Uber Limits 'God View' To Improve Rider Privacy 76
mpicpp sends this report from CNN:
Uber has rolled back employee access to its "God view" mode, which allows the company to track riders' locations and other data. The ride service company was faced with questions about its privacy policies from U.S. Senator Al Franken, following a series of recent privacy debacles. Uber's updated policy is detailed in its response to the senator's questions. Franken sent Uber a letter (PDF, Uber's response) in November after news reports made two things clear: The ride service company collects lots of data on customers — and some executives don't exercise that power responsibly. In one case, an Uber employee using "God View" easily tracked a reporter's movements on her way to a meeting.
Great job, guys (Score:4, Insightful)
It's great to know that a company that has threatened reporters, acted flippant about sexual assault, and charged excessive fees to people trying to leave the scene of a hostake crisis after public transit was shut down, had to be cajoled into maybe not letting every weenie stalk its users. No, stalking is just for the upper management that's been shown to be aggressive, condescending, and seemingly have something of a god-complex.
If you have to use a ridesharing app, please, at least use anything other than Uber.
No privacy regardless (Score:3, Insightful)
You should have no expectation of privacy using any App, nor the Internet in general. Period. This is a beautiful rule as there are indeed a very few exceptions offered which prove the rule.
Title Correction (Score:5, Insightful)
The title of the article, (and therefore the summary), should have said "Uber Claims To Have Limited 'God View' To Improve Rider Privacy". After all, does anybody other than gullible people and fanbois really take them at their word?
You still can't change user behavior (Score:5, Insightful)
One of the things that is fueling the insane hype behind the Web 2.0/mobile/social/app/whatever bubble is the fact that any group of startup kids can use tools to build an app. Just like any group of startup kids could build a website capable of processing payments in 1997, add in a shaky business model and all of a sudden, "this time it's different." Apple, Google and other smartphone OS vendors have rolled out some really cool stuff and basically given everyone a tracking device with all sorts of sensors attached to a full-powered computer the size of a phone. The problem is this -- the nature of the user interface hides the fact from ordinary users that all of their location and other data is being shared with the app developers. Android does a little better with privacy controls, but basically all this stuff is hidden from the user.
Ordinary users, i.e. non-techies, see the shiny app interface and (understandably so) don't see that the "free" services the app provides are paid for either through marketing/advertising (eyeballs in dotcom bubble 1.0 speak) or selling your data to a third party. And even if they knew about it, most people would want the benefit of hailing a cab on demand more than their privacy. It would take some serious user education, and a few very high-profile leaks of customer data to change behavior, and I don't think it would even be possible if that happened. People like their free apps. I would pay Google for a subscription to their search engine if I could be assured my information wasn't being harvested, but I know no one else would want this.
On the positive side, sitting on the sidelines and watching from my comfy seat, it looks like Bubble 2.0 is starting to reach the top. We're already seeing the insane valuations and VC investments, have had a couple high-profile revenue-free IPOs like Twitter, and the next phase is coming. Soon as interest rates start going up and the stock and VC bubble money stops flowing, things will calm down again. When you start hearing startup-speak more and more in the financial press, it's time to sell and wait for things to collapse again. It really is the dotcom bubble all over again, but this time people are carrying their web browsers in their pockets and companies have direct access to their location and habits.
Re:Great job, guys (Score:4, Insightful)
Okay, the government decides to shut down the government subsidized/run public transit (i.e., reneges on their implied commitment to their customers) and you blame a company that tries to provide at least some people a substitute service? How do you suppose Uber might increase supply of drivers to meet demand? Hmm..., maybe they could offer drivers more money to show up and offer rides? How might they fund that effort? Hmm..., how about by charging the consumer more?
This is a case, fairly rare actually, where supply can actually be increased to some degree almost instantaneously - but there has to be a motivation to the supplier to do so. If an Uber driver is at home gardening because they decided that the pay for rides wasn't high enough to motivate her to offer rides instead of garden at that moment, the most efficient means to get her to change her mind and thereby increase demand is to offer her more money. This is no different than how employers staff their positions -- if they have a need that they can't fill, they increase the pay until a qualified person is motivated to take the position.
From what little I know, Uber does seem like a pretty crappy company but I don't see how them utilizing well understood market forces to match supply and demand is a bad thing.
Ah, all better! (Score:4, Insightful)
That's the unpleasant flip side to a story like this. Yes, as it happens, Uber has some of the most punchable management shitweasels one could ask for. The very idea of one of them using 'god view' on you makes you want to take a hot shower and scrub yourself until the uncleanness is gone. However, while opportunistic assholerly is repulsive, it is also unsystematic. Once they grow up a bit, and put those data into the hands of solid, value-rational, systematic, people who aim to squeeze every drop of value out of it, then you are really screwed.
Re:Decentralization (Score:2, Insightful)
liability is an issue.
Do you want your kid killed by a ride share driver and then to be told that the insurance is not covering it and you are on your own?
When taxis insurance will cover the same thing?