florean

6 ms·

1.
by florean 2y ago
Why would you think this stuff wasn't in writing? Do you think the investigation OAI did into the board's actions was just relayed orally?[1] That the board's discussions where all done in conference calls and not in e-mail
2.
by florean 9y ago
Yes, it really went that deep. But only if you pinky swore to only use that data to improve your app and then delete it! Facebook changed their API in 2014 and removed that ability, allowing companies to only see the profiles of friends t
3.
by florean 9y ago
Not really. The EPA has done this for decades, specifically for Superfund sites. When you can, it's more efficient to have bad actors pay for their bad acts rather than burdening an industry as a whole.
4.
by florean 9y ago
I was joking about Alsup allowing Uber's pretrial malfeasance to be disclosed to the jury. But the quotes in this Ars Technica article[0] make me wonder. "My normal inclination is, let’s decide the case on the merits but I’ve nev
5.
by florean 9y ago
Only in @kateconger's replies[0], but it appears Alsup is still deciding whether he'll allow the Jacobs letter to be admitted as evidence for the jury. Excluding a letter alleging Uber stole Waymo trade secrets would be a big blo
6.
by florean 9y ago
Oh, now we know how the USA got it: https://twitter.com/kateconger/status/935912822478794752 . Uber "voluntarily disclosed the Jacobs letter" because Jacobs threatened to involuntarily disclose it. Howe
7.
by florean 9y ago
I didn't say the tweet I referenced was one she was mistaken about. I said it had an interesting tidbit that I had not otherwise seen reported. For ones she got wrong, see https://twitter.com/CSaid/status/93
8.
by florean 9y ago
Unfortunately, @CSaid mistakenly used Waymo instead of Uber in a few places, but she did have an interesting tidbit I haven't seen in any of the subsequent articles[0]: the former employee of Uber claimed that he was reprimanded in a p
9.
by florean 9y ago
Judge Alsup got the letter because the US Attorney's office passed it along to him. I haven't seen anything about how the US Attorney obtained it, but presumably criminal prosecution and subpoenas provide a greater disincentive t
10.
by florean 9y ago
Uber supporters often seem to think that the only alternative to an easy to use ride hailing app is driving drunk and killing someone. It would take some careful research to correlate Uber rides to drunk driving deaths and I have yet to se
11.
by florean 9y ago
Even worse: he interrupted her talking about research results and started with "Actually, what it shows..."
12.
by florean 9y ago
You are shielding The Intercept from criticism. The Intercept has not countered the DOJ testimony or any of the other reporting on this. The FBI has sworn that these things happened. So let us think through the counterfactual that you&#x
13.
by florean 9y ago
She didn't communicate with any reporters over Gmail. She e-mailed The Intercept asking for a podcast transcript months ago and again to confirm her account. In fact, she had no electronic correspondence of any kind regarding the lea
14.
by florean 9y ago
Why do they need parallel construction when The Intercept narrowed it to a single person (printed and lives in Augusta, GA)? I'm going to restrict my conversation on this topic to the reporting and sworn testimony.
15.
by florean 9y ago
How does the FBI know it was printed? Because the Intercept told them. It could have been screenshots from a phone. It could have been downloaded from some hack. The number of people that viewed a document is going to be a superset of th
16.
by florean 9y ago
They did not. They told a government contractor that the document had been printed and mailed from Augusta, GA, who then reported it to the government. That's what got her, microdots or not. You can read the search warrant at https:
17.
by florean 9y ago
> There's no evidence that it was The Intercept's actions that caused her to be found. There's plenty of evidence The Intercept's actions caused her to be found. It's documented in the FBI's affidavits for
18.
by florean 9y ago
We're talking about the FBI, not the NSA, and court documents. > Meanwhile the alleged leaker allegedly used her work computer to contact The Intercept. This really should be ignored. The FBI included it as probable cause for their
19.
by florean 9y ago
> the NSA simply looked up everyone who had accessed the document and inspected their workstations for clues. The FBI doesn't mention the watermark in their affidavits, but they do mention that The Intercept gave away that the docum
20.
by florean 9y ago
Important businesses are the ones that need restrictions the most. "Too big to fail" doesn't work, for society or consumers.
21.
by florean 9y ago
Because it violated their agreement with Apple and accessed private APIs, infringed on user privacy, and they geofenced the behavior to try to sneak it past app review. It's another example of Uber knowingly being evil.
22.
by florean 10y ago
> I'd be surprised if an insurance company would determine fault without a police report. You haven't had to deal with an insurance company. I've dealt with at least five claims personally. None had a police report. A co
23.
by florean 10y ago
You usually don't have to report accidents. See my comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13241292
24.
by florean 10y ago
> You're technically required to report accidents to the police when they happen, are you not? No, you are not. Unless there is an injury or death, you just exchange information and pay the other party or let insurance figure it