[kenpomeroy]

I struggle to see how anything you described could be categorized as "Orwellian"... Why are we concerned about "problem users" being left with no options? Just act like a normal human and you won't be a problem user... What is "Orwellian" about free markets and voluntary exchange?

[ncallaway]

The beautiful thing about this comment is that the sentence "Just act like a normal human and you won't be a problem user." would have fit _perfectly_ in 1984.

Just accept 2+2=5 and you won't have any issues!

[kenpomeroy]

If the government were mandating people behave a certain way, that would be an entirely different discussion. We're talking about a service that people can choose to use or not use. If they want to use it, they have to comply with the standards set by the service provider...

[throwanem]

"Yeah, I mean jeez, what is it with people who can't, like, walk right and stuff? What's even their whole deal? They should just act normal and then it wouldn't be a problem any more!"

I'm not going to make any comparisons to novels or anything. I'm just going to tell you you're acting like an asshole, and you should think about not doing that.

[mrob]

It's "Orwellian" because people are being judged "problem users" without due process. There's no jury of peers, no possibility of appeal, just an opaque judgment from a private company concerned only with their own profit. If a company becomes a de facto monopoly then they are de facto part of the government, and should be held to government standards.

[wrs]

In the US, at least, they don’t have to be a monopoly to be held to non-discrimination standards. And unless there’s a huge investment in “Uber due process”, this is one-click cloud-powered discrimination.

[kenpomeroy]

They quite literally are being judged by a jury of their peers... that is kind of my whole point.

[benj111]

I would bet skin colour and gender show up in these scores, as would many disabilities.

"problem users" doesn't necessarily mean what you think it means.