6 ms·

NYC proposes rule to collect GPS data on car service passengers

43 points by necessity 10y ago

givinguflac 10y ago
Between the militarization of NYPD and the increasingly bold mass surveillance they're implementing, I think I may just never go to NYC again.
- jgalt212 10y ago
  In general, I tend to a agree with you. i.e. Big Brother is bad, but if Big Brother is being Big Brother to protect you against the abuses of Uber then the case is not so clear against increased govt data collection.
  - givinguflac 10y ago
    The article makes a clear distinction between reasonable collection for those purposes, and this plan which is clearly a catch all with plenty of loopholes for using it however they'd like. I'm all for efficiency and against abuses, but there no way they need all this data for that purpose.
- CPLX 10y ago
  We will miss you terribly.
- Spooky23 10y ago
  It's little different elsewhere. One of my relatives were railing about being compelled to get EZPass for the Mass Pike, citing security/tracking concerns. The reality is, any state or highway water crossing is almost certainly captured on LPR. If you travel on known "drug corridors", like I95, you're face and plate is captured multiple times.
totalZero 10y ago
Looks like I'm going to take the subway from now on.
- l3m0ndr0p 10y ago
  NYC Police can also search you without a warrant before you enter the subway. It's illegal, but if you say no, you cannot enter the subway. If you say no & continue to enter, you will be arrested. You'll need to look for an alternative entrance. NYC is an shining example of a police state. It's getting worse each day & nobody cares, except me.
- jdavis703 10y ago
  Someone earlier made a now dead, but sensationalistic comment about how in some cities the transit police can search you before entering the subway, and if you refuse you can't enter (though usually you can enter from an entrance or station without the checkpoint). I've even seen TSA stationed inside of busy subway stations, thankfully they were only gruffly and inefficiently redirecting passengers, but weren't doing body scans or pat downs.
  - danso 10y ago
    I believe this is the way that it is in New York, at least when I lived there, unless the city relinquished its powers on this. Long reddit thread here: https://www.reddit.com/r/nyc/comments/1dm5fu/what_are_my_rights_regarding_random_subway_bag/ https://www.reddit.com/r/nyc/comments/1dm5fu/what_are_my_rig...
- bsilvereagle 10y ago
  I don't think riding the subway fixes the problem of determining where you're picked up and where you're dropped off (which this rule addresses). If you have a prepaid pass you use it when you board, at the minimum, your subway entrance terminal is known. If your phone wi-fi is on, your MAC can be sniffed at entrance and exit. Similar with Bluetooth. NYC subway stations are blanketed in cameras. You'll be on film entering and exiting. I'm not able to find it, but 60 Minutes (or similar) interviewed the NYC chief of police and he was claiming most surface streets have near full camera coverage in some capacity between government & private actors. Using Uber/Lyft arguably gives you less time on camera in NYC. Edit: `"That's the world we're living in now. Any street, any incident in New York City you get to -- most of the time -- that gets captured on video surveillance," New York City Police Commissioner James O'Neill said at a press conference on Monday.` http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ny-nj-bombings/more-8-000-cameras-helped-snare-bomb-suspect-ahmad-rahami-n650891 http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ny-nj-bombings/more-8-000-c...
rbcgerard 10y ago
Not condoning this, but they have almost of this data from yellow cab taxi riders, with the exception of the ones that paid in cash.
colinbartlett 10y ago
Before everyone cries foul, let's not forget that what the government is proposing to collect is just a small subset of the data that private companies like Uber and Lyft already have on you. There it's accessible by untold number of people for all kinds of unregulated purposes.
- gravypod 10y ago
  Uber isn't backed by an army, secret courts, and they can't decide to throw me in jail. Edit: Fix my autocorrect word choice.
  - jdavis703 10y ago
    Yes but someone could pay or coerece a weak link to extract the data. The DEA has been known to engage in this behavior: https://oig.justice.gov/reports/2016/f160107b.pdf https://oig.justice.gov/reports/2016/f160107b.pdf, (even for things like reporting customers who are carrying large amounts of cash but no drugs).
    - gravypod 10y ago
      > Yes but someone could pay or coerece a weak link to extract the data Or just pass a law to force them to do it and not spend any money.
    - wyager 10y ago
      Is your argument that "the government could do this immoral thing under the table, so we might as well let them do it over the table"? I'm not sure I buy that line of reasoning. I would rather just say that the government can't legally do this immoral thing, and prosecute the government actors involved if we catch them doing it.
      - jdavis703 10y ago
        That is indeed my argument. In a democracy anything is possible if the people vote for it. However we need to make the actions of elected officials public. For example while I personally oppose the NSA's warrantless wiretapping program, I would've been less angry (and more sad) had it passed through congressional means with an open debate the public was aware of. I also do not think that violating (whether it be through amendments or other actions) the constitution's intent is inherently immoral, as the constitution has little, if any morality built into it.
memset 10y ago
Unrelated: the time frame to comment on this rule for residents has expired. Were it that I was aware of this earlier! How can I not miss these things in the future?
unethical_ban 10y ago
This would be terribly evil and awful, and I hope it doesn't go through. Eventually, trying to keep your personal whereabouts out of a government database will itself be so suspicious you'll probably be tailed.
ebbv 10y ago
This is a nice AstroTurf campaign by Uber. Regular taxis in NYC already give this information. It is about tracking the taxis, not the customers. It's kind of crazy that Uber is trying to leverage customer privacy concerns given they recently started tracking customer location data even after they are dropped off.
- JoshTriplett 10y ago
  > Regular taxis in NYC already give this information. All the more reason for a better service to differentiate themselves by not doing so. > It is about tracking the taxis, not the customers. And wiretapping eavesdrops on telephones, not people?
bogomipz 10y ago
From the proposal PDF linked in the article: "Although almost all TLC-licensed drivers do not drive an excessive number of hours, TLC recognized that a small number does and that some drivers may be tempted to work dangerously long hours. Therefore, in support of the City’s Vision Zero initiative to reduce traffic fatalities,TLC adopted rules in July 2016 to address the risks of fatigued driving" If "almost all TLC licensed drivers do not drive an an excessive number of hours", then this is a very minor problem which should be able to be corrected by enforcement at the FHV(for hire vehicle) level and not by a proposal that not only has potential privacy implications but also has city budgetary implications. If New York City and the TLC's legitimate focus were on safety and quality of life(Vision Zero)issues then they could start by fixing the problem of aggressive driving by taxis - including blocking the cross-walk boxes, and intersections, blatantly running lights after they are clearly turned red as well as other general uncivil and aggressive behavior such as excessive and unnecessary horn blowing.

43 points by necessity 10y ago

Between the militarization of NYPD and the increasingly bold mass surveillance they're implementing, I think I may just never go to NYC again.

jgalt212 10y ago
In general, I tend to a agree with you. i.e. Big Brother is bad, but if Big Brother is being Big Brother to protect you against the abuses of Uber then the case is not so clear against increased govt data collection.
- givinguflac 10y ago
  The article makes a clear distinction between reasonable collection for those purposes, and this plan which is clearly a catch all with plenty of loopholes for using it however they'd like. I'm all for efficiency and against abuses, but there no way they need all this data for that purpose.
CPLX 10y ago
We will miss you terribly.
Spooky23 10y ago
It's little different elsewhere. One of my relatives were railing about being compelled to get EZPass for the Mass Pike, citing security/tracking concerns. The reality is, any state or highway water crossing is almost certainly captured on LPR. If you travel on known "drug corridors", like I95, you're face and plate is captured multiple times.

totalZero 10y ago

Looks like I'm going to take the subway from now on.

l3m0ndr0p 10y ago
NYC Police can also search you without a warrant before you enter the subway. It's illegal, but if you say no, you cannot enter the subway. If you say no & continue to enter, you will be arrested. You'll need to look for an alternative entrance. NYC is an shining example of a police state. It's getting worse each day & nobody cares, except me.
jdavis703 10y ago
Someone earlier made a now dead, but sensationalistic comment about how in some cities the transit police can search you before entering the subway, and if you refuse you can't enter (though usually you can enter from an entrance or station without the checkpoint). I've even seen TSA stationed inside of busy subway stations, thankfully they were only gruffly and inefficiently redirecting passengers, but weren't doing body scans or pat downs.
- danso 10y ago
  I believe this is the way that it is in New York, at least when I lived there, unless the city relinquished its powers on this. Long reddit thread here: https://www.reddit.com/r/nyc/comments/1dm5fu/what_are_my_rights_regarding_random_subway_bag/ https://www.reddit.com/r/nyc/comments/1dm5fu/what_are_my_rig...
bsilvereagle 10y ago
I don't think riding the subway fixes the problem of determining where you're picked up and where you're dropped off (which this rule addresses). If you have a prepaid pass you use it when you board, at the minimum, your subway entrance terminal is known. If your phone wi-fi is on, your MAC can be sniffed at entrance and exit. Similar with Bluetooth. NYC subway stations are blanketed in cameras. You'll be on film entering and exiting. I'm not able to find it, but 60 Minutes (or similar) interviewed the NYC chief of police and he was claiming most surface streets have near full camera coverage in some capacity between government & private actors. Using Uber/Lyft arguably gives you less time on camera in NYC. Edit: `"That's the world we're living in now. Any street, any incident in New York City you get to -- most of the time -- that gets captured on video surveillance," New York City Police Commissioner James O'Neill said at a press conference on Monday.` http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ny-nj-bombings/more-8-000-cameras-helped-snare-bomb-suspect-ahmad-rahami-n650891 http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ny-nj-bombings/more-8-000-c...

rbcgerard 10y ago

Not condoning this, but they have almost of this data from yellow cab taxi riders, with the exception of the ones that paid in cash.

colinbartlett 10y ago

Before everyone cries foul, let's not forget that what the government is proposing to collect is just a small subset of the data that private companies like Uber and Lyft already have on you. There it's accessible by untold number of people for all kinds of unregulated purposes.

gravypod 10y ago
Uber isn't backed by an army, secret courts, and they can't decide to throw me in jail. Edit: Fix my autocorrect word choice.
- jdavis703 10y ago
  Yes but someone could pay or coerece a weak link to extract the data. The DEA has been known to engage in this behavior: https://oig.justice.gov/reports/2016/f160107b.pdf https://oig.justice.gov/reports/2016/f160107b.pdf, (even for things like reporting customers who are carrying large amounts of cash but no drugs).
  - gravypod 10y ago
    > Yes but someone could pay or coerece a weak link to extract the data Or just pass a law to force them to do it and not spend any money.
  - wyager 10y ago
    Is your argument that "the government could do this immoral thing under the table, so we might as well let them do it over the table"? I'm not sure I buy that line of reasoning. I would rather just say that the government can't legally do this immoral thing, and prosecute the government actors involved if we catch them doing it.
    - jdavis703 10y ago
      That is indeed my argument. In a democracy anything is possible if the people vote for it. However we need to make the actions of elected officials public. For example while I personally oppose the NSA's warrantless wiretapping program, I would've been less angry (and more sad) had it passed through congressional means with an open debate the public was aware of. I also do not think that violating (whether it be through amendments or other actions) the constitution's intent is inherently immoral, as the constitution has little, if any morality built into it.

memset 10y ago

Unrelated: the time frame to comment on this rule for residents has expired. Were it that I was aware of this earlier! How can I not miss these things in the future?

unethical_ban 10y ago

This would be terribly evil and awful, and I hope it doesn't go through. Eventually, trying to keep your personal whereabouts out of a government database will itself be so suspicious you'll probably be tailed.

ebbv 10y ago

This is a nice AstroTurf campaign by Uber. Regular taxis in NYC already give this information. It is about tracking the taxis, not the customers. It's kind of crazy that Uber is trying to leverage customer privacy concerns given they recently started tracking customer location data even after they are dropped off.

JoshTriplett 10y ago
> Regular taxis in NYC already give this information. All the more reason for a better service to differentiate themselves by not doing so. > It is about tracking the taxis, not the customers. And wiretapping eavesdrops on telephones, not people?

bogomipz 10y ago

From the proposal PDF linked in the article: "Although almost all TLC-licensed drivers do not drive an excessive number of hours, TLC recognized that a small number does and that some drivers may be tempted to work dangerously long hours. Therefore, in support of the City’s Vision Zero initiative to reduce traffic fatalities,TLC adopted rules in July 2016 to address the risks of fatigued driving" If "almost all TLC licensed drivers do not drive an an excessive number of hours", then this is a very minor problem which should be able to be corrected by enforcement at the FHV(for hire vehicle) level and not by a proposal that not only has potential privacy implications but also has city budgetary implications. If New York City and the TLC's legitimate focus were on safety and quality of life(Vision Zero)issues then they could start by fixing the problem of aggressive driving by taxis - including blocking the cross-walk boxes, and intersections, blatantly running lights after they are clearly turned red as well as other general uncivil and aggressive behavior such as excessive and unnecessary horn blowing.