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

401–410 of 596 posts

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

#401

Post by th4dv »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #362
oblio wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't work. It's been tried, some people are just too stupid and they'll hurt themselves and complain about it. By your logic we shouldn't regulate smoking or guns or a million other things we regulate, for good reason.

> some people are just too stupid and they'll hurt themselves and complain about it It's not just about stupid people. It's also about people who get deceived by marketing (i.e. all of us, in some way, at some point). It's also about the market adjusting prices so that the unsafe option will be the only option available for some people, while true costs are externalized onto society. But the point still is, as you sa…

> It's also about the market adjusting prices

Yes, but it'll work the other way around - the "safe option" will become cheaper, otherwise services that provide it will go out of business. What makes you think that "unsafe option will be the only option available for some people". Feels a bit like you're demonising the free market.

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

#403

Post by JustSomeNobody »

inetknght wrote: post #169
nradov wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the prosecutor is able to prove intent and you had committed some other crime as well then yes, you and your friend could potentially both be convicted of conspiracy to obstruct justice. This isn't some kind of game; judges don't look favorably on defendants playing tricks.

Note to self: if I find a car following me, I should immediately turn myself in to authorities or face "repercussions".

You're missing the other point. You had to also have committed a crime.

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

#404

Post by JustSomeNobody »

sushid wrote: post #89
pvg wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

If you have committed a crime and they are peering into the windows to see if you are still committing the crime, putting up blinds with the intent to block their view would be obstruction and you'd now be committing another crime.

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

#405

Post by JustSomeNobody »

laughingman2 wrote: post #318

Lots of Anarcho-Kapitalists drunk on Ayn Rand Kool Aid. Travis is a criminal who has marketed his breaking of labor laws, civil laws as "disruption". Maybe this is what will happen you get billions of investment dollars without earning through old fashioned way of making profits. Financialism has blinded America.

No, we've simply failed at educating people in what is right and wrong.

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

#406

Post by gvb »

raspasov wrote: post #399

How is "software used to evade authorities" different from .. using a "radar used to detect highway patrol"?

It isn't. Illegal is illegal no matter the scale[1].

The scale, however, is substantially different between you with a radar detector and Uber's behavior. If you use a radar detector illegally and are caught, you will be fined maybe $150 as a civil infraction (no criminal penalties).

If Uber gets convicted of obstruction of justice and violation of RICO statutes, that is now serious federal offenses with very serious criminal penalties (felonies).

[1] The irony of your analogy is that Uber's business model is to legally enable "independent contractors" (drivers) to operate an illegal taxi service. Uber is legally brokering an illegal taxi service (the brokering is not breaking taxi service laws).

In your analogy, Uber is the radar detector manufacturer and the drivers are the drivers. The drivers are operating illegally in both cases. If Uber stuck to "manufacturing radar detectors" (brokering rides), they would be legal. Instead, in addition to making "radar detectors", they set up "radar jammers" and directly operated the jammers in highly patrolled areas. That is directly illegal and thus Uber is at direct risk of criminal prosecution.

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

#408

Post by dpark »

braveo wrote: post #352
dpark wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. If someone hands you their credit card and you refuse to sell to them because their card has a Star of David on it, you are doing something nefarious with CC information but not violating PCI. PCI is concerned with reducing fraud cost. Visa does not care if the business charging your card is shady, only that it doesn't result in extra costs to Visa.

I'm sorry, but THAT is about the most ridiculous use of a strawman I've ever seen. Uber was using the CC information to LOOK UP MORE INFORMATION ON THE USER. Comparing that to someone simply refusing service is completely outlandish, uncalled for, and indicates a level of bias that is wholly unhealthy for both sides in this discussion.

It's not a straw man at all. Uber literally denied services based on who issued customers' credit cards (allegedly). That they recognized the bank as a police credit union instead of recognizing the Star of David as a Jewish symbol doesn't meaningfully change the scenario.

PCI is not concerned about protecting the user. It's about protecting credit card companies. Visa does not care that Uber uses credit card information for nefarious business purposes. They care that Uber doesn't leak the credit card information they possess.

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

#409

Post by oblio »

th4dv wrote: post #398
oblio wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't work. It's been tried, some people are just too stupid and they'll hurt themselves and complain about it. By your logic we shouldn't regulate smoking or guns or a million other things we regulate, for good reason.

> some people are just too stupid and they'll hurt themselves and complain about it stupid people will hurt them self, one way or another. You can't protect people from their own stupidity by introducing more and more regulations. Soon, you won't be able to purchase a kitchen knife.

Just to give an example that kind of goes against what you were saying: cars were invented and at first there were not that many regulations.

Now we have:

- speed limits

- car making regulations

- fuel regulations

- ...

And 99% of those rules are good for society as a whole.

Regulation isn't bad in and of itself, abuse of regulation is. Focus on the real target ;)

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

#410

Post by TheCoelacanth »

bogositosius wrote: post #261
TheCoelacanth wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would be fine with that, but there's no reason that the federal government shouldn't also bring a RICO case for obstruction of justice.

There are plenty of reasons that they shouldn't. You may not agree with the reasons but they exist.

Well, since you haven't stated what the reasons are, you aren't doing a very good job of convincing me that they exist.
Post reply on HN