Uber faces criminal probe over software used to evade authorities • Hacker News Board

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

#421

Post by AlexandrB » Fri, May 05, 2017, 1:36 PM UTC

taneq wrote: post #41

samrap wrote: post #18

At first, it seemed like legitimate software to assess spam until: > For example, it mined credit card information to see if the owner was affiliated with a credit union used by police and checked social media profiles to assess the likelihood that the person was in law enforcement. Yikes. I know people who have the mentality that this sort of thing is ok. Whether you're a startup that never makes it, or one worth bi…

> Whether you're a startup that never makes it, or one worth billions, at some point this kind of stuff surfaces. But if you're a startup that fails early, it doesn't . The thinking is that you do whatever it takes to make it, and that if your nefarious deeds ever come to light it just proves that you've made it big enough to cop some scrutiny. I don't agree with it, but many do.

> I don't agree with it, but many do.

Ugh. What happened to ethics? Does no one at Berkeley teach that course anymore?

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

#422

Post by rayiner » Fri, May 05, 2017, 1:36 PM UTC

raleighm wrote: post #419

mbreese wrote: post #413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not a lawyer, but I believe the point isn't necessarily that you'd use civil disobedience as an affirmative defense (like a self-defense claim would be). Instead, you'd make that argument to a jury that may or may not factor that into their decision (i.e. jury nullification). You're right that it's not a claim you'd make to a court expecting leniency. But you might be able to gain sympathy from a jury of your pee…

I agree. Just saying that's available to corporations as well. Reason I mention is this: "companies do not engage in civil disobedience" is not only not true; we need and should expect companies to engage in civil disobedience. Edit: To be clear, I am not talking at all about Greyball. I mean cases where civil disobedience would actually be justified.

Civil disobedience is rooted in ideas of justice. E.g. a corporation could engage in civil disobedience by refusing to have separate black and white seating areas. But our society does not generally recognize any "justice" angle to economic regulation. It's not "civil disobedience" for a company to skirt laws as part of a profit-making enterprise just because it wants to second-guess the government's idea of what those regulations should be. Nobody will write history books about how the noble unicorn startup evaded unjust regulations of its day to maximize its market capitalization.

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

#423

Post by milquetoastaf » Fri, May 05, 2017, 1:40 PM UTC

j_bond wrote: post #420

holly4 wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well I hope some one goes to jail. Though my hopes aren't high after 2008.

I don't really understand why people say this. 2008 was really the popping of an investment bubble due to business incompetence and exuberance among many actors. I don't really see that as a criminal act. If that were the case, then all VC employees should be arrested for causing the 2001 bubble. The only argument that really has any merit is the one that rating agencies misled investors, so I can see some action bei…

Incompetence can be criminal

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

#424

Post by shostack » Fri, May 05, 2017, 1:43 PM UTC

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #356

ingenuous2 wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given the reported strictness of the Uber rating system, are the actual drivers good? Isn't that what the rating system is supposed to solve?

Simple; all drivers register their own Uber account, and lose the car if their ratings are not good enough. Actually I wouldn't be surprised if the cars were rented out for a flat daily fee instead of depending on the number of rides. Just a taxi company using Uber.

The Uber account becomes the new medallion.

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

#425

Post by bsenftner » Fri, May 05, 2017, 1:46 PM UTC

samrap wrote: post #18

At first, it seemed like legitimate software to assess spam until: > For example, it mined credit card information to see if the owner was affiliated with a credit union used by police and checked social media profiles to assess the likelihood that the person was in law enforcement. Yikes. I know people who have the mentality that this sort of thing is ok. Whether you're a startup that never makes it, or one worth bi…

Do you need proof they are killing people? Just the exploitation of their drivers was enough for me to quit them.

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

#426

Post by raleighm » Fri, May 05, 2017, 1:49 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #422

raleighm wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. Just saying that's available to corporations as well. Reason I mention is this: "companies do not engage in civil disobedience" is not only not true; we need and should expect companies to engage in civil disobedience. Edit: To be clear, I am not talking at all about Greyball. I mean cases where civil disobedience would actually be justified.

Civil disobedience is rooted in ideas of justice. E.g. a corporation could engage in civil disobedience by refusing to have separate black and white seating areas. But our society does not generally recognize any "justice" angle to economic regulation. It's not "civil disobedience" for a company to skirt laws as part of a profit-making enterprise just because it wants to second-guess the government's idea of what tho…

No disagreement here on that. I'm not defending Greyball.

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

#427

Post by JangoSteve » Fri, May 05, 2017, 1:49 PM UTC

raspasov wrote: post #399

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

Because a radar detector doesn't send out a signal to the officer's radar fooling giving it a false speed.

That essentially is what their software did. It didn't just alert the driver that the person requesting a ride may be law enforcement, it seems it actually showed the officer incorrect data to mislead them about the vehicles' whereabouts.

And for the record, radar detectors actually are illegal in many states.

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

#428

Post by misiti3780 » Fri, May 05, 2017, 1:52 PM UTC

j_bond wrote: post #420

holly4 wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well I hope some one goes to jail. Though my hopes aren't high after 2008.

I don't really understand why people say this. 2008 was really the popping of an investment bubble due to business incompetence and exuberance among many actors. I don't really see that as a criminal act. If that were the case, then all VC employees should be arrested for causing the 2001 bubble. The only argument that really has any merit is the one that rating agencies misled investors, so I can see some action bei…

If you are still confused about the criminal acts that occurred, read more about REPO 105:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repo_105

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

#429

Post by wonderwonder » Fri, May 05, 2017, 2:03 PM UTC

Uber needs new leadership yesterday.

Current team did the impossible and bootstrapped the company to where it is via hustle, working in the grey (and black apparently) and pure drive. They should be commended not for their methods but just the for the fact that they actually succeeded in the environment they worked in, one stacked against them.

Uber is a real company now and they need to hand it off to a proven leadership team that can guide it moving forward. Give the current leaders a golden parachute but the time has come to transition.

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

#430

Post by grandalf » Fri, May 05, 2017, 2:04 PM UTC

gotothedoctor wrote: post #295

grandalf wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> so be it. No offense was meant by my phrasing, FYI. > Thankfully we have choices Yes we do. I think we likely agree on the overall benefits of Uber, but you are more inclined to focus on Lyft as a better instantiation of the idea and I'm just sort of defending Uber because it's fun to do so when everyone hates it.

I'm not offended; its just the opposite of persuasive. And "jumping on the bandwagon" is kind of a conversation ender: if that's how you understood my reply, we're unlikely to understand each other & its not worth the effort to be clear. I hear you on being a contrarian, but only when there's a compelling argument. Here, I doubt we do agree on Uber--I don't think there are overall benefits. As I've said, I am not con…

> "jumping on the bandwagon" is kind of a conversation ender

Has there not been a very profound anti-Uber bandwagon effect going on? Several incidents snowballing into a major backlash? I think there is some sort of organized labor sponsorship of a smear campaign, fwiw.

> I don't think there are overall benefits

I'm curious how you reach this conclusion. Is it as a consumer, comparing Uber to traditional taxi offerings in your area? Or based on some other viewpoint?

> I am not convinced Uber is some huge innovation

I think innovation is the wrong word as well. Uber is a political and economic achievement of breaking a very entrenched system that had oppressed many people so that a small number could extract profits at the expense of society as as a whole.

> democracy and the rule of law are ... important

Absolutely. I view corrupt laws and crony capitalism as antithetical to the rule of law even if the laws which happen to be on the books support specific arrangements. The taxi market was a golden goose being plucked by corrupt officials and a small number of fat cat owners at the expense of everyone else.

These sorts of crony/entrenched arrangements are a form of organized crime, as are the regulators who enforce unfair laws meant to funnel money into the coffers of specific crony firms.

> my version of this being fun is being understood.

I think I understand your points. But I'm not sure how you weigh your various points against each other in terms of their influence on your overall view. I don't disagree with any of them outright, but I think you weigh literal compliance with law too highly.

Also, on the subject of Uber's corporate culture, Uber has been punished significantly already for the revelations about its culture. As much as I admire Uber's accomplishments, I would very likely not want to work there.

One time I got a coding quiz easter egg in the Uber app and scored well and was invited to apply, but after what I've heard I would be unlikely to consider it, since I personally view the tolerance of sexual harassment behavior by companies to be one of the biggest indicators of larger culture problems and a "law of the jungle" environment where social dominance trumps merit when it comes to how decisions are made.