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

Uber and Lyft to swap data on banned drivers

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–88 of 88 posts

Re: Uber and Lyft to swap data on banned drivers

#81

Post by chii »

throwaway53453 wrote: post #71
cwkoss wrote: post #56

I wonder if they'll start sharing data on banned passengers. I think this is a much more interesting and nuanced social issue. A recent viral video this week showed a woman assaulting an Uber driver, she livestreamed on IG to try to justify her actions and in the process said that she would only be using Lyft, then lyft tweeted that they pre-emptively banned her. If FAANG joined together to make a shared blocked user…

Cancel culture ensures we basically have that already... How many times has an undesirable been unpersoned from Twitter, Facebook and YouTube within hours?

and what if they weren't really undesirable, but framed? What if they actually had a case, but the context shows a biased view?

That's why we don't rely on the court of public opinion for deciding guiltiness of an accused.

What needs to be canceled is cancel cultuer itself.

Re: Uber and Lyft to swap data on banned drivers

#82

Post by hytdstd »

NaturalPhallacy wrote: post #64
redditmigrant wrote: post #29

This is obviously a good thing from a safety standpoint, but I worry we are increasingly becoming a one strike society. Where one instance of bad behavior locks you out of significant parts of the infrastructure. Moreoever this happens in a "court" with no documented laws/appeals process.

Cancel culture in a nutshell. There's a reason we have "innocent until proven guilty" and lots of interlocking checks and balances in the legal system to prevent the mob from lynching people. Nowadays they can lynch your social life and employment options over a drunken tweet. How do we fix this?

It has been standard advice--for almost a decade-- to watch what you say online before applying for a job. And background checks have existed for work and renters for much longer.

Re: Uber and Lyft to swap data on banned drivers

#83

Post by fakedang »

smt88 wrote: post #68
cwkoss wrote: post #56

I wonder if they'll start sharing data on banned passengers. I think this is a much more interesting and nuanced social issue. A recent viral video this week showed a woman assaulting an Uber driver, she livestreamed on IG to try to justify her actions and in the process said that she would only be using Lyft, then lyft tweeted that they pre-emptively banned her. If FAANG joined together to make a shared blocked user…

> they could effectively make a digital caste system subject to little current government oversight You mean like credit scores?

Reminds me of that one Black Mirror episode

Re: Uber and Lyft to swap data on banned drivers

#84

Post by incrudible »

Why is this necessary? If people are convicted of sexual assault, it's on the public record. Otherwise, even though some accusations that are not brought to court may have merit, Uber or Lyft should not be the ones to arbitrate on that.

https://www.theroot.com/uber-bans-passenger-for-life-after-s...

Re: Uber and Lyft to swap data on banned drivers

#85

Post by throwaway53453 »

chii wrote: post #81
throwaway53453 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cancel culture ensures we basically have that already... How many times has an undesirable been unpersoned from Twitter, Facebook and YouTube within hours?

and what if they weren't really undesirable, but framed? What if they actually had a case, but the context shows a biased view? That's why we don't rely on the court of public opinion for deciding guiltiness of an accused. What needs to be canceled is cancel cultuer itself.

Yeah I'm agreeing. Undesirable wasn't meant to be literal.

Re: Uber and Lyft to swap data on banned drivers

#86

Post by mikepurvis »

lhorie wrote: post #42
mikepurvis wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet— still the same ship, right? It would be fascinating to have some insider stories about whether overhauling the upper management has actually changed the culture of the company, or if it's largely the same attitudes and behaviours at play.

I joined Uber a few months before Travis left. I can share a few things that come to mind: - shortly after Dara joined, he sent a company-wide email to the effect of "all corporate espionage projects must be halted effectively now" - he introduced a new guiding motto: "We do the right thing. Period." and repeatedly refers back to it - he found out about a previously undisclosed data leak and went ahead and made a pro…

That is helpful to hear, thanks for sharing— dismissing the board member especially feels like a very tangible, real thing.

Re: Uber and Lyft to swap data on banned drivers

#87

Post by mijamo »

londons_explore wrote: post #65
badRNG wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's say you are mistaken for a wanted robber and arrested and later acquitted or have the charges dropped, when that record is expunged, there is a legal duty for the government to destroy all records related to that arrest. If they don't, you have political and legal recourse. A third-party company doesn't have the same legal obligation, nor does the public have any democratic control over that organization. Data…

In Europe, a third party company would have a legal obligation to keep their records accurate.

"In Europe" is not really accurate here. In some countries it is actually illegal to do any background check at all apart from the ones provided by the state (you can still check if a diploma is real of course).

In some other there will be no real obligation of keeping the records accurate (sometimes there is one theoretical but not enforced, sometimes there is one but with a legal leeway that allows a certain amount of inaccuracy).

Post reply on HN