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

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

#581

Post by abakker » Sun, May 07, 2017, 4:18 AM UTC

fstuff wrote: post #580

will_brown wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think rider auto corrected to driver...here is a link to a copy of the alleged Uber email to Miami driver's [1]. I don't believe they misspelled anything but if you change the charge from illegal ride for hire to prostitution, drugs, etc... it's Fairly easy to see organized crime... some of our drivers/prositutes/dealers have got into legal trouble, while we work to lobby to change the law, you can hopefully avoid…

Wow. I read that link and they flat out tell their people how to get around the airport ban. They tell the drivers not to have the app in view, keep it in your cup holder, ask the passenger to sit up front and say your a friend if asked. Drop the passenger off as far away from the terminal door if possible. And if you do get caught they'll provide you with a lawyer and pay the 1100 dollar fine up to 3 times before de…

This has actually happened to me. Can confirm.

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

#582

Post by [deleted] » Sun, May 07, 2017, 4:45 AM UTC

chronic940 wrote: post #574

illumin8 wrote: post #571

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've recently noticed a huge decline in the quality of Uber drivers. In 2012, when I first started using Uber, most of the drivers were college educated millennials driving a brand new Toyota Prius. They were friendly and nice to have a conversation with while you drove. Today, the drivers I get on UberX are almost universally bad. You get a 10 year old vehicle that is poorly maintained and unsafe (last couple rides…

> Unless I really have to now, I'm avoiding Uber and driving myself to the airport. Uber has proven they don't care about passenger safety, and only care about profits. You do that. Me and the tens of thousands other riders will continue to use Uber for airport trips despite owning a car. I just wanted to counter your antecdote with mine.

[deleted]

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

#583

Post by hackuser » Sun, May 07, 2017, 6:10 AM UTC

illumin8 wrote: post #571

will_brown wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Forget software, here in Miami where Uber drivers were initially operating illegally (cited with violating 2 municipal ordinances each being a ~$1,010 civil fine, but escalates to criminal charge after the 3rd such violation) Uber sent emails to driver training them on avoiding detection (e.g. When at airport take down phone; have drivers sit up front; etc...). I imagine there are similar emails for every county, cit…

I've recently noticed a huge decline in the quality of Uber drivers. In 2012, when I first started using Uber, most of the drivers were college educated millennials driving a brand new Toyota Prius. They were friendly and nice to have a conversation with while you drove. Today, the drivers I get on UberX are almost universally bad. You get a 10 year old vehicle that is poorly maintained and unsafe (last couple rides…

> when I first started using Uber, most of the drivers were college educated millennials driving a brand new Toyota Prius

To pick on one point, I don't see educated people or millennials as likely to be better drivers.

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

#584

Post by digitalzombie » Sun, May 07, 2017, 6:13 AM UTC

linkregister wrote: post #538

azernik wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Part of why they like working for Lyft more is that it gives them a bigger cut. Paying workers better is a positive mark in my book.

Don't both services take 25%? I'm confused.

The cut may be the same but the rates for ride may not be the same.

Also Lyft do not take a percentage out of your tip compare to Uber.

-- once upon a time lyft driver

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

#585

Post by tossaway322 » Sun, May 07, 2017, 7:55 AM UTC

gotothedoctor wrote: post #162

Seems like a lot of people are confused/have questions about why Uber is being criminally investigated by the Department of Justice.* Here's why: 1. Uber is subject to the laws in the jurisdictions in which it operates. Evading authorities is textbook obstruction of justice. Not only did Uber build software that they used to evade authorities & break local laws in multiple states and countries, but they profited from…

Just looked up RICO on Wikipedia and it has indeed been used in some dioceses to prosecute the Roman Catholic Church for the pedophilia and coverup that has occurred within the Church's clergy! The relevant excerpt:

"Catholic sex abuse cases[edit]

In some jurisdictions, RICO suits have been filed against Catholic dioceses, using anti-racketeering laws to prosecute the highers-up in the episcopacy for abuses committed by those under their authority[citation needed]. E.g. a Cleveland grand jury cleared two bishops of racketeering charges, finding that their mishandling of sex abuse claims did not amount to criminal racketeering[citation needed]. Notably, a similar suit was not filed against Cardinal Bernard Law, then Archbishop/Emeritus of Boston, prior to his assignment to Vatican City.[11][12] In 2016, RICO charges were considered for cover-ups in Pennsylvania.[13]"

So RICO can be used for both criminal and civil charges?

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

#586

Post by gaius » Sun, May 07, 2017, 10:44 AM UTC

hackuser wrote: post #583

illumin8 wrote: post #571

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've recently noticed a huge decline in the quality of Uber drivers. In 2012, when I first started using Uber, most of the drivers were college educated millennials driving a brand new Toyota Prius. They were friendly and nice to have a conversation with while you drove. Today, the drivers I get on UberX are almost universally bad. You get a 10 year old vehicle that is poorly maintained and unsafe (last couple rides…

> when I first started using Uber, most of the drivers were college educated millennials driving a brand new Toyota Prius To pick on one point, I don't see educated people or millennials as likely to be better drivers.

I don't see educated people or millennials as likely to be better drivers

Maybe not, but they are people who have options, and if they pick "driving for Uber" as their best option, we can assume that the conditions are pretty good, vs people for whom this is the only "job" they can get.

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

#587

Post by raspasov » Sun, May 07, 2017, 10:55 AM UTC

gvb wrote: post #406

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…

Thank you for the thoughtful reply. I am not an expert in all the law complexities in this area but I feel like that can be a great challenge for a lawyer that's up to the task to try and defend Uber.

One can argue (and in my opinion, quite rightfully so) that it's not Uber's responsibility to offer anyone "correct data", especially when someone is trying to use it maliciously against them or their clients. To give another shot at an analogy, the radar manufacturing company doesn't owe the police a working radar (which also happens to be "free" in Uber's case).

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

#588

Post by awfgylbcxhrey » Sun, May 07, 2017, 2:20 PM UTC

illumin8 wrote: post #571

will_brown wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Forget software, here in Miami where Uber drivers were initially operating illegally (cited with violating 2 municipal ordinances each being a ~$1,010 civil fine, but escalates to criminal charge after the 3rd such violation) Uber sent emails to driver training them on avoiding detection (e.g. When at airport take down phone; have drivers sit up front; etc...). I imagine there are similar emails for every county, cit…

I've recently noticed a huge decline in the quality of Uber drivers. In 2012, when I first started using Uber, most of the drivers were college educated millennials driving a brand new Toyota Prius. They were friendly and nice to have a conversation with while you drove. Today, the drivers I get on UberX are almost universally bad. You get a 10 year old vehicle that is poorly maintained and unsafe (last couple rides…

>In 2012, when I first started using Uber, most of the drivers were college educated millennials driving a brand new Toyota Prius.

Surely that's a historical oddity courtesy of the economy at the time.

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

#589

Post by will_brown » Sun, May 07, 2017, 4:35 PM UTC

fstuff wrote: post #580

will_brown wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think rider auto corrected to driver...here is a link to a copy of the alleged Uber email to Miami driver's [1]. I don't believe they misspelled anything but if you change the charge from illegal ride for hire to prostitution, drugs, etc... it's Fairly easy to see organized crime... some of our drivers/prositutes/dealers have got into legal trouble, while we work to lobby to change the law, you can hopefully avoid…

Wow. I read that link and they flat out tell their people how to get around the airport ban. They tell the drivers not to have the app in view, keep it in your cup holder, ask the passenger to sit up front and say your a friend if asked. Drop the passenger off as far away from the terminal door if possible. And if you do get caught they'll provide you with a lawyer and pay the 1100 dollar fine up to 3 times before de…

Here is what's even worse:

1. The way it was working in Miami is drivers would get 2 tickets when they were stopped, I think a. No taxi license; b. Illegal ride for hire. Both are $1,010 so a total of $2,020 per stop;

2. The laws escalate from civil penalties to criminal charges upon the 3rd such violation (I.e. 2nd stop could be criminal)

3. This also means 2 stops and you are out from your Uber driving

4. I don't think Uber has actually paid anyone's fines, at least it appears all these years later articles say the fines are still outstanding.

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

#590

Post by gotothedoctor » Sun, May 07, 2017, 10:32 PM UTC

raleighm wrote: post #578

gotothedoctor wrote: post #559

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just meant I wouldn't respond to a comment about how actually corporations totally have state of minds and intentions. Sure, one could write laws where they did (just like you could write a law that says anything), but that is not presently the case in any jurisdiction I am aware of and there's not much of a reason to think it'll ever change. Because corporations are not people. I am not sure what you mean. I do vi…

For examples of legally binding orders, see the transparency policies of major tech companies (disclosure: I worked for one). Government routinely submits binding information requests, together with gag orders. The pleadings in Microsoft's recent lawsuit challenging the orders gives a sense of the extent. The fact that actions can be challenged doesn't mean corporate civil disobedience is irrelevant. What if a challe…

Binding information requests are court orders, which can, as you note, be appealed in court. I am unaware of any instance where a company has lost an appeal in court & refused to turn over information to the court in an instance where civil disobedience would be relevant. And yes, fiduciary obligation does not require absolute compliance, but it certainly does demand that corporation do not direct employees to violate the law. Indeed, context does matter--that's also why agreed upon definitions of, eg, "civil disobedience" are so important. Otherwise, among other things, its very hard to understand each other. Glad that we found a way:)