Slashdot Mirror
Uber Said To Use 'Sophisticated' Software To Defraud Drivers, Passengers (arstechnica.com)
A class-action lawsuit against Uber alleges that Uber has "devised a 'clever and sophisticated' scheme in which it manipulates navigation data used to determine 'upfront' rider fare prices while secretly short-changing the driver," reports Ars Technica. "When a rider uses Uber's app to hail a ride, the fare the app immediately shows to the passenger is based on a slower and longer route compared to the one displayed to the driver. The software displays a quicker, shorter route for the driver. But the rider pays the higher fee, and the driver's commission is paid from the cheaper, faster route, according to the lawsuit." From the report: This latest lawsuit (PDF) claims that Uber implemented the so-called "upfront" pricing scheme in September and informed drivers that fares are calculated on a per-mile and per-minute charge for the estimated distance and time of a ride. "However, the software that calculates the upfront price that is displayed and charged to the Users calculates the expected distance and time utilizing a route that is often longer in both distance and time to the one displayed in the driver's application," according to the suit. In the end, the rider pays a higher fee because the software calculates a longer route and displays that to the passenger. Yet the driver is paid a lower rate based on a quicker route, according to the suit. Uber keeps "the difference charged to the User and the fare reported to the driver, in addition to the service fee and booking fee disclosed to drivers," according to the suit.
Kudos Uber, maybe you've finally figured out a path to turning a profit...
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
If this claim is true, the claim that Uber merely facilitates the agreement between the driver and passenger and takes a commission is clearly bogus.
Also, if Uber specifies the route and demands that the driver takes that specific route, that may be exerting too much control of the drivers for them to be contractors.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
Why is Uber's woes a surprise to anyone? We learned these lessons as a society when taxis were new.
Uber shows up, avoids regulation, offers cheap fares, accuses the existing infrastructure off being too bloated, and makes a bunch of money. Then it's noticed they are doing the same thing that taxis used to do before formal regulation.
Things like: overworking drivers, fudging rates, opaque accounting practices, etc.
I have to snicker when those in their 20's seem to think Uber is revolutionary and doesn't need to be "old skool" regulated, then quickly complain when things don't work out by saying, "they shouldn't be allowed to do that."
Hopefully, Uber is the one who will pay for all their nefarious deeds.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
Another anti-Uber story. Who's paying for all these?
Uber's customers and drivers.
Not just states and cities they defraud, but the drivers themselves.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
...And not just the company heads, but the coders themselves.
Here's why: They authored code that when used as intended, would defraud innocent folks by default.
I must add that going to jail for a crime like this isn't that certain at present in these United States, sadly.
It sounds like Uber charges an up front fixed price fee with a risk margin built in. If the driver takes less time then Uber keeps this margin, however if the driver takes longer is Uber out of pocket? If so this is pretty much like all fixed price work.
Uber could make or lose money on each job.
"Do you think we could wipe out world hunger forever if scientists figured out how to make AOL's Free CD's edible?"-
Taxis have all sorts of regulations, most of them are for the good of society, such things as:
- maximum prices
- accountable billing practices
- enhanced driver licensing requirements
- vehicle inspections
- hours of service regulations
- insurance requirements
But then governments went overboard and also added regulations that do not help society at all such as:
- minimum prices
- limits to the number of taxis
The end result is that while most people applaud the items in the first list, the abhor the regulations in the second list. That list is why society as a whole is screaming for "ride-sharing" services to come in to their cities. That's why everyone is willing to pretend that these aren't taxi services, it's to try to get around the ridiculousness of those excessive regulations that are hated by all but the taxi industry themselves.
Problem is, you end up "throwing out the baby with the bathwater". If governments had stuck to regulating the safety and price gouging aspects of taxis, without artificially constraining supply or forcing artificially high prices, there'd be no demand for "ride sharing" services.
Any smart government would start over, and regulate anyone carrying passengers for hire the same, without limiting who can do it, or setting a minimum price. You'd get as free a market as possible, while still ensuring everyone plays fair and safe. Uber would hate you, but they'd have a really tough time getting the public on their side if the local taxi industry was already competitive (which they'd have to be if there were no limit on the number of taxi licenses).
Okay, we know a few things. First, that some drivers will deliberately take longer routes if a driver thinks they can get away with it. Next, an app can show whatever it wants to any person. I would assume (I don't use uber), that it doesn't break down the route for the passenger. Had the app been required by law (and it should) to breakdown the route (similar to the way google does when you get directions) as well as the price per/mile or km, a moderately observant passenger would notice that the route shown to the passenger is different from what the driver is taking and questions would asked. There was an article that claimed Uber had enough data to indicate what times of data a passenger would be indifferent to the fare charged, implying that Uber might have a "premium charge" for say, rush hour. As we know Uber ignores laws (see self-driving cars new reports) around the world, the Uber president has actually be abusive to his own driver on camera. Given this as well as the data collection on the uber app (which needs to be curbed a lot, we are seeing case after case of abuse), it would only be reasonable to assume Uber will try any scheme it can get away with. I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt, but behavior patterns qualify as supporting evidence in count in court and in real life. If you see someone repeatedly exhibiting unethical behavior, it's reasonable to assume that individual entity is likely doing similarly unethical actions that you aren't aware of.I just read an article about a town in Ontario Canada using Uber as a cheap substitute for a proper bus system. But a quick look at the user fees + city subsidies per trip suggest the combined amount might be more than the standard Uber fare using public money and leaving the financial challenged to get a phone or be unable to use this "public" transit. (or course the telecommunication companies love this) Seems to me Uber will take advantage of the unaware, the mentally lazy and the gullible. My question is, when do we all wake up and start questioning our blind use of Uber. Better yet, when do we start creating competition and/or regulating this kind of business to keep it honest..
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" - Einstein
Use Lyft, it's better for the driver and better for the passenger.
If all the drivers who complain about Uber would just go to Lyft, the passengers will follow. Same for passengers.
Sign up to drive: https://www.lyft.com/drive-wit...
Get free passenger ride credits: https://www.lyft.com/signup/PO...
"Uber Said To Use 'Sophisticated' Software To Defraud Drivers, Passengers"
Really now. You wouldn't expect a high tech company like Uber to use unsophisticated software to rip off its customers and employees ... ehrr .. independent contractors?
You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
I am running out of excuses for Uber's behavior. As a Libertarian i love their disruptive technology. I cheered them on when they took on over-regulated cities that basically monopolized (in my view) taxi cab services. I cheered on them using the free market to drive down prices. I truly did (and still mosty do) think the uber/lyft business model increases freedom for all, allowing anyone to obtain extra income without having to interview, sign a bunch of paperwork, and punch a 9-5 clock everyday and do exactly as ordered by a manager.
That said, if you are going to tackle regulators and try to bring free-market reforms, a certain percentage of the population is going to perceive that as immoral. In order to stand up against the fierce winds of authoritarianism you better darn make sure your service is as safe and convenient as possible and make sure your business is run in such a way that it stands up against the fiercest of ethical scrutiny.
When you have cars that are killing people, contractors being accused of sexual assault, MANAGERS being accused of sexism/racism in the workplace, and a CEO with a cringe-worthy temper AND evidence that your pricing models are not as transparent and honest as you led people to believe, you are just further reinforcing socialist's/communist's opinions that all companies are greedy, immoral, and care about nothing more than the bottom line. Instead of being a force for good and promoting libertarian ideals, you are just contributing to the decline of freedom and encouraging an excessive bureaucratic government to continue regulating our rights away
Lyft. xD
Screwed? You must be joking. Do you know how expensive the alternatives are? How crude? How seedy?
On their worst day, Uber is cheaper and the driver is far less creepy than any cabbie you will ever encounter.
Perhaps drivers are getting screwed. Not the customers.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Nope, If the route is longer than expected. Say construction detour, uber will recharge the passenger.
In that case, its dodgy
"Do you think we could wipe out world hunger forever if scientists figured out how to make AOL's Free CD's edible?"-
Now I normally take shorter rides, but I've never once seen the proposed/priced route be anything other than I would expect. The price has (unless I absolutely had to get a ride at peak) been anywhere near excessive.
I have had drivers (mostly Haitian cabbies moonlighting or trying to switch) that do not use the Uber provided guidance (or any at all since they're using their phone to talk to their families in Creole) and take typical cabbie routes instead (way too long for the trip). Those drivers get a 1 to get them out of the pool as fast as possible.
"Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my Presidency. I'm fucked."; ~ Donald J. Trump
You have a fare to pick up, guy. Snap to it.
"Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my Presidency. I'm fucked."; ~ Donald J. Trump
Here's some real life data to put this into perspective:
A few days ago, I took a trip from JFK to my home in Long Island.
Fare displayed by Uber before trip: ~$73
Fare charged to me: $73
Fare Uber told the driver they charged me: $58
Share of Fare Uber gave to driver: $38
So they took roughly half of what I paid to them.
they're being accused of giving different information to the Driver & Rider to manipulate the drivers into working more for less.
They could charge whatever they want, but that's not what they're doing. They're effectively telling a Rider the fee is $20 bucks, telling the Driver it'll be $18 and pocketing that $2. Assuming this is true (and it's easy to prove) They're lying to the Driver and almost certainly committing fraud by doing so.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Bravo for the insightful Ty Cobb comment!!
They're really Über, they only drive on elevated roadways.
Why would they do this instead of raising their commission? The effect should be similar, the same at Ubers scale of operation, cheaper to achieve and easier to control.
So essentially the uber software is malware. It classifies as the definition of malware. Goodbye Uber.
That's arguably even worse. It means that drivers are being paid per mile/minute of driving they do, while passengers are paid per trip they get. In other words, for entirely different things. That indicates Uber is NOT facilitating contracts between riders and drivers, but rather, they are providing rides while paying the driver a salary. No different from your local city bus. Once all those drivers are classified as employees, it's immediately obvious that Uber is violating a million employer laws.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Does Uber have Louis working for them?
So:
1. If uber is to be belived that its drivers are not employees, and are contractors.
2. Uber is paying the contractor a portion of its revenues in order to facilitate a task.
3. Uber is falsifying data on how much they are actually gaining in revenue on a task.
This would then, as is my understanding, constitute widespread fraud against its 'contractor' drivers.
If this is true, and prosecutor has the wherewithal to actually process it, this would be a huge corner uber has painted itself into.
Either:
1. Uber drivers are contractors, and are have widespread fraud perpetuated against them, fraud being an actual criminal charge and someone at uber (or multiple someones) having to go to actual jail, as well as the company being liable for a class action fraud case equal to the total number of rides delivered, ever.
2. Uber drivers are employees with fees not ultimately related to the distance driven (and then must provide there employees the proper securities and benefits relevant to there position)
Another anti-Uber story. Who's paying for all these?
The now-legendary Taxi Cartel-ZOG over-arching conspiracy.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Or it could be that Uber is run by a bunch of scofflaw assholes. It happens. Their attempts to end-run around laws don't inspire much confidence in me.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Why? What is the point? Lets look at this. Client A shows up with a path of how to get their destination and the price-sub-0. Driver B has a different path to the destination and a price-sub-1. Awkward. There was never a meeting of the minds! This is basic contracts first semester. At this point there is no contract. Maybe Driver B can renegotiate the contract with Client A. Why should Uber get a dime of this transaction?
I've encountered plenty of cabbies that were not creepy at all, so unless all Uber drivers have negative creepiness, your claim is a load of bullshit.
I'm in Ottawa, Canada. Uber is almost exactly half the price of a Taxi, the Uber rides are more pleasant, and the cars are clean and well maintained. My suspicion is the Uber drivers are taking home more per hour than taxi drivers. They sure as heck aren't working 16 hour days like the taxi drivers who are working the first 8 hours just to pay the medallion rental.