Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by pacificmint 139 days ago
I mean, it’s not quite that simple, is it? Did they do everything they could to make drivers and passengers safe? Or did they put profits over people’s safety?

From the article:

> internal company documents […] showing that Uber had flagged her ride as a higher risk for a serious safety incident moments before she was picked up. Uber never warned her […]

Uber actually had a whole project that produced systems that determine the risk of incidents happening. Could they make rides safer but chose not to? That’s at the core of these lawsuits.
3 comments
satellite2 139 days ago
Interesting. When it's the state I think the overwhelming opinion is that predictive policing is dangerous but when it's a private company we actually want it to enforce it?
link
itsdesmond 139 days ago
They could not be held accountable to warn her if they had not done the analysis. They did. Their organizational conclusion was that it was potentially an unsafe trip. Shit, they could have just cancelled the ride dynamically and re-assigned her. Why wouldn’t they do that? It’d probably be more expensive. Maybe they’d get more cancelled rides. Maybe this woman wouldn’t have been raped by an agent of Uber selected for and sent to her by them.
link
satellite2 139 days ago
Wouldn't they then expose themselves to discrimination and loss of revenue lawsuits from targeted drivers?
link
itsdesmond 139 days ago
It depends. Are the inputs to the algorithm themselves discriminatory? If so, then yes that would be appropriate. But that is a different conversation. They determined the passenger may be unsafe and did nothing.

Mind you, these companies work very hard for us to not know how they match A to B, usually so we don’t notice things like their disregard for safety.

link
kyleee 138 days ago
The inputs wouldn’t even matter; the inputs could even be above reproach but if there were disparate impacts in terms of outcomes, the case for liability could be made.
link
itsdesmond 138 days ago
Maybe, but they’re clearly liable for not using the information.
link
kylehotchkiss 139 days ago
Oof, this sounds like a case where executives/management who knew about this tool and didn't act upon it should be charged with accessory-to-crime. There has got to be a moral imperative to act upon tools like this.
link
nilslindemann 139 days ago
If Uber knew but did not warn her, then it's certainly correct that they were convicted.
link