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

How Uber Used Secret “Greyball” Tool to Deceive Authorities Worldwide

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

751–760 of 805 posts

Re: How Uber Used Secret “Greyball” Tool to Deceive Authorities Worldwide

#751

Post by WildUtah »

wpietri wrote: post #656
wpietri wrote: post #654

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obstruction of justice is a crime. So are lying to an FBI agent, destroying evidence, resisting arrest, evading arrest, falsifying business records, destruction of documents with intent to impede an investigation, and of course perjury. I don't know that any of these apply here, but yes, actively avoiding accountability is often a crime on its own. And correctly so, I'd say. Creating fake accounting records as a hobb…

Oh, and if you're wondering about the moral case, I think it's pretty clear. When we the people set out to do something together, deciding to evade our joint decisions and mechanisms for self-regulation is an antisocial, antidemocratic act.

When big money monopolists corrupt our local governments to obtain taxi monopolies at the expense of working families, the environment, and vulnerable racial minorities that can't hail taxis but can get an Uber, then it's the system that's antisocial and antidemocratic.

Uber is a social reform movement organized as a profit-seeking business. Of course the forces of corruption and reaction are going to try to stop it under cover of law.

Re: How Uber Used Secret “Greyball” Tool to Deceive Authorities Worldwide

#752

Post by ihsw »

greghendershott wrote: post #127

Not only am I done with Uber, I'm starting to wonder about associates and partners (investors, advisors, marketing partners, etc.) If you're still doing business with Uber in 2017, it's because you don't want to know or you don't care who you're dealing with. Neither reflects well on you. It tells me you have your own very low bar -- your own version of "well we're not as awful as taxis shrug " -- above which anythin…

> If you're still doing business with Uber in 2017, it's because you don't want to know or you don't care who you're dealing with. Neither reflects well on you. It tells me you have your own very low bar -- your own version of "well we're not as awful as taxis shrug" -- above which anything goes ethically and professionally.

Or you have a vested interest in seeing Uber succeed -- personally I am all for crushing the taxi cartels so I am always happy to take Uber.

Re: How Uber Used Secret “Greyball” Tool to Deceive Authorities Worldwide

#753

Post by wheelerwj »

CompanionCuube wrote: post #231
valine wrote: post #25

That's actually pretty impressive. I mean, it morally questionable maybe. Is there a law that says Uber is required to send a cab to city officials? The official gave Uber access to his personal details. If Uber doesn't want to fulfill the request it seems reasonable that ultimately it's Uber's decision. I'm not sure what to think about this one.

City officials are not a protected class in the US that are provided legal protections connected to being discriminated against.

protected class refers to groups of people who shall not be targeted by laws and regulations.

It has nothing to do with discrimination by companies towards groups of people.

Re: How Uber Used Secret “Greyball” Tool to Deceive Authorities Worldwide

#754

Post by hyperpape »

wheelerwj wrote: post #750
davidf18 wrote: post #745

There are laws that protect people from physical harm such as licensing for doctors or to keep people in certain fields from working too many hours (e.g. airline pilots and Emergency Room Doctors). There are laws that protect patents, copyrights, and other forms of IP so that inventors, writers can get some returns on their work. Then there are laws put in place by special interest groups to benefit themselves econom…

You call it "rent seeking" but that's just not the case. Almost every law is founded in some sort of public interest. In 1937, NYC passed the Haas Act to clean up the taxi industry which had become so competitive that taxi drivers were not able to make ends meet (sound familiar?) and were turning to less than legal means to supplement their income. While that law is 80 years old, its original principle was to provide…

This is a common and bad form of argument: "there is at least one conceivable justification for this law, so it is not rent-seeking".

But no one ever makes their primary public justification "we'd like to screw over the public and make more money". There is always something about some harm that the law will prevent. The question is whether the law is well targeted and proportionate. The restrictions on supply for taxi medallions fail that criterion by a long shot.

Re: How Uber Used Secret “Greyball” Tool to Deceive Authorities Worldwide

#755

Post by maxerickson »

wheelerwj wrote: post #753
CompanionCuube wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

City officials are not a protected class in the US that are provided legal protections connected to being discriminated against.

protected class refers to groups of people who shall not be targeted by laws and regulations. It has nothing to do with discrimination by companies towards groups of people.

It does in the US:

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

Re: How Uber Used Secret “Greyball” Tool to Deceive Authorities Worldwide

#756

Post by hyperpape »

davidf18 wrote: post #745

There are laws that protect people from physical harm such as licensing for doctors or to keep people in certain fields from working too many hours (e.g. airline pilots and Emergency Room Doctors). There are laws that protect patents, copyrights, and other forms of IP so that inventors, writers can get some returns on their work. Then there are laws put in place by special interest groups to benefit themselves econom…

Just because the law is problematic (and let's be clear, it's problematic, but 1000 times less so than drug laws, for instance) doesn't give Uber a blanket right to keep cops from hailing their vehicles, unless you really think that there's no scenario where Uber or its drivers could be legitimate targets of investigation.

Re: How Uber Used Secret “Greyball” Tool to Deceive Authorities Worldwide

#757

Post by omegaham »

rand77763 wrote: post #723
pyrale wrote: post #685

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We do have quite a lot of advancement which comes without violating the law. Also breaking the social canvas to correct something you feel is unfairly repressed/enforced is not something to do lightly. Let me give you an example here. I think Uber is a bad thing, but there's nothing I can do to oppose them, legally, that is. Should I carry out my own justice, illegally ? You can see that this pattern of thought quick…

God, I wish HN had a downvote button.

It does - you just need a certain amount of karma (500?) to get it. That's why some answers are grayed out; get enough downvotes, and your writing will blend in more and more with the background.

Re: How Uber Used Secret “Greyball” Tool to Deceive Authorities Worldwide

#758

Post by wheelerwj »

booleandilemma wrote: post #540
avn2109 wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I seem to be the minority here, but I don't see how any entity (including Uber) has an obligation to make it easy for the law to ticket them. Anyone who uses e.g. the Waze app to evade speedtraps is similarly guilty of "systematically avoiding the law." Lastly, let me just disclaim that I think Uber is run by assholes and so is the police.

Greyball makes it easier for Uber to continue breaking the law. It's like drug dealers using police scanners to determine if the police are nearby.

actually the drug dealer police scanner analogy is pretty appropriate even if its not 100% accurate.

Is it inherently illegal for a drug dealer to scan for police in the area and close shop if they believe officers are nearby?

Re: How Uber Used Secret “Greyball” Tool to Deceive Authorities Worldwide

#759

Post by wheelerwj »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #734
direfungasaur wrote: post #725

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are arbitrarily assigning Uber's disruption a positive social outcome, which appears to be the lynchpin of your argument. Your argument could be applied to many outcomes that would appear on the surface to be negative. A few (admittedly exaggerated) examples: "ArmzDealR is providing a great service by eliminating government bureaucracy and providing access to arms that citizens should have. It's good that they he…

I'm simply pointing out that Temporal's argument that breaking the law is always wrong is simply incorrect. I'm not saying all laws should be broken. I'm saying one must decide whether or not the law is just, and support those who break unjust laws. I see no one even attempting to make the argument that taxi protectionism laws are just. Do you have an argument that they are?

"taxi protection" laws are really just outdated "people protection" laws. They were just at the time and worked for many years after.

Regardless, all laws should be followed. Thats the whole point of society. We agree to follow the laws collectively.

Re: How Uber Used Secret “Greyball” Tool to Deceive Authorities Worldwide

#760

Post by misnome »

DanBC wrote: post #743
misnome wrote: post #739

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Certainly it depends on which one of many jurisdictions Uber operates in. For a start, in the U.K. it's illegal to use radar detectors [Edit: this first is apparently false; they publically stated that they were going to, but never changed the law. Other countries apparently do ban them, according to wikipedia.], and people have been given criminal convictions for "Flashing their lights" in order to warn incoming mot…

Is it illegal to use either radar detectors or gps camera locators in England? What law is it? I'd be interested in a link to the "flashing lights" case too.

Apologies - apparently I'm mistaken with the first - apparently several years ago there were public discussions about it and they claimed they were going to, but never followed through. Probably some more secondary sources confirmed it for me that I never double checked. (Also, wikipedia claims that although the UK doesn't ban, plenty of other countries do - and in the US it seems only Virginia explicitly bans them)

RE: Headlight flashing, I can only find sources from a few years ago - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-humber-12823922 was the one I remember hearing about, but several other instances seem to have taken place; i.e. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/9324722...

Post reply on HN