3 ms·

Uber doesn’t have a gigantic State apparatus with both a vested interest in and the ability to use violence to enforce it’s will on me. By your logic, it would

by dpratt 7y ago

Uber doesn’t have a gigantic State apparatus with both a vested interest in and the ability to use violence to enforce it’s will on me. By your logic, it would be more reasonable to require that Google be barred from all data sent over email, but require that copies get sent to the NSA. Similarly, AT&T should be required to not collect any phone records, but also be mandated to provide a copy of every single call to the FBI.

AlexandrB 7y ago
> Uber doesn’t have a gigantic State apparatus with both a vested interest in and the ability to use violence to enforce it’s will on me. Uber falls under the jurisdiction of a gigantic State apparatus with both a vested interest in and the ability to use violence to enforce it’s will on you. Being a good corporate citizen, Uber would dutifully hand over your data to said government when asked. This is a distinction without a difference.
- dpratt 7y ago
  Explain how it is legal for Uber to send a team of armed men to kick down my door at 3am and forcibly confine me to a cell.
  - ForHackernews 7y ago
    Before you worry about the legality of Uber's Maximum Customer Satisfaction Response Team, you'll have to provide evidence that something being against the law has ever stopped Uber from attempting it.
  - AlexandrB 7y ago
    This weird paranoia about the government acting with no consequence seems to never extend to 2nd or 3rd layer thinking. If the government could send a team of armed me to kick down your door at 3am and forcibly confine you to a cell with no due process, they could do the same to the CEO of Uber to get your information in the first place. Having a layer of indirection in the form of a private company is little-to-no protection against a despotic regime. It only works if the government is still following the rule of law themselves.
    - thumb 7y ago
      the point is: - the government would be knocking down the door of a CEO who may not necessarily have the type of data they're looking for. - the government would have to go through a ton of effort to get anything they needed, rather than having it all up front to begin with. - no data should be given up freely without direct, fair consent (no matter who demands it)
    - Nasrudith 7y ago
      It makes perfect sense in a cynical way - the government would face way more backlash if they went after the CEO of Uber as opposed to a probable nobody like you in the sense that "you are unlikely to cause major consequences which threaten their aparatus of power". If they made a habit of doing that without a serious trail of justification under the law capital flight would be historic - damaging their income and GDP/the source of economic power, and damaging stability. It isn't even anything overtly sinister - just sensing that given the peril it is time to get the hell out of there. And that is without lobbying and soft power aren't available.
- dpratt 7y ago
  Also, the above article itself shows some empirical data that Uber will not, in fact, just hand over my data when asked. Note that I don’t think they do this out of the goodness of the hearts or altruism, but rather that they’ve done the calculus and determined that giving this data to the government would cost them enough ill will and loss of revenue to make it not worthwhile. Uber, unlike a government, has to answer to the market, and thus its every consumer’s duty to punish those who would sell our liberties.
  - zaroth 7y ago
    > Also, the above article itself shows some empirical data that Uber will not, in fact, just hand over my data when asked. And even when they are threatened with (and now ultimately face) a shutdown that will cost them downtime in presumably a very profitable market.
  - jquery 7y ago
    This should be the top comment. Well said.
  - AlexandrB 7y ago
    That's because the US government is still fundamentally democratic and follows the rule of law. Such a government might also treat your data with some due process. A government that's willing to use force to arbitrarily enforce its will is also one that would do the same to Uber and its executives. In that environment Uber would not resist.
    - stale2002 7y ago
      But right now, Uber is resisting, right? And at the same time, the government is doing bad things with your data.

by dpratt 7y ago

AlexandrB 7y ago

> Uber doesn’t have a gigantic State apparatus with both a vested interest in and the ability to use violence to enforce it’s will on me. Uber falls under the jurisdiction of a gigantic State apparatus with both a vested interest in and the ability to use violence to enforce it’s will on you. Being a good corporate citizen, Uber would dutifully hand over your data to said government when asked. This is a distinction without a difference.

dpratt 7y ago
Explain how it is legal for Uber to send a team of armed men to kick down my door at 3am and forcibly confine me to a cell.
- ForHackernews 7y ago
  Before you worry about the legality of Uber's Maximum Customer Satisfaction Response Team, you'll have to provide evidence that something being against the law has ever stopped Uber from attempting it.
- AlexandrB 7y ago
  This weird paranoia about the government acting with no consequence seems to never extend to 2nd or 3rd layer thinking. If the government could send a team of armed me to kick down your door at 3am and forcibly confine you to a cell with no due process, they could do the same to the CEO of Uber to get your information in the first place. Having a layer of indirection in the form of a private company is little-to-no protection against a despotic regime. It only works if the government is still following the rule of law themselves.
  - thumb 7y ago
    the point is: - the government would be knocking down the door of a CEO who may not necessarily have the type of data they're looking for. - the government would have to go through a ton of effort to get anything they needed, rather than having it all up front to begin with. - no data should be given up freely without direct, fair consent (no matter who demands it)
  - Nasrudith 7y ago
    It makes perfect sense in a cynical way - the government would face way more backlash if they went after the CEO of Uber as opposed to a probable nobody like you in the sense that "you are unlikely to cause major consequences which threaten their aparatus of power". If they made a habit of doing that without a serious trail of justification under the law capital flight would be historic - damaging their income and GDP/the source of economic power, and damaging stability. It isn't even anything overtly sinister - just sensing that given the peril it is time to get the hell out of there. And that is without lobbying and soft power aren't available.
dpratt 7y ago
Also, the above article itself shows some empirical data that Uber will not, in fact, just hand over my data when asked. Note that I don’t think they do this out of the goodness of the hearts or altruism, but rather that they’ve done the calculus and determined that giving this data to the government would cost them enough ill will and loss of revenue to make it not worthwhile. Uber, unlike a government, has to answer to the market, and thus its every consumer’s duty to punish those who would sell our liberties.
- zaroth 7y ago
  > Also, the above article itself shows some empirical data that Uber will not, in fact, just hand over my data when asked. And even when they are threatened with (and now ultimately face) a shutdown that will cost them downtime in presumably a very profitable market.
- jquery 7y ago
  This should be the top comment. Well said.
- AlexandrB 7y ago
  That's because the US government is still fundamentally democratic and follows the rule of law. Such a government might also treat your data with some due process. A government that's willing to use force to arbitrarily enforce its will is also one that would do the same to Uber and its executives. In that environment Uber would not resist.
  - stale2002 7y ago
    But right now, Uber is resisting, right? And at the same time, the government is doing bad things with your data.