5 ms·

If anything the headline is misleading in the other direction. The details in this are pretty damning: 1. Paid an employee 4.5M after sending accusatory email

If anything the headline is misleading in the other direction. The details in this are pretty damning: 1. Paid an employee 4.5M after sending accusatory email to CEO 2. Levandowski used Wickr for an unknown purpose, an app no longer used within the company 3. Said email to CEO hidden from discovery during trial None of this is 100% proof, but the body of evidence that is growing makes it harder and harder to reasonably believe that Uber is innocent here. That said yes the quote as stated is misleading of what Alsup actually said. I just wish the headline was about the points above, not his quote.

dmix 9y ago
You can twist a narrative about using an app with 'self-destructing messages' to sound like a malicious act but what's stopping any individual or company from wanting privacy? Wickr is a very popular app, especially among technically-savvy people. With widespread surveillance and hacking there are a hundred other reasons besides hiding evidence from an IP trial for using an app like that. Uber's claims the letter from the security employee, who highlighted the use of 'special laptops' and self-destruction messaging apps, was of an 'extortionist' nature and led to him getting a payout. Calling that employee a 'whistleblower' is another potential spin. Which is why that statement rightfully includes "On the surface...". Paying off someone is far more directly relevant but again there is a presumption of innocence for very good reasons. And I don't think we should ignore that
- adjkant 9y ago
  I agree, there are other uses for sure. But, again, you have to look at the full body of evidence. The most notable part to me is that Uber stopped using the app. What would change in the privacy world to make them not need that app if they had a use for it before? Add that to all the other context of the case, and malicious use is a lot more likely to me. > Paying off someone is far more directly relevant but again there is a presumption of innocence for very good reasons. If I'm not mistaken, this is a civil suit and subject to "more likely than not" rather than "beyond a reasonable doubt". I find a hard time making an argument that it's more likely Uber didn't use Levandowski to steal trade secrets from Google.
  - sokoloff 9y ago
    > The most notable part to me is that Uber stopped using the app. What would change in the privacy world to make them not need that app if they had a use for it before? Does every company that switches from one messaging system to another need a nefarious reason?
- relaunched 9y ago
  It seems like those users were at the highest levels of Uber. Travis and Corey were directly communicating, as has come out already. >>>https://www.recode.net/2017/8/15/16151986/travis-kalanick-anthony-levandowski-texts-tesla-google-waymo-lawsuit<<< https://www.recode.net/2017/8/15/16151986/travis-kalanick-an... So, there are a lot of legit questions as to why Lewandowski was using it to communicate? With whom was he speaking? When and why did he decide to use self destroying communication? I'd imagine the best practice for hiring a employee that could have a potential conflict of interest or be in violation of an employment agreement would be to document the great lengths the new company went to make sure there was no IP violations and keep records of everything. Though, one could argue that Uber saw value in destroying evidence and create doubting, where the truth would most certainly be damning.
- gpm 9y ago
  You can't accuse GP of twisting the 'self destructing message' app thing when the original source says it was for malicious purposes (you could arguably accuse the original source, except...). I'm also highly skeptical that it is at all legal to use such an app for communications you are legally required to preserve because you are aware of the possibility of a lawsuit. > Jacobs: Uber's use of encrypted ephemeral systems was dessigned to protect sensitive info and ensure we didn’t create a paper trail that wd come back to haunt the co in any potential civil or criminal investigation. [0] > Judge quotes Jacob's atty letter: Uber employees went to Pittsburgh to educate the AV group about ephemeral, encrypted communications "to prevent Uber's unlawful schemes from seeing the light of day" [1] [0] https://twitter.com/CSaid/status/935555627815813120 https://twitter.com/CSaid/status/935555627815813120 [1] https://twitter.com/CSaid/status/935569588309327878 https://twitter.com/CSaid/status/935569588309327878
  - dmix 9y ago
    The Jacob person you're quoting was demanding money to not expose such information in an 'extortionist' style attempt... and he did take the money and he did keep quiet. He wasn't some good-guy whistleblower, he took advantage of his inside knowledge after he was fired for personal gain. While then rejoining Uber after the fact and continuing to work there. In that letter, likely written by his attorney who also got $3 million, had a clear incentive to twist the narrative of using an app like Wickr to make it seem as malicious and damaging as possible. Uber also went to federal prosecutors with his letter to preempt him from using it for further personal gain. They didn't try to hide from it. I'm not saying it wasn't used for malicious purposes but I'd take those allegations in the letter with a grain of salt.
    - bob_theslob646 9y ago
      >I'm not saying it wasn't used for malicious purposes but I'd take those allegations in the letter with a grain of salt. Seriously? What ever happened to due process?
tim333 9y ago
Also according to the FT what the judge actually said was: “I can’t trust anything you say because it’s been proven wrong so many times,” he told Uber. “You’re just making the impression that this is a total cover-up.” Which also seems quite damning. https://www.ft.com/content/3d4cb174-d636-11e7-a303-9060cb1e5f44 https://www.ft.com/content/3d4cb174-d636-11e7-a303-9060cb1e5...

dmix 9y ago

You can twist a narrative about using an app with 'self-destructing messages' to sound like a malicious act but what's stopping any individual or company from wanting privacy? Wickr is a very popular app, especially among technically-savvy people. With widespread surveillance and hacking there are a hundred other reasons besides hiding evidence from an IP trial for using an app like that. Uber's claims the letter from the security employee, who highlighted the use of 'special laptops' and self-destruction messaging apps, was of an 'extortionist' nature and led to him getting a payout. Calling that employee a 'whistleblower' is another potential spin. Which is why that statement rightfully includes "On the surface...". Paying off someone is far more directly relevant but again there is a presumption of innocence for very good reasons. And I don't think we should ignore that

adjkant 9y ago
I agree, there are other uses for sure. But, again, you have to look at the full body of evidence. The most notable part to me is that Uber stopped using the app. What would change in the privacy world to make them not need that app if they had a use for it before? Add that to all the other context of the case, and malicious use is a lot more likely to me. > Paying off someone is far more directly relevant but again there is a presumption of innocence for very good reasons. If I'm not mistaken, this is a civil suit and subject to "more likely than not" rather than "beyond a reasonable doubt". I find a hard time making an argument that it's more likely Uber didn't use Levandowski to steal trade secrets from Google.
- sokoloff 9y ago
  > The most notable part to me is that Uber stopped using the app. What would change in the privacy world to make them not need that app if they had a use for it before? Does every company that switches from one messaging system to another need a nefarious reason?
relaunched 9y ago
It seems like those users were at the highest levels of Uber. Travis and Corey were directly communicating, as has come out already. >>>https://www.recode.net/2017/8/15/16151986/travis-kalanick-anthony-levandowski-texts-tesla-google-waymo-lawsuit<<< https://www.recode.net/2017/8/15/16151986/travis-kalanick-an... So, there are a lot of legit questions as to why Lewandowski was using it to communicate? With whom was he speaking? When and why did he decide to use self destroying communication? I'd imagine the best practice for hiring a employee that could have a potential conflict of interest or be in violation of an employment agreement would be to document the great lengths the new company went to make sure there was no IP violations and keep records of everything. Though, one could argue that Uber saw value in destroying evidence and create doubting, where the truth would most certainly be damning.
gpm 9y ago
You can't accuse GP of twisting the 'self destructing message' app thing when the original source says it was for malicious purposes (you could arguably accuse the original source, except...). I'm also highly skeptical that it is at all legal to use such an app for communications you are legally required to preserve because you are aware of the possibility of a lawsuit. > Jacobs: Uber's use of encrypted ephemeral systems was dessigned to protect sensitive info and ensure we didn’t create a paper trail that wd come back to haunt the co in any potential civil or criminal investigation. [0] > Judge quotes Jacob's atty letter: Uber employees went to Pittsburgh to educate the AV group about ephemeral, encrypted communications "to prevent Uber's unlawful schemes from seeing the light of day" [1] [0] https://twitter.com/CSaid/status/935555627815813120 https://twitter.com/CSaid/status/935555627815813120 [1] https://twitter.com/CSaid/status/935569588309327878 https://twitter.com/CSaid/status/935569588309327878
- dmix 9y ago
  The Jacob person you're quoting was demanding money to not expose such information in an 'extortionist' style attempt... and he did take the money and he did keep quiet. He wasn't some good-guy whistleblower, he took advantage of his inside knowledge after he was fired for personal gain. While then rejoining Uber after the fact and continuing to work there. In that letter, likely written by his attorney who also got $3 million, had a clear incentive to twist the narrative of using an app like Wickr to make it seem as malicious and damaging as possible. Uber also went to federal prosecutors with his letter to preempt him from using it for further personal gain. They didn't try to hide from it. I'm not saying it wasn't used for malicious purposes but I'd take those allegations in the letter with a grain of salt.
  - bob_theslob646 9y ago
    >I'm not saying it wasn't used for malicious purposes but I'd take those allegations in the letter with a grain of salt. Seriously? What ever happened to due process?

tim333 9y ago

Also according to the FT what the judge actually said was: “I can’t trust anything you say because it’s been proven wrong so many times,” he told Uber. “You’re just making the impression that this is a total cover-up.” Which also seems quite damning. https://www.ft.com/content/3d4cb174-d636-11e7-a303-9060cb1e5f44 https://www.ft.com/content/3d4cb174-d636-11e7-a303-9060cb1e5...