Waymo vs. Uber: unsealed court documents reveal damning evidence

"Yeah, uh huh, I shredded the 5 drives...after copying them to a new WD passport that I've yet to connect to a work computer."

Rather than the main road of remarking about how the bad optics and evidence continue to get worse, I will say that this also reaffirms my sense that Uber is just not that good at the sort of machiavellian maneuvering that the SV crowd lauds them for. Ethics aside, this makes them seem less than competent at their unethical behavior.

I read the report. It certainly demonstrates that Levandowski retained Google data (but we knew that already), that Levandowski recruited to form Otto before he left Google (but we knew that already), that Uber always planned to buy Otto, dating back to before Levandowski left Google (if we didn&#x27;t know that, we had pretty strong suspicions), and that Levandowski is kind of a scuzzball (but again, we knew that).<p>But it doesn&#x27;t appear to offer any good evidence that Google&#x27;s trade secrets made it to Uber. Which is what actual &quot;damning evidence&quot; would be.

My favorite part is Levandowski emptying his empty trash <i>during</i> the interview.<p>That said, apparently you do not need to know anything about file systems to pass a Google interview.

This is just a civil case, so we go by preponderance of the evidence right?<p>If Uber&#x2F;Otto are shown to have done incredibly weird&#x2F;questionable stuff but Google&#x2F;Waymo can’t show any of the information was used would Uber&#x2F;Otto still be liable for anything?

The people in question all lied so much that you can&#x27;t even put together a straight narrative... seems to be a moderately effective defense.

If this is a dup where&#x27;s the main thread?