8 ms·

I'm not sure how you somehow found a broad antigovernment oppositional attitude in these posts here. All of what you say about governance can be true, and I lar

I'm not sure how you somehow found a broad antigovernment oppositional attitude in these posts here. All of what you say about governance can be true, and I largely agree with it, but I still don't want NYC to have my data and I do think the onus is on them to show they will be responsible custodians because they screwed it up in the past. Once bitten, twice shy. I don't know if you've tried to do free work for governments and get them to go along with your initiatives before, but I bet you that it quickly becomes a politicized process and is much more painful than, say, submitting a PR. I don't have the time, energy, or resources to do such a thing, but I do have the ability to vote against policies that I feel are misguided. If you have examples of normal citizens getting municipalities to adopt their initiatives and the process going smoothly, I'm all ears. Also, the point here is that Uber is not a cab ride; if I take a cab ride I can understand why NYC gets the data directly since cabs are a de facto government-established monopoly, but I don't see why that extends to my business dealings with a private corporation.

anigbrowl 10y ago
I still don't want NYC to have my data and I do think the onus is on them to show they will be responsible custodians because they screwed it up in the past As I pointed out in the first place, with a public entity like NYC you can file FOIA requests to find out what they actually did to mitigate the problem and ensure it doesn't recur. Is it enough? Opinions will vary, but reliably ensuring better security practices in the future will require some sort of rule, if only to identify the standard their IT operations need to comply with. Meanwhile, the city is still expected to respond to complaints from residents about the cab service and to carry out its existing oversight functions which are almost certainly mandated by law. Uber's right to operate a transport service is subject to the same laws as every other transit service, so there's no legal basis for them to have a veto over the city contingent on the city meeting some (undefined) standard of reliable data custody. That would be giving a private entity (Uber) authority over the data security policy of NYC, which is an absurdity. Certainly their opinion matters, as does yours as a voter, or even (very indirectly) as someone who chooses to drop some of your tourist $ in NYC or not. But having an opinion which you attempt to everage at election time (occasionally alone or more commonly through donating to some lobbying group to do it for you) is very different from a company unilaterally declining to comply with a rule and then claiming to be doing so in order to uphold your interests rather than their own. Also, the point here is that Uber is not a cab ride Of course it is. You summon a vehicle to transport you in comfort from A to B and you pay on arrival. Summoning them via an app rather than via a telephone call or a wave down is a mere operational detail. You're still hiring a car, for the time being cars are driven by people, and the law in New York is that commercial drivers can't work more than 60 hours a week (because of the increased risks of accidents due to driver fatigue, which is backed up by a lot of data) and have to be able to provide work logs on request. The existence of a difference tells you nothing about its degree. From the point of view of the customer and driver, there is virtually no functional difference between Uber or any pre-existing taxi company. The significantly different business, dispatch and billing practices don't alter the fact that it's a ride-for-hire service.

anigbrowl 10y ago

I still don't want NYC to have my data and I do think the onus is on them to show they will be responsible custodians because they screwed it up in the past As I pointed out in the first place, with a public entity like NYC you can file FOIA requests to find out what they actually did to mitigate the problem and ensure it doesn't recur. Is it enough? Opinions will vary, but reliably ensuring better security practices in the future will require some sort of rule, if only to identify the standard their IT operations need to comply with. Meanwhile, the city is still expected to respond to complaints from residents about the cab service and to carry out its existing oversight functions which are almost certainly mandated by law. Uber's right to operate a transport service is subject to the same laws as every other transit service, so there's no legal basis for them to have a veto over the city contingent on the city meeting some (undefined) standard of reliable data custody. That would be giving a private entity (Uber) authority over the data security policy of NYC, which is an absurdity. Certainly their opinion matters, as does yours as a voter, or even (very indirectly) as someone who chooses to drop some of your tourist $ in NYC or not. But having an opinion which you attempt to everage at election time (occasionally alone or more commonly through donating to some lobbying group to do it for you) is very different from a company unilaterally declining to comply with a rule and then claiming to be doing so in order to uphold your interests rather than their own. Also, the point here is that Uber is not a cab ride Of course it is. You summon a vehicle to transport you in comfort from A to B and you pay on arrival. Summoning them via an app rather than via a telephone call or a wave down is a mere operational detail. You're still hiring a car, for the time being cars are driven by people, and the law in New York is that commercial drivers can't work more than 60 hours a week (because of the increased risks of accidents due to driver fatigue, which is backed up by a lot of data) and have to be able to provide work logs on request. The existence of a difference tells you nothing about its degree. From the point of view of the customer and driver, there is virtually no functional difference between Uber or any pre-existing taxi company. The significantly different business, dispatch and billing practices don't alter the fact that it's a ride-for-hire service.