6 ms·

> but Uber as a company is very ethical If it wasn't for the apparent money laundry[1], drivers exploitation[2], cashing out on desperation[3], and tax evasion

• pawadu 10y ago
  You forgot the best ones: using dirty tactics against journalists [1] and Lyft [2], I don't understand how anyone can with a straight face claim that "Uber as a company is very ethical company". I would rank the company management (not drivers) as ethical as the New York mafia. [1] http://www.businessinsider.com/an-uber-exec-brought-up-the-idea-of-spying-on-journalists-2014-11?r=US&IR=T&IR=T http://www.businessinsider.com/an-uber-exec-brought-up-the-i... [2] http://money.cnn.com/2014/08/11/technology/uber-fake-ride-requests-lyft/index.html http://money.cnn.com/2014/08/11/technology/uber-fake-ride-re...
  • HeavyStorm 10y ago
    Very rare to have a company this size to be ethical.
    • karmacoda 10y ago
      Yes. These companies have teams of people spewing out a list of values for PR, and thinking that they have Jedi mind trick powers over the employees (on some people it actually works!). It's the company image, not how the company operates.
  • supergreg 10y ago
    If only we were able to rate management and they were let go with a 3 or less stars review.
• J-dawg 10y ago
  I might be with you on the others, but [3] is just media hysteria based on faulty logic. I've seen this type of story repeatedly after there's been an incident in some city. If it's not Uber it's a hotel chain or similar. It's easy clicks for tabloid newspapers. They probably have a template for this sort of story ready to go. And there will be plenty more ammo for this sort of thing as more companies move to automated pricing models. Almost everyone who had to pay surge prices that day would not have been directly involved in the explosion (or even seen it). Are companies now supposed to compensate for any bad thing that might be happening in somebody's life? Presumably those who chose to pay surge prices did so because it was still the cheapest/best way of getting home. So even at those prices Uber was better than any alternative. EDIT: Forgot to mention, it's also possible some people might have only got home that night because of surge pricing, because it increases the number of drivers. If I had to buy a very expensive airline ticket at the last minute to see a sick relative, would the airline be exploiting me? Previous HN discussion and article on the Copenhagen Interpretation of Ethics, which is relevant here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10367855 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10367855
• sambe 10y ago
  I think the parent's point is that there's nothing hidden going on in addition to the known business model and standard company practices. You obviously disagree with that business model, and that's fine. For the millions of people who don't disagree with it, parent says: "we are not cheating or abusing you behind your back". Those links are also pretty weak: all speculation or opinion pieces about things that are out in the open: 1) this is not even close to money laundering? 1) this is just a list of companies with "uber" in their name? besides, it's very common for companies to structure and re-structure themselves without anything unethical going on. it's also common to do it for tax purposes, see below. 2) quite a bold opinion piece about the driver situation. clearly, with so many drivers and customers taking part, it's a matter of opinion. it's reasonable to call it unethical if that's your view but it's not really what the parent meant. 3) pure media hysteria. good to see The Sun as a source on HN. 4) the tax thing again. as it stands, everyone wants to lower their taxes and almost all large companies do this a lot and do it legally. if your view is that they should just volunteer as much tax as possible, you're welcome to that view - there are signs that the law will start to change to be less forgiving of this. however, the specific case in the article is probably the worst example you could pick: the ability to offset losses from previous years isn't even close to being a grey area. Do cab drivers come in for the same criticism? I've been scammed and lied to so many times by (official) cab drivers and they are absolute sharks for exploiting desperation and ignorance. There are investigative stories linking taxi cab rings with genuine organised crime. I guess they must do perfect tax returns?
  • madeofpalk 10y ago
    'God Mode'? http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2014/10/03/god-view-uber-allegedly-stalked-users-for-party-goers-viewing-pleasure/#41956a313f84 http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2014/10/03/god-view-...
  • vmateixeira 10y ago
    Thank you for your comment, always good to read and learn from other points of view. I can agree with the weak links. Unfortunately didn't have much time to find better ones. Also, having The Sun as source in HN doesn't give it much of a credibility, but I'm sure there are more reliable sources out there [1]. I can also agree that this point can be made from a bit of a media hysteria. But a company whose business model makes prevail supply/demand rules on a disaster, seems like a bit sick to me. From my point of view, this is not an ethical company behavior. And when I mean company, I mean company as a whole despite believing there are departments within the company where things are done ethically (parent's point maybe?). Also, again in my opinion, a company shouldn't attempt tax evasion, by any means p.e. tax evasion schemes (most of them arguably legal) as it impacts all country's and overall economy. This said, I classify most big companies as unethical. This can possibly be one of the main reasons the gap between rich and poor is getting bigger every year as big sharks cash out clean out of the exploited marked. If a company disagrees with a country's taxation model, ethically, maybe it shouldn't attempt to get to that market? Company name changes can be seen as tactical maneuvers used for tax evasion also and debt evasion in case the company goes bust. On previous + [2],[3], altogether, this may present no substantial evidence on money laundry but do you really believe investors would be naively burning billions worth of investment on a company which on 7+ years of existence didn't present, neither is close to presenting, any profit? I'm not saying cab drivers shouldn't be put through similar criticism, maybe they should. But I think we cannot generalize on that. There are good and bad professionals everywhere. What I can say, based on what I know from my country, is that cab drivers cannot scam you as their fees are regulated. They cannot charge you more that X per Km as their taximeters are regulated by the government to ensure that. They need to have a professional driving license and be identifiable to the customer. And they're also entitled to pay their taxes accordingly. Of course one can always hear a bad experience from time to time, but again, that is subject to happen in every industry. [1] https://twitter.com/SarahBertolozzi/status/777347314746884097/photo/1 https://twitter.com/SarahBertolozzi/status/77734731474688409... [2] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-25/uber-loses-at-least-1-2-billion-in-first-half-of-2016 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-08-25/uber-lose... [3] http://qz.com/618022/ubers-ceo-says-the-company-is-burning-1-billion-a-year-in-china/ http://qz.com/618022/ubers-ceo-says-the-company-is-burning-1...
• skuzye 10y ago
  [3] why does uber have to go around their prices algorithm because of an attack? I mean, that's how they operate: more demand = more expensive. They could use the marketing to do it but they don't really need to. I don't understand why people expect corporations to work as a non-profit