5 ms·

The driver covertly filmed a passenger during a ride he was being paid for and disclosed the footage to a news organisation. This is extremely unethical IMO. Ev

The driver covertly filmed a passenger during a ride he was being paid for and disclosed the footage to a news organisation. This is extremely unethical IMO. Even if this is the CEO of Uber, it is entirely inappropriate, and he IMO is still entitled to an expectation of privacy equally as you or I would when we are paying for the exclusive private hire of a vehicle.

throwanem 10y ago
So, welcome to the world, where there's a reason why the phrase "public figure" contains the word public. I tend to agree that, in an ideal world, it wouldn't be that way. But this is hardly an ideal world, and I'm kind of frightened that someone confused on this point should be building a read/write API on bank accounts.
- foo101 10y ago
  Your point about ideal world vs. real world makes sense. But your personal attack on sjtgraham is unwarranted.
  - throwanem 10y ago
    Is it really that? I don't believe I'm indicting his qualities as a person; certainly that's not my intent. But if Teller takes off, he's going to have, to a first approximation, the entire world gunning for him - because whoever suborns him or his company has a reasonable chance of getting rich, or at least a solid payday, out of it. That's not a tremendously safe place to be uncynical.
  - sjtgraham 10y ago
    Thank you for this foo101.
- sjtgraham 10y ago
  I'm not defending Kalanick's behavior, although I do think it is regretful he ended the interaction in the way he did. Public figure or not I think it's unreasonable to expect anyone to completely waive their expectation of privacy. There are right and wrong ways to pursue a grievance, IMO this was not the right way and two wrongs do not make a right.
  - throwanem 10y ago
    I think it's remarkable to suggest that the CEO of a company, when speaking in that role in a public place, has an expectation of privacy.
    - xapata 10y ago
      The interaction with the driver, that's fine to film. The long section before their conversation, watching that made me feel uncomfortable, like a voyeur. I suppose that's what makes me cringe when watching "reality TV".
mrbabbage 10y ago
Every taxicab I have been in for the last few years has had internal video cameras. Where are you getting the idea that someone has a reasonable expectation of privacy in someone else's vehicle, for hire or not? In general in America, this expectation extends no further than one's home.
- sjtgraham 10y ago
  I live in the UK and the place is covered by CCTV including private hire vehicles, but we also have the Data Protection Act, which makes this kind of thing illegal. I know if I am being filmed in a taxi because there must a notice prominently displayed, and I also know that the only way this footage will ever be used, is if I attack the driver and it is used as criminal evidence against me, or if make a complaint about a driver and he uses it to bolster his case with Transport for London.
- gpawl 10y ago
  Why would the inside of a vehicle not be private? https://www.quora.com/Are-Uber-drivers-allowed-to-have-a-camera-recording-passengers https://www.quora.com/Are-Uber-drivers-allowed-to-have-a-cam... > A California appellate court has ruled that the Penal Code statute applies to the use of hidden video cameras to record conversations. You think Uber would still be in business if drivers made a habit of publicly posting videos of passengers?
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
c3534l 10y ago
What are you talking about? Every uber car has a camera in it in case of disputes or insurance, which are common. There is no expectation of privacy in a car with clear windows and a stranger sitting in front of you.
logfromblammo 10y ago
Being the driver of a passenger car for hire is one of the more dangerous occupations. I would expect that every last one of them would have a forward-facing dash-cam, an inside camera that covered the entire passenger seating area, and possibly also cameras covering the external approaches to the vehicle doors. The driver or cab company owns the car, and they have the same right to film the customers for the safety of the driver as a convenience store does to promote the safety of its clerks and cashiers. You are correct that it is unethical to release that footage in most circumstances, without it being evidence of a crime, but the CEO of a company like Uber might be considered a public figure, and if you want other people to be ethical in their dealings with you, you must also be ethical in your dealings with them. I think we never would have seen this video if the driver didn't think that Uber's top-level management pulled a bait-and-switch on him with respect to the recruiting promises versus the actual income. If you act like an ass, you shouldn't expect discretion from anyone. Were this an ordinary passenger that engaged in a mildly argumentative conversation with the driver, yes, that would be very unethical to post the video without explicit two-party consent. But for the guy that technically signs your paychecks and controls whether you get fares or not and how much you get for them, having a conversation about the business? I'd say that's fair game. There was a #DeleteUber campaign going on well before this became public, and the reasons for that come from the company's management culture. If he's going to apologize for anything, he still has a lot more to answer for.

throwanem 10y ago

So, welcome to the world, where there's a reason why the phrase "public figure" contains the word public. I tend to agree that, in an ideal world, it wouldn't be that way. But this is hardly an ideal world, and I'm kind of frightened that someone confused on this point should be building a read/write API on bank accounts.

foo101 10y ago
Your point about ideal world vs. real world makes sense. But your personal attack on sjtgraham is unwarranted.
- throwanem 10y ago
  Is it really that? I don't believe I'm indicting his qualities as a person; certainly that's not my intent. But if Teller takes off, he's going to have, to a first approximation, the entire world gunning for him - because whoever suborns him or his company has a reasonable chance of getting rich, or at least a solid payday, out of it. That's not a tremendously safe place to be uncynical.
- sjtgraham 10y ago
  Thank you for this foo101.
sjtgraham 10y ago
I'm not defending Kalanick's behavior, although I do think it is regretful he ended the interaction in the way he did. Public figure or not I think it's unreasonable to expect anyone to completely waive their expectation of privacy. There are right and wrong ways to pursue a grievance, IMO this was not the right way and two wrongs do not make a right.
- throwanem 10y ago
  I think it's remarkable to suggest that the CEO of a company, when speaking in that role in a public place, has an expectation of privacy.
  - xapata 10y ago
    The interaction with the driver, that's fine to film. The long section before their conversation, watching that made me feel uncomfortable, like a voyeur. I suppose that's what makes me cringe when watching "reality TV".

mrbabbage 10y ago

Every taxicab I have been in for the last few years has had internal video cameras. Where are you getting the idea that someone has a reasonable expectation of privacy in someone else's vehicle, for hire or not? In general in America, this expectation extends no further than one's home.

sjtgraham 10y ago
I live in the UK and the place is covered by CCTV including private hire vehicles, but we also have the Data Protection Act, which makes this kind of thing illegal. I know if I am being filmed in a taxi because there must a notice prominently displayed, and I also know that the only way this footage will ever be used, is if I attack the driver and it is used as criminal evidence against me, or if make a complaint about a driver and he uses it to bolster his case with Transport for London.
gpawl 10y ago
Why would the inside of a vehicle not be private? https://www.quora.com/Are-Uber-drivers-allowed-to-have-a-camera-recording-passengers https://www.quora.com/Are-Uber-drivers-allowed-to-have-a-cam... > A California appellate court has ruled that the Penal Code statute applies to the use of hidden video cameras to record conversations. You think Uber would still be in business if drivers made a habit of publicly posting videos of passengers?

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

c3534l 10y ago

What are you talking about? Every uber car has a camera in it in case of disputes or insurance, which are common. There is no expectation of privacy in a car with clear windows and a stranger sitting in front of you.

logfromblammo 10y ago

Being the driver of a passenger car for hire is one of the more dangerous occupations. I would expect that every last one of them would have a forward-facing dash-cam, an inside camera that covered the entire passenger seating area, and possibly also cameras covering the external approaches to the vehicle doors. The driver or cab company owns the car, and they have the same right to film the customers for the safety of the driver as a convenience store does to promote the safety of its clerks and cashiers. You are correct that it is unethical to release that footage in most circumstances, without it being evidence of a crime, but the CEO of a company like Uber might be considered a public figure, and if you want other people to be ethical in their dealings with you, you must also be ethical in your dealings with them. I think we never would have seen this video if the driver didn't think that Uber's top-level management pulled a bait-and-switch on him with respect to the recruiting promises versus the actual income. If you act like an ass, you shouldn't expect discretion from anyone. Were this an ordinary passenger that engaged in a mildly argumentative conversation with the driver, yes, that would be very unethical to post the video without explicit two-party consent. But for the guy that technically signs your paychecks and controls whether you get fares or not and how much you get for them, having a conversation about the business? I'd say that's fair game. There was a #DeleteUber campaign going on well before this became public, and the reasons for that come from the company's management culture. If he's going to apologize for anything, he still has a lot more to answer for.