying both the attention and the money from pageviews, but this is getting ridiculous.

The scale of the story is not relevant; the moral issue is.

There should be no sliding scale for things like this. Period.

Re: Senator Al Franken's Letter to Uber [pdf]

#119

Post by briandear »

craigching wrote: post #36
w4 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This was my reaction as well. Yes, Uber's behavior here is reprehensible. But it's also kid stuff compared to what other entities (including the Federal Government itself, whose behavior we never agreed to in a TOS agreement) are engaged in, and I have to wonder what, if any, authority the government could exert in these circumstances (disregarding the appropriateness of the use of said authority, or any potential le…

> So while I agree with the spirit of what Frankin is saying, I'm just left with distaste for what obvious posturing and pandering it is. At least someone is speaking up. You criticize Al Franken for not going after everyone else as well, but why not criticize the other 99 senators who haven't done anything . I apologize in advance if I'm missing another senator that has done anything like this about privacy.

Rand Paul has done something far more important that weighing in on a private business policy.. He (along with a few others) have been extremely outspoken against the Patriot Act and warrantless NSA spying. Where's Franken's letter to Obama demanding "executive action" to suspend warrantless information gathering by the government. If Uner wants to be a shit, we don't have to use Uber. If I don't want my personal information harvested by my government, I have no recourse. I even live in France, yet my French bank records are required by FATCA to be disclosed to an American government entity simply because I happen to have an American passport. That's far more intrusive than anything a ride-sharing app can do to me. How about reports that the government has monitored journalists? Where's Franken's letter about that?

This is nearly meaningless political grandstanding because Uber happens to be both well-known as well as currently in the headlines.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/congress/the-nsa-has-at-least...

And here's Rand Paul proposing a bill to end warrantless NSA wiretaps. http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/rand-paul-bill-would-curb-nsa...

Re: Senator Al Franken's Letter to Uber [pdf]

#120

Post by netcan »

There's an element of pissing in the wind to the majority of "actions" regarding online privacy. People are worried. No one knows what to do.

The best example is the EU/UK "cookie law." It was impractical to begin with, mostly serving to allow legislatures the opportunity to be morally outraged and incensed. Then it devolved into "all sites must have a nagging popup."

Realistically, the only way to achieve any of the law's goals was in the browser, not laws dictating what websites can do.

This letter is mostly is mostly a criticism of Uber's bureaucracy. Privacy policies, training, etc. Again, not really the place to tackle any of these issues especially if the intent isn't there. Maybe, phones could do a better job of letting users control the data they leak. We don't really know how to deal with data in which the quanta is not sensitive, but aggregation makes it scary.

An interesting point here is that the "statement" really sounded like tipsy macho bullshitting, not an actual threat or indication of intent. What the statement does indicate is a violation of the "don't be evil" maxim. Hey, Uber have assholes in high places. They have a lot of power. How many assholes are out there with dangerous access to data?

Post reply on HN