Uber failed to disclose major breach back in 2016, until now.

[BlueChinchillaEatingDorito]

Oh dear lord, this just adds onto the list of problems I have with Uber. Not to say that other companies haven't been guilty of this, but it's a big blow because Governments all over the world were already hesitant with allowing Uber to operate in their territories. 

 

But what is even more sinister is that allegedly the hackers were paid to keep quiet about the whole thing.

Quote

keeping the hack under wraps, which included a $100,000 payment to the attackers.

 

The data included:

Quote

...names, email addresses and phone numbers of 50 million Uber riders around the world

and allegedly driver license numbers of their drivers as well. 

 

Source: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-21/uber-concealed-cyberattack-that-exposed-57-million-people-s-data

 

What do you guys think about this? I know it's another breach of a major corporation. Has this changed your stance in allowing Uber to operate in your territory? 

 

I've personally never trusted Uber as their original name was "Uber Cab" before they wanted to go for the so trendy "ride sharing" image. So naturally my answer was "no" when the new BC Government pledged to bring Uber over here. 

Edited December 1, 2017 by iamdarkyoshi
Fixed quotes for night theme users

[TheCherryKing]

I have always had and always will prefer the local cabs. 

[aisle9]

So in case you're paying attention at home, a company that already:

• Mistreats its workers
• Underpays its workers
• Doesn't offer insurance to what is surely a full-time staff
• Steals trade secrets
• Operates without proper permits
• Doesn't adequately vet its employees and
• Engages in predatory pricing

is now accused of paying off hackers not to publicly state that they had compromised customer information.

 

How are these guys in business again? Oh, right, I need a ride to the airport and Ubers smell better than taxis, that's how.

[BlueChinchillaEatingDorito]

1 minute ago, aisle9 said:

So in case you're paying attention at home, a company that already:

• Mistreats its workers
• Underpays its workers
• Doesn't offer insurance to what is surely a full-time staff
• Steals trade secrets
• Operates without proper permits
• Doesn't adequately vet its employees and
• Engages in predatory pricing

is now accused of paying off hackers not to publicly state that they had compromised customer information.

 

How are these guys in business again? Oh, right, I need a ride to the airport and Ubers smell better than taxis, that's how.

"Because people want more transportation choices"

[Tech_Dreamer]

hmm, they made a deliberate effort to stop the leaks by paying off the hacker, that's a bold move . it's a bit confusing but they protected the data from spilling out more rather than harbor on to their profits & blame the hackers later when the breach eventually does happen.

[mr moose]

You can add being taken to court under a major class action lawsuit by cab drivers in Australia to the list of reasons Ubber need to die in a hole.

[Matu20]

Once praised, now frowned upon. Guess things taking it's natural course.

[Commodus]

Keep in mind, folks, that this happened under Kalanick, not the new CEO (Dara Khosrowshahi).  The reason you're hearing about this is because the new chief found out and realized he needed to get things fixed ASAP.  I suspect Khosrowshahi just spends his days banging his head against his desk as he finds out about yet another bad thing the former management did.

[79wjd]

8 hours ago, mr moose said:

 Ubber need to die in a hole.

Not until the shit taxi unions are destroyed please.

 

On topic, it's reasons like this that it would be nice if companies didn't want every piece of personal information, and why permanent SSNs need to disappear, and why companies need to actually give a shit about security.

[mr moose]

5 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

Not until the shit taxi unions are destroyed please.

 

On topic, it's reasons like this that it would be nice if companies didn't want every piece of personal information, and why permanent SSNs need to disappear, and why companies need to actually give a shit about security.

 The taxi unions in Aus. aren't that bad.  In fact they are pretty timid.  If they were as bad as the CFMEU (construction and mining) uber would have have a pair of concrete boots and first hand view of the bottom of the ocean.

 

 

 

 

[SpaceGhostC2C]

19 hours ago, BlueChinchillaEatingDorito said:

I've personally never trusted Uber as their original name was "Uber Cab" before they wanted to go for the so trendy "ride sharing" image.

 

I have a fantastic idea: labor sharing.

You come do some work at my plant in your spare time, or just wait around for some work to appear (but you must show up and be available a minimum of hours per month). I won't actually hire you, just make you sign some TOS, and neither you nor me will report a dime to tax authorities, social security, etc. Think of it as role-playing an illegal immigrant for a few hours a week. Just for fun, you know. And a few extra pennies (*).

 

(*) Until regular factories go out of business. Eventually I'll have to be financially sustainable, you know, so it's either you or the customers. 

[aisle9]

20 hours ago, BlueChinchillaEatingDorito said:

"Because people want more transportation choices"

These assholes are going to get Uber, Lyft and any future companies along those lines regulated out of existence, and I'm going to be stuck paying three times as much for a 4 AM ride to the airport in a car that smells like curry and vomit with a cabby who won't shut up about his grandmother in (pick a country, any country).

 

Don't screw this up for the rest of us, Uber.

[79wjd]

2 hours ago, mr moose said:

 The taxi unions in Aus. aren't that bad.  In fact they are pretty timid.  If they were as bad as the CFMEU (construction and mining) uber would have have a pair of concrete boots and first hand view of the bottom of the ocean.

 

 

 

 

The taxi unions are actually ridiculous by me in NYC (surprise surprise).

[ScratchCat]

Uber's and EA's PR departments must be hell right now.

Why do people get in a strangers car who may not be sane, is underpaid and works for a company who's record is darker than Vantablack^TM? Parents give children this advice for a reason.

[aisle9]

8 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

The taxi unions are actually ridiculous by me in NYC (surprise surprise).

Would you believe me if I told you that New York cabbies are among the very best I've ridden with? As long as you're careful not to get into a shady-ass gypsy cab (which, in retrospect, is basically what Uber is), the drivers tend to be pretty damn good. 

[ItsMitch]

Oh look, another Kalanick fuck up, what a surprise, feel bad for Khosrowshahi as he has to deal with what Kalanick fucked up. 

[Drak3]

3 hours ago, ScratchCat said:

Uber's and EA's PR departments must be hell right now.

Assuming that they still have them.

[Lach1230]

6 hours ago, mr moose said:

 The taxi unions in Aus. aren't that bad.  In fact they are pretty timid.  If they were as bad as the CFMEU (construction and mining) uber would have have a pair of concrete boots and first hand view of the bottom of the ocean.

 

 

 

 

Don't know what part of Aus you live in, it's bloody horrific in QLD.

Average ride from the city 20~ mins out is around $50-$60, Along with Cabbies bashing and raping people.

Average ride from the city in a Uber for the same distance, $25-$40 with surging.

 

Have never put my wife in a cab, and never will. Not until the "Vetting" and "Security" of the cabs (That is the reason that they cost so much) is actually improved and/or is actually  done. I've ridden in multiple cabs up here where the driver is not the driver, and is in-fact his housemate, or relative.

[79wjd]

15 hours ago, aisle9 said:

Would you believe me if I told you that New York cabbies are among the very best I've ridden with? As long as you're careful not to get into a shady-ass gypsy cab (which, in retrospect, is basically what Uber is), the drivers tend to be pretty damn good. 

NY taxis are good, but also stupidly expensive. 

[mr moose]

On 11/23/2017 at 1:33 PM, Lach1230 said:

Don't know what part of Aus you live in, it's bloody horrific in QLD.

Average ride from the city 20~ mins out is around $50-$60, Along with Cabbies bashing and raping people.

Average ride from the city in a Uber for the same distance, $25-$40 with surging.

 

Have never put my wife in a cab, and never will. Not until the "Vetting" and "Security" of the cabs (That is the reason that they cost so much) is actually improved and/or is actually  done. I've ridden in multiple cabs up here where the driver is not the driver, and is in-fact his housemate, or relative.

whats any of that (bashing and raping) got to do with the unions?  unions are to protect workers rights not to enforce the law on rogue operators.  Although I would argue that if the taxi union had any backbone they might just tackle that behavior.

 

Also those prices sound about normal.  I wouldn't start a job for less than that either.  Remember that $50-60 dollars has to pay taxi licenses, tax, work cover, sick leave, long service leave and annual leave.  While Uber only pay tax (if they even do that).

 

 

[Lach1230]

On 26/11/2017 at 7:25 PM, mr moose said:

whats any of that (bashing and raping) got to do with the unions?  unions are to protect workers rights not to enforce the law on rogue operators.  Although I would argue that if the taxi union had any backbone they might just tackle that behavior.

 

Also those prices sound about normal.  I wouldn't start a job for less than that either.  Remember that $50-60 dollars has to pay taxi licenses, tax, work cover, sick leave, long service leave and annual leave.  While Uber only pay tax (if they even do that).

 

 

I would honestly be surprised if any taxi driver is hired on a full time basis granting them sick leave pay.

Taxi licences that supposedly cover what I said about vetting and security don't really do the job. (Even though I can't provide you with a better solution)

Work cover is a government body that can be claimed regardless of employer, and they will go after employer for compensation if they aren't compliant.

Service leave, long and annual, once again, I would be surprised if taxi drivers get this as they are all most likely hired on a casual contract. So none of this is accrued.

 

So the only thing that $50-60 is paying for is the Taxi licence, and the fair.

As for the part about bashing and raping, these are core things that are preached as "This is what taxi licences help prevent".

There was an entire campaign run saying something like "If the number plate doesn't have a T it's not safe to get in"

So, as I said earlier these licences that are supposed to provide all of the safety and vetting, and regular police background checks etc, doesn't help if the person behind the wheel isn't the person on the licence.

[mr moose]

33 minutes ago, Lach1230 said:

I would honestly be surprised if any taxi driver is hired on a full time basis granting them sick leave pay.

Taxi licences that supposedly cover what I said about vetting and security don't really do the job. (Even though I can't provide you with a better solution)

Work cover is a government body that can be claimed regardless of employer, and they will go after employer for compensation if they aren't compliant.

Service leave, long and annual, once again, I would be surprised if taxi drivers get this as they are all most likely hired on a casual contract. So none of this is accrued.

 

So the only thing that $50-60 is paying for is the Taxi licence, and the fair.

As for the part about bashing and raping, these are core things that are preached as "This is what taxi licences help prevent".

There was an entire campaign run saying something like "If the number plate doesn't have a T it's not safe to get in"

So, as I said earlier these licences that are supposed to provide all of the safety and vetting, and regular police background checks etc, doesn't help if the person behind the wheel isn't the person on the licence.

 

They have to pay their own sick leave, pay their own workcover (yes it's government but it does not apply to self employed people unless they pay the fees), pay their own super/long service, insurance,  etc.  That is why they charge what they do, if they were full time employed by a taxi company the fees would still be the same because that $50-60 has to cover all that.  

 

with regard to background checks, that's a pretty big claim that the taxi industry allows people to use someone else's license.  Have you got some evidence this happens?

[Lach1230]

On 29/11/2017 at 4:23 PM, mr moose said:

 

They have to pay their own sick leave, pay their own workcover (yes it's government but it does not apply to self employed people unless they pay the fees), pay their own super/long service, insurance,  etc.  That is why they charge what they do, if they were full time employed by a taxi company the fees would still be the same because that $50-60 has to cover all that.  

 

with regard to background checks, that's a pretty big claim that the taxi industry allows people to use someone else's license.  Have you got some evidence this happens?

No, But I have personally been in multiple taxis where the driver listed on the app is not the driver.

I've even asked one if it was his cab, his response was "No it's my brother's he just wanted the night off so I'm driving for him."

 

The taxi companies do not police this well, the best you can do is to report it, but hey then it's up to the cab company to do something about it.

I mean, QLD police even have a division that pulls taxis over, takes a photo of them, their licence, and their cab licence and cross references it with the cab companies because it's so rampant.

 

The taxi drivers also don't determine what to charge at all so I don't know where you get the part about managing charges to pay their own sick leave etc from, that's all determined by the cab company. As for sick leave, I see that you don't know how Casual + Commission works.

To make it short, they don't get any paid sick leave period. They get an hourly rate, plus commission per ride. They get casual loading on their hourly rate, that make up for them not accruing Sick, Annual or long service leave.

Net. This ends up being cheaper for companies.

 

If anything, due to the fact that none of what you mention would be calculated into casual + commission, if anything when they were full time employees the fees would increase from what they are now.

[mr moose]

9 minutes ago, Lach1230 said:

No, But I have personally been in multiple taxis where the driver listed on the app is not the driver.

I've even asked one if it was his cab, his response was "No it's my brother's he just wanted the night off so I'm driving for him."

 

The taxi companies do not police this well, the best you can do is to report it, but hey then it's up to the cab company to do something about it.

I mean, QLD police even have a division that pulls taxis over, takes a photo of them, their licence, and their cab licence and cross references it with the cab companies because it's so rampant.

 

The taxi drivers also don't determine what to charge at all so I don't know where you get the part about managing charges to pay their own sick leave etc from, that's all determined by the cab company. As for sick leave, I see that you don't know how Casual + Commission works.

To make it short, they don't get any paid sick leave period. They get an hourly rate, plus commission per ride. They get casual loading on their hourly rate, that make up for them not accruing Sick, Annual or long service leave.

Net. This ends up being cheaper for companies.

 

If anything, due to the fact that none of what you mention would be calculated into casual + commission, if anything when they were full time employees the fees would increase from what they are now.

 

What?  So your saying they don't get sick leave, but they get a loading to make up for it?  That's the same thing.  The amount charged has to cover all that, it doesn't matter whether it is the cab company that decides the end value or the driver,  the amount still has to cover all of the aforementioned entitlements regardless of the pay arrangements.

 

If uber are charging 1/3rd what the cabs do you can bet your arse those drivers aren't earning enough to cover periods of sickness, annual leave or put anything aside for super.

 

Having worked casual, full time, part time and self employed for the better part of 27 years I am well versed in pay arrangements and how much the consumer needs to be charged in order to cover all the costs.

[Lach1230]

4 minutes ago, mr moose said:

 

What?  So your saying they don't get sick leave, but they get a loading to make up for it?  That's the same thing.  The amount charged has to cover all that, it doesn't matter whether it is the cab company that decides the end value or the driver,  the amount still has to cover all of the aforementioned entitlements regardless of the pay arrangements.

 

If uber are charging 1/3rd what the cabs do you can bet your arse those drivers aren't earning enough to cover periods of sickness, annual leave or put anything aside for super.

 

Having worked casual, full time, part time and self employed for the better part of 27 years I am well versed in pay arrangements and how much the consumer needs to be charged in order to cover all the costs.

Firstly, the leave loading is if they are applicable, depending on the award they are paid under, they may not even get the loading.

If they do, it's calculated based of hours worked. I'll see if I can find it but from what I've heard this is only calculated when a driver is actually 'on a job' rather than just clocked on and available.

 

Eg. Working at a fast food restaurant if you do under X hours per week as a casual, you are not entitled to leave loading.

Meaning that you will not get any pay to make up for annual or sick leave.