4 ms·

Hiring smart people is now considered a 'tool' move?

• ceejayoz 11y ago
  In case you're genuinely unaware of the various criticisms of Uber: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uber_%28company%29#Criticism_and_controversies http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uber_%28company%29#Criticism_an...
• toomuchtodo 11y ago
  No, I'm referring to the other issues in the wikipedia page posted by ceejayoz. Two examples: When I see news about Tesla, I have a positive reaction. They constantly release new technologies, open sourced their patents, and so on. When I see a news piece about Uber, I think, "What'd they fuck up this time?". News pieces about how Uber was attempting to encrypt/destroy data remotely in their Canadian office while a law enforcement raid was in progress......does not help their case.
  • res0nat0r 11y ago
    Luckily in this case all of that has nothing to do with hiring smart people to try and improve their product.
    • deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
• SilasX 11y ago
  I expressed similar confusion in the last discussion of this, and a poster tried to make the case that Uber could have done this in a more responsible way, that preserved the private benefit but didn't destroy institutional seed corn in the process. I don't endorse it, but it's the best case I've seen against this move. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9606773 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9606773 However, other comments suggest that the lab wasn't true academia anyway, but an applications-only wing that is non-profit in name only.