I really hope that Uber's shenanigans get studied in ethics classes in Computer Science and other technology degrees. When I was doing my CS degree, we had a mandatory ethics class (which I hated at the time but in hindsight think is a good thing). Ethical implications were something I hadn't previously thought of much, but in the field I've encountered them many times.<p>Based on the news that has been coming out from Uber, I think it's time for our industry to re-focus on the ethics of what we do. Being technologically cool, doesn't make something good.
I strongly prefer lyft's side, haven't used uber in years and the last year I drove for ridesharing I exclusively drove for lyft and not uber, but I really don't have a problem with this. OF COURSE you should collect intelligence on your competitor's activities - if they expose information publically (e.g. showing the cars on the app / API) and cross-correlating with the uber drivers that still are logged on - what is the objection to this?<p>Mind you, some of the other things uber has done, like hail a lyft and repeatedly cancel, are totally not ok.
Trying to think through how Hell must have worked, Uber must have decoded Lyft's encrypted Rest APIs and were able to hit an endpoint that returned the 8 nearest available rides given a user and geolocation. Given a large metro area such as LA, you would probably need to make hundreds of requests with fake geolocations to be able to map out the whole area. You would probably only need to do it maybe every 5-10 minutes to get decent resolution for a semi-live map. Depending on Lyft's rate limiting you might get by with in the order of dozens of fake accounts. Given Lyft's scale this would probably be small undetectable noise in their analytics and wouldn't really degrade their systems. I would say it's only semi-shady, probably doesn't rise to the level of civil or criminal lawsuits.
It's only because Uber's view of its own drivers is known as heaven/god view.<p>edit: discussed in article.<p>Call me a pessimist, but I am betting that, despite the long and rocky road ahead, Uber is eventually going to succeed. And we're going to see the emergence of a new corporate template.
I don't see how this is nefarious, Uber is scraping data that Lyft is sharing publicly. And based on Lyft's response, my hunch is that they do the same thing.<p>If anything, this story distracts us from legit nasty business practices - like repeatedly cancelling on Lyft drivers to waste their time and lower their earnings.
Interesting how they didn't punish drivers who also drove for Lyft, they actually rewarded drivers who also drove for Lyft with better Uber offers.
>If there were several Uber drivers near an Uber rider but one of those drivers was also frequently available on the Lyft network, as seen by the Hell program, Uber’s ride-dispatch team was supposed to “tip” that ride request to the driver who was “dual apping,” or typically looking for riders through both the Lyft and Uber apps, sometimes by using two different smartphones at the same time. The person involved in the program called it “privileged dispatch” and said Uber aimed to use that to squeeze Lyft’s supply of drivers.
[from the original article on The Information]<p>I think this should be the most controversial part of the program. Essentially, Uber favored its drivers who used both Uber and Lyft at the expense of its drivers who were strictly loyal to Uber.
What is wrong with Uber's management? I don't think I've ever read anything positive about the company.<p>From their numerous gender bias and sexual harassment claims, to their CEO acting like a bratty spoiled 15yr old and bitching out a driver, to trying to skirt public safety laws by refusing to register their self-driving cars after being catered and begged to do so by government regulators simply because they don't give a fuck, to this whole Waymo lawsuit, to this. I think this shitty company needs a complete change of upper management.
I drove for both Lyft and Uber last year, and I could swear that Uber was tracking Lyft. I'd get a call for an Uber and while fumbling around with the phone getting to the Lyft app to drop driver mode, I'd get a Lyft call in. Totally anecdotal, but it happened enough that I noticed. Eventually I quit trying to double dip, it was just too stressful. I'd make a call on which to use based on the incentives being offered, basically, or if things were slow on one I'd switch to the other.
I love how "There has been some recent tension between her and Kalanick, with some investors blaming bad press for Uber’s woes (wrong!), although sources said that was expected given all the controversies at the company of late." becomes "Uber’s head of communications Rachel Whetstone recently quit, reportedly because of conflicts with Kalanick."
<i>Lyft said “We are in a competitive industry. However, if true, these allegations are very concerning.”</i><p>Notice the careful non-statement by Lyft. It's hard to believe Lyft isn't doing exactly the same thing.<p>It's not questionable behavior to track what your competitor is doing. That's the first step toward beating them. And yes, Uber is trying to beat Lyft, just like Lyft is trying to beat Uber. That happy balance is a good thing for consumers.<p>It's pretty strange that I have to second-guess whether to post this comment since it could be interpreted as a defense of Uber. But the PR spin is getting to be a feeding frenzy.<p>Is <i>all</i> tracking now unethical? Under what circumstances should you be allowed to track other people? Google knows more about you than your significant other. Should they be allowed to do this? Is this ethically questionable? What is the categorical difference between Google and Uber? These are questions which have no clear and easy answer, but it's painted as if it's so clear-cut.
> <i>[Uber] used software to trick Lyft’s system into thinking those riders were in certain locations</i><p>Could this be a CFAA violation? Are there any prosecutorial jurisdictions with lots of Lyfts and few or no Uber?
I always wondered why Uber showed fake cars on their map. I remember them citing "technical" issues which seemed suspicious given that it's not a hard problem, and Lyft actually shows car locations. I wouldn't be surprised if the fake cars came about as a result of the Hell program when they realized car locations could be used against them.
Please note that the whole "illegal access to a computer system" business is what Aaron Scwartz was being prosecuted for. I don't think we want to promote a restrictive idea about what constitutes authorised use of a system, just so we can have a go at an unpopular taxi service.
Is Uber the only tech company using unethical and immoral practices to take out the competition? or the only one to be caught?<p>(Not asking as a defense for them, I'm just curious, and cynical, I believe they all do this, but thats an ignorant belief as I dont know)
>Hell originated after Uber created fake rider accounts on Lyft and used software to trick Lyft’s system into thinking those riders were in certain locations. This allowed Uber to see the eight closest available Lyft drivers to each fake rider.<p>This is not ethical.
It's not.
I would really like to know what is unethical (or even illegal) about this (just so I can understand this correctly).<p>Uber<p>* created multiple fake accounts on lyft to know about it's drivers<p>* figured out that it's drivers were assigned numerical ids<p>* used said ids, to track lyft drivers.<p>imho, this is just figuring out your competition (say by signing up to the service) and then using this knowledge to improve your service (by incising drivers on both platforms to ditch one).<p>This is one of those "do things that don't scale" mean (or my interpretation of it). I say this because, one multi-billion $ "startup" is doing this to another multi-billion $ "startup".<p>Also, I'm sure this would never be an issue if Uber was not in the press for other crappy stuff they did.
Are user location credentials often accidentally exposed in other app's APIs? This isn't something I have much knowledge in and am just wondering how often this is a security issue.
If I were Lyft, I might try to detect what traffic is coming from suspect clients and present an inaccurate view to them to maximize inefficient spending on Uber's part. This seems like it should be easy to do without harming someone in case you inaccurately label someone as illegitimate.