Slashdot Mirror
Uber Will Add Panic Button and Location/Journey Sharing In India
mpicpp sends word about new Uber safety measures coming soon to India. "Late last year, Uber announced plans for tighter safety measures in India following the rape of a passenger using its service in December. Now it has confirmed that two major features — an in-app panic button and journey/location sharing — will roll out to users in India on February 11
The company went public with the launch date after Times Of India reported that the Mumbai transportation department was considering a ban on its service over its apparent approach to safety. Authorities are reportedly "not happy with Uber representatives' responses during various meetings held to consider measures for passengers' safety."
Uber cleared the air on its plans to settle "some misconceptions" around its safety policy — which already includes more stringent background checks and a dedicated emergency response team. That will be boosted when the in-app panic button, which alerts local police when triggered, and a 'safety net' feature, which goes beyond Uber's existing 'share my ETA' feature to let customers share details of their location and trip with up to five other people, go live in India next week."
The company went public with the launch date after Times Of India reported that the Mumbai transportation department was considering a ban on its service over its apparent approach to safety. Authorities are reportedly "not happy with Uber representatives' responses during various meetings held to consider measures for passengers' safety."
Uber cleared the air on its plans to settle "some misconceptions" around its safety policy — which already includes more stringent background checks and a dedicated emergency response team. That will be boosted when the in-app panic button, which alerts local police when triggered, and a 'safety net' feature, which goes beyond Uber's existing 'share my ETA' feature to let customers share details of their location and trip with up to five other people, go live in India next week."
Solution, ban police in India?
Yup, it's true.
They even have campaigns against public shitting.
The App allowed the woman to order a taxi service from a person who was not checked out properly and turned out to be a rapist. If there was no App, the woman would have called regular taxi service and would have received the service from a person who was not as likely to be a rapist because of the more strict background checks.
I guess the App is better than hitchhiking (which in my opinion is extremely dangerous both for the passenger (the driver can turn out to be a criminal) and the driver (the passenger could turn out to be a criminal). Which is why I will never stop for a hitchhiker and will never hitchhike (unless my life was in extreme danger anyway that getting in a car driven by a murderer would not be much worse than not getting in a car at all).
I believe rape is already banned. It doesn't seem to be working. Perhaps we need to police more easily policed things. And while banning Uber might be rather too extreme, this is about being proactive about preventing the crime, rather than some sort of moral judgement.
It's a little surprising that did not exist until now, but that's a great relief to someone getting into a vehicle with someone they do not know... too bad real taxis don't have that.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Forget the shitting & pissing. The worst part, imo, is the carcasses floating down the Ganges.
i'd fly there for just that reason
"Excuse me driver can you refrain from beating raping me for a moment while I reach for my phone, unlock it, navigate to the uber app, find the panic button and activate it?"
What are they doing for the drivers, who pick up a hundred times more random strangers? Like, isn't the driver supposed to be the most trustworthy person on each of these rides?
Wonder what the public key field is for?
can i shit in the temples if i dress up as the appropriate animal?
Don't be ridiculous.
There are two possible solutions:
- Censor any news regarding Uber rapes.
- Ban India.
any clowns floating down?
the woman would have called regular taxi service and would have received the service from a person who was not as likely to be a rapist because of the more strict background checks.
actually I'm pretty sure ubers rating system is more of a background check.. it's India we're talking about anyways and well.. the statistics for that stuff in India/Asia portray a pretty grimm picture.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
um... bollocks?
Just because someone doesn't have a criminal record, doesn't mean they're squeaky clean - it just means they haven't been caught yet.
Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
What a joke this all is. Let's just keep denying reality, that will fix the problem.
Ok, I'll bite.
I guess the App is better than hitchhiking (which in my opinion is extremely dangerous both for the passenger (the driver can turn out to be a criminal)
And do what? As a hitchhiker you're asking a random person for a lift, which is statistically very safe indeed. The probability that a randomly selected person stopping his/her car is not only a criminal but a criminal who would target you is very small indeed.
It's like asking someone to watch your laptop for a while in Starbucks while you go to the toilet. If you ask a random person, chances are you're ok. If someone offers to do it, be wary.
and the driver (the passenger could turn out to be a criminal).
If this were true, cab driver would be a seriously dangerous job. In most countries, it isn't. I concede that in countries where hitchhiking has become less common, there's probably some cause to exercise caution regarding whom you might pick up. Common sense goes a long way.
Please, enough of the fearmongering. The western world is a safe place. You'll be fine, and so will your kids.
You can't shut us down! The Internet is about the free exchange and sale of other people's ideas!
I rather doubt the regional cap services subject their drivers to more of a background check then what Uber did.
The whole thing reads like the pattern of harassment we've seen throughout the world where ever uber sets up shop. The cab companies complain... politicians wring their hands... lawsuits from nowhere start pouring in... and of course none of the same standards being demanded of Uber are ever applied to the existing players in the industry.
We're seeing this play out throughout europe and America. So I see this happening in India and I smell bullcrap.
I'm not saying the guy didn't rape the girl. And I'm not saying that is bad. What I am saying is that Uber shouldn't be expected to meet a standard that other people in the industry aren't likewise expected to meet.
Require the existing cab companies to do whatever it is you want and you'll find that suddenly the politicians pushing for all this stuff start moderating their position as the cab companies quietly tell them it isn't worth it.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
The comments in this thread are very weird. Especially the one above. Hitchhiking is very safe? Not in the US in my opinion. It used to be when I commonly did it in 1980 or so. No more. There are very few hitchhikers nowadays or drivers picking them up so the chances you will be picked up by a weirdo are high.
Not in the US in my opinion.
Publc opinion is a terrible way to measure risk. That's why people are afraid of terrorists and sharks and paedos and snakes rather than cigarettes and driving and tea cosies.
You can't shut us down! The Internet is about the free exchange and sale of other people's ideas!
Just because someone doesn't have a criminal record, doesn't mean they're squeaky clean - it just means they haven't been caught yet.
That is no excuse for not vetting drivers who are KNOWN to be convicted rapists or guilty of other serious offences. Or operating a half assed program to vet drivers which isn't as stringent as the one that normal taxi drivers are expected to go through. Uber should be no exception. It is a taxi service and it should abid by the laws that govern other taxis. If that cuts into their profits then tough shit.
Perhaps a nice canister of pepper spray in your handbag would be more appropriate. Oh wait mr taxi driver whilst i find my panic button in this Uber app that called me a taxi owned by a criminal. TAKE OFFICIAL TAXIS PEOPLE. I would say catch the BUS, but in Indian bus drivers seem to be rapists as well.
um... bollocks?
Just because someone doesn't have a criminal record, doesn't mean they're squeaky clean - it just means they haven't been caught yet.
But at the risk of stating the totally fucking obvious, if they do have a criminal record then they're definitely not squeaky clean.
It is true, but essentially meaningless, to say that we are all potential criminals.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
The App allowed the woman to order a taxi service from a person who was not checked out properly and turned out to be a rapist.
That happens in this country all the time, except, when people actually called a taxi, and not an alternative like Uber. I know two women who have been raped by taxi drivers. Only an extremely low form of life would make this argument. Only an extremely ignorant jackhole who isn't keeping up with how rapey India is would think that the situation would be any better there.
If you think that taxi services in India are checking their employees out well enough to be sure that they aren't rapists, you are incapable of thought.
I will never stop for a hitchhiker and will never hitchhike
Yeah, whatever. Fearful forever, huh?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
As a hitchhiker you're asking a random person for a lift, which is statistically very safe indeed. The probability that a randomly selected person stopping his/her car is not only a criminal but a criminal who would target you is very small indeed.
But the person stopping their car is the very opposite of a randomly selected person. They have made the deliberate choice to stop.
Unless you live in a society where hitchhiking is the norm, your argument is flawed.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Not in the US in my opinion.
Publc opinion is a terrible way to measure risk. That's why people are afraid of terrorists and sharks and paedos and snakes rather than cigarettes and driving and tea cosies.
I find it hard to believe that there are really more tea cosy related deaths than from terrorists, sharks, paedos or snakes.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
And do what? As a hitchhiker you're asking a random person for a lift, which is statistically very safe indeed. The probability that a randomly selected person stopping his/her car is not only a criminal but a criminal who would target you is very small indeed.
It's like asking someone to watch your laptop for a while in Starbucks while you go to the toilet. If you ask a random person, chances are you're ok. If someone offers to do it, be wary.
Except, it's not as if you are stepping into traffic and jumping on the first passing car. By hitchhiking, you are indeed waiting for just *that* kind of person who wants to stop and let a stranger into their car.
Imagine the surge pricing when you hit the panic button
This is a fair counterargument I guess. But I would posit that the number of people willing to pick up a hitchhiker is massive compared to the number of people with bad intentions.
What kind of a criminal would think it a good idea to target hitchhikers? Almost by definition they are both penniless and streetwise. And there really are not enough crazies on a random kiling spree to worry about it, no matter how hard Fox News is trying to convince us otherwise.
You can't shut us down! The Internet is about the free exchange and sale of other people's ideas!
The one thing a panic button (or calling 9-1-1) will do is let the police know who raped and/or killed the Uber user. It will not protect them in any way...
When seconds count, the police are only minutes away.
Carry a gun instead (and train how to use it safely and legally).
The App allowed the woman to order a taxi service from a person who was not checked out properly and turned out to be a rapist.
Seriously? Do you even READ the news, or just blindly post opinions here?
Yup, it's true.
They even have campaigns against public shitting.
Triggers: filth, corpses, rape.
India is filthier than most people can imagine. Overcrowded, dirt poor, hot, dusty, starving animals everywhere. I had constant nausea. People pissing/shitting in the streets (and not being shy about it), empty lots filled with human feces in such a pattern that you can tell people have been navigating in between the little piles. And never any used paper on the ground next to the shit piles.. Human and animal corpses floating 20 ft away from someone brushing their teeth, washing clothes (the Ganges) etc etc. Rape is common. I doubt that Uber did their homework on womens position in Indian society.
Your points don't matter. There's enough of a correlation that it's worthwhile. Of course there are no absolute guarantees. There never are, in anything.
Here in the UK, taxi drivers are background-checked, as well as required to pass a stricter driving-test than ordinary drivers. If these restrictions were removed, we would see an increase in taxi-driver crimes and accidents. It really doesn't take a genius...
Oh I know! Somebody got raeped. Let's kill all assigned males in a 25 mile radius. ALL ASSIGNED MALES ARE GUILTY! NUKE THEM FROM ORBIT! It's the only way to be sure.
A person may not be convicted but if a person has a checkered work history it might be of concern. A former employer or coworker might say "He had a problem with women so there was a lawsuit and he had to leave".
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
Haven't you seen 'Snatch'?
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
"people shitting/pissing in the streets"
Have you ever been to Mardis Gras?
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
So, a little bit of reality here...
In India, what we take for granted as a "background check" is actually not possible. While here in the US we have a massive database called NCIC (which is really the name of the organization that runs it, but everyone calls it NCIC anyways) there's not really such a clearinghouse in India. The individual municipalities keep their own records...often on paper...about past crimes, but there's no centralized source where you can go and check. As a result, "background checks" basically don't exist, because they are exercises in futility unless you're looking to check on a specific event related to a person.
Now, to be 100% accurate, I will say that India did just recently create a centralized database, a year ago I believe. But the database is barely getting any input at all at this point. And on top of that, fake documentation is really easy to obtain in India, there's a lot of corruption...there's a larger systemic issue with just being able to take someone's unique identifying information and do a "background check" to make sure they haven't been convicted of raping a whole school or something in the past.
I've run into this before, with regard to situations where certain kinds of business processes and information handling couldn't be outsourced because of regulatory requirements for background checks, but I also found an interesting analysis that is in the context of this situation with Uber: http://qz.com/308888/the-secre...
For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
If the hitchhiker is a good looking girl the driver might be willing to giver her a lift to a nearby forest...
A very publicized case of this happened recently where I live. The girl arranged the ride trough Facebook (it seems to be the trendy thing to do among young people) and the driver raped and murdered her.
There's a ringing endorsement for your service, you need a "Help, I think this guy is gonna rape me" button.
Maybe they should only send female drivers for female clients. Nobody ever lies about who they are on the internet.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Remember drivers, you need to keep your ratings up. As long as you only rape one in every ten passengers, you'll still be 4.5 stars!
Instead of taxi, app contained bobcat. Would not buy again.
um... bollocks?
Just because someone doesn't have a criminal record, doesn't mean they're squeaky clean - it just means they haven't been caught yet.
So are you confessing something here?
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Uber will say anything to keep people from realizing just how careless and unprofessional they are. A bunch of selfish rich kids way over their heads trying desperately to look innovative when, let's face it, it's most just BS. Real ride sharing would be free, not a paid service. Paid rides are called taxis and they are already operating just fine. Uber needs to play by the same laws as the rest of us, or work legally to change the laws; otherwise it's just a scam.
Haven't you seen 'Snatch'?
This is Slashdot! There are many people here who won't see snatch their entire lives.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
It would prevent rape. The question is whether it's a proportionate response.
If the hitchhiker is a good looking girl the driver might be willing to giver her a lift to a nearby forest...
A very publicized case of this happened recently where I live. The girl arranged the ride trough Facebook (it seems to be the trendy thing to do among young people) and the driver raped and murdered her.
And people are raped and murdered by fathers, mothers, husbands, wives, relatives, trusted authorities, people from dating services, and many other ways.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
because everything a person does is a crime?
I believe that is what you are insinuating.
If this were true, cab driver would be a seriously dangerous job. In most countries, it isn't.
Yes it is. Taxi driver is one of the most dangerous jobs. It is much more dangerous than being a police officer.
Not a bad suggestion! Given that in India, police are completely corrupt and in the pocket of ruling politicians of whoever happens to be in power
The App allowed the woman to order a taxi service from a person who was not checked out properly and turned out to be a rapist. If there was no App, the woman would have called regular taxi service and would have received the service from a person who was not as likely to be a rapist because of the more strict background checks.
I guess the App is better than hitchhiking (which in my opinion is extremely dangerous both for the passenger (the driver can turn out to be a criminal) and the driver (the passenger could turn out to be a criminal). Which is why I will never stop for a hitchhiker and will never hitchhike (unless my life was in extreme danger anyway that getting in a car driven by a murderer would not be much worse than not getting in a car at all).
What a crock!!! Rapes are very common in India - a regular taxi driver would have done it just as well. This trend of blaming Uber pretends that everything is hunky dory w/ Indians, and that they don't rape unless they get the Uber app on their phones. Never mind that the driver in question was already stalking the woman in question.
If this were true, cab driver would be a seriously dangerous job. In most countries, it isn't.
Yes it is. Taxi driver is one of the most dangerous jobs.
Fine, I should've been more careful with my wording. The article you linked to doesn't break down the number but implies heavily that the high fataility rate is due to car accidents. We're talking about the risk of violence here, which the article implies has been decreasing: "There aren't so many potential felons in the backseat as there used to be".
But ignoring all that, let's look at the numbers. 19.7 fatalities per 100,000 workers (per year, I assume). Let's say a cab driver takes 20 customers per shift, 250 days a year. That's 19.7 fatalities per 500,000,000 trips, or one death per twenty five million rides. I can live with those odds.
I'll leave the conversion to micromorts to someone else.
You can't shut us down! The Internet is about the free exchange and sale of other people's ideas!
gee that's helpful
Funny how it's never 'she had a problem with men so we had to fire her'.
"people shitting/pissing in the streets"
Have you ever been to Mardis Gras?
Mardi Gras doesnt represent everyday street life in the west, as you well know. With India, it's just the whole place that's revolting. Filthy people, the constant smell of shit and decay, lack of basic hygiene. Dudes squatting & shitting in a little plastic bag, then throwing it over the shack rooftops. Gotta see it to believe it. Peace.
I guess we must hold these newcomers to a higher bar because of public safety. No need for any of these rules to apply to the legions of dangerous, shitty, and unhelpful taxis / drivers already on the road! Please, keep Uber out for our own protection -- I am more comfortable with untrackable, combative, unhelpful, no-feedback-receiving, swindling taxi drivers and taxi companies that I'm used to!
This is a fair counterargument I guess. But I would posit that the number of people willing to pick up a hitchhiker is massive compared to the number of people with bad intentions.
I posit that you're an idiot. And I have more evidence (your posts) for my argument than you do for yours.
Hitchhiking was "safe" in the 1960s when everyone was doing it and people were willing to give rides (for gas, grass, or ass - nobody rides for free).
Today both hitchhikers and the people who pick them up are far fewer - good intentioned people fear a hitchhiker may attack them and won't give people rides. Good intentioned people who need rides fear the person who picks them up may attack them. What you're left with on both sides is a reduced pool with a higher concentration of crazy.
Former employers almost NEVER say things like that about employees that are asked to leave because there is a lot of liability involved, so they opt to have a blanket policy of saying nothing at all.
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
[citation needed]
You make a very specific claim: hitchhiking is dangerous, and it's more dangerous than it was in the past. Is that claim based on actual numbers or anally extracted ones?
This claims the chances of being killed or raped while hitchhiking in the United States are 0.0000089%.
You can't shut us down! The Internet is about the free exchange and sale of other people's ideas!
Or some equivalent? Because if it does, how can adding a third party in between the victim and the police dispatcher possibly improve the police response?
everything is a crime when the State decides it is.
Question is, how low can you keep your head?
(yes, I confess, my road bikes currently have no lights on them - in contravention of the Road Traffic Act. Come get me).
Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
Lol
So, a little bit of reality here...
In India, what we take for granted as a "background check" is actually not possible. While here in the US we have a massive database called NCIC (which is really the name of the organization that runs it, but everyone calls it NCIC anyways) there's not really such a clearinghouse in India. The individual municipalities keep their own records...often on paper...about past crimes, but there's no centralized source where you can go and check. As a result, "background checks" basically don't exist, because they are exercises in futility unless you're looking to check on a specific event related to a person.
Now, to be 100% accurate, I will say that India did just recently create a centralized database, a year ago I believe. But the database is barely getting any input at all at this point. And on top of that, fake documentation is really easy to obtain in India, there's a lot of corruption...there's a larger systemic issue with just being able to take someone's unique identifying information and do a "background check" to make sure they haven't been convicted of raping a whole school or something in the past.
I've run into this before, with regard to situations where certain kinds of business processes and information handling couldn't be outsourced because of regulatory requirements for background checks, but I also found an interesting analysis that is in the context of this situation with Uber: http://qz.com/308888/the-secre...
Grim, not grimm
Implying that female do not rape? Fuck off.
So, why add another potential rape by trying to save a few euros for a bus ticket? I understand the really poor people doing it as buying the bus ticket may mean not being able to afford to buy food. But not someone who has a PC, internet connection and a smartphone with internet connection.
That "study" makes two very dangerous assertions: 1) all of the victims of hitchhiking are found dead/raped along the highway (as opposed to in a park, someones back yard, a dumpster, etc) and 2, all of the people in the US count as the population sample (this is the craziest one). Since not everyone who dies or is assaulted while hitchhiking can be associated, and we don't have any good way to even peg how many people might hitchhike in any given year, there is no real way to tell.
The correct term is "unconvicted criminal living in the community".
Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
It was more to explain my point than get into a debate about gender equality and rape but I accept your point.
The significant problems we have cannot be solved at the same level of thinking with which we created them.
Psychopaths do not fear punishment;
Caste system created millions of Psychopaths in India;
http://www.sciencedaily.com/re...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new...
Casteism
Former employers almost NEVER say things like that about employees that are asked to leave because there is a lot of liability involved, so they opt to have a blanket policy of saying nothing at all.
I've heard of this but of all the people I've called on both for entry level minimum wage jobs and upper level developer positions, I've never once ran
into someone who didn't tell me everything I wanted to know. My questions usually include things like why did they leave, do you trust them,
would you hire them again, etc... and I've never got the runaround.