Uber Commits $5 Million To Sexual Assault, Domestic Violence Prevention (gizmodo.com)

Uber announced on Sunday that it's taking new steps toward preventing sexual assault and domestic violence, starting with a $5 million donation to its partners -- Raliance, National Network to End Domestic Violence, No More, Women of Color Network, Casa de Esperanza, A Call to Men, and The National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs -- along with an employee training program and in-app messaging to educate riders and drivers. Gizmodo reports: "As a result of this ongoing collaboration we have begun to make important changes internally and will commit to use Uber's scope and visibility to help drive awareness, education, and prevention of sexual assault and domestic violence to millions globally," said Uber's announcement. Uber wrote on its blog that its technology "enhances safety for riders and drivers in ways that weren't possible before such as GPS tracking, the ability to share a trip with family and friends, and 24/7 support through the app." But the company has failed to adopt measures like more rigorous driver background checks, despite urging by lawmakers. The ride-sharing service left Austin altogether last year (along with Lyft) because it refused to fingerprint its drivers. Uber has argued that mandated fingerprinting is too burdensome. Advocates for fingerprinting argue that it helps ensure rider safety.

Comments

Where is the money coming from?

[drinkypoo]

I keep hearing that Uber is throwing away money to make their name. Is this another example of that, and if so, where did they get the cash? Or are they actually making money now? Last I heard they were maybe profitable in the US, but still just flushing money down the toilet in China.

Re:Where is the money coming from?

[Anonymous Coward]

The Fed prints electronic money, funnels it into some investment companies, which then burn the money on investment/welfare for Uber. It's just turning the US dollar into the Zimbabwean dollar.

The US possibly to default on its debt is not going to help: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-13/u-s-default-unlikely-but-bond-traders-are-taking-no-chances. The US is already a Third World country w.r.t. its infrastructure, so perhaps it will also become one financially. E.g., with the end of the petrodollar in sight, what will the US really have to offer to the world, besides a flashy phone (on which it can barely can make any tax dollars)?

Re:Where is the money coming from?

[Mr0bvious]

$5m? So what's that? About $1 per case of Uber drivers going afoul?

Re:Where is the money coming from?

[AmiMoJo]

The continued assaults against their staff and customers are hurting their bottom line. Some regulators are cracking down on them because of it, at least in part, e.g. London.

So $5m seems like peanuts if it fixes that problem for them.

Re: Where is the money coming from?

[Anonymous Coward]

They can offer tons of bullshit propaganda about non-binary sex benefits, minority entitlements, fartsy artsy education etc.

Re:Where is the money coming from?

[stephanruby]

They sold Uber-China to Didi Chuxing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... And most of the money they're using is from investors. That's why they're trying to do an IPO, because they're running out of private Venture Capital funds.

Re:Where is the money coming from?

[Sniper98G]

They just need to dodge long enough to get automated vehicles up and going.

Then they can fire all the people and this problem goes away.

Re:Where is the money coming from?

[Trailer Trash]

The other question is "where is the money going to?" Frankly, it looks to me that rather than actually do something within their company they're paying penance to various "anti-violence" organizations.

This is the Jesse Jackson playbook in reverse. If you're not aware of his shakedown scam, he targets an organization claiming they have a racism problem. The "solution" is simple - a donation to his Rainbow/PUSH Coalition group fixes everything and he moves on to the next target.

It really smells like Uber has decided that rather fix problems within their organization they'll throw money at a few outside organizations so that they can point to it whenever this topic comes up.

Re:Where is the money coming from?

[mjwx]

I keep hearing that Uber is throwing away money to make their name. Is this another example of that, and if so, where did they get the cash? Or are they actually making money now? Last I heard they were maybe profitable in the US, but still just flushing money down the toilet in China.

You make it sound as if Uber has any plan to be profitable, they're a scheme to funnel the money of gullible VC's into the private offshore accounts of their owners. Uber is losing something to the tune of US$150,000,000 a quarter, so $5,000,000 is just a drop in the bucket and nothing but a sad attempt at getting positive PR by a scummy company struggling with its image, sorry but the irrational hate of traditional taxi companies has subsided now that Uber has the same problems... and who could have predicted that.

Re:Where is the money coming from?

[Anonymous Coward]

They're not fixing anything, they're throwing money at one or more organizations for the sake of virtue signalling. The problem is governments let uber and their like get away with the "we're not a taxi company guv' really we're not!" bullshit far too long instead of requiring the same things that taxi companies have been required to do for decades because of the same issues. Background checks, vehicle maintenance checks every 6mo, basic first aid requirements, etc.

But just think if all these issues were prominent and got equal play. We'd be seeing ads like: "women don't grope men in the club" "sticking your hand down his pants because you're drunk, and he's hot, doesn't equal consent." Ask your local male police officer who works a club as on-duty security how many times they're groped and assaulted by women and are expected to just shrug it off. 20-50 times a night is pretty common.

Re:Where is the money coming from?

[alvinrod]

If $5 million dollars could fix the problem, Hollywood could have cleaned up their act decades ago. This just reeks of throwing money at some organization that claims to specialize in training, etc. as a PR move.

Re:Where is the money coming from?

[AmiMoJo]

By "fixes the the problem" I mean the PR issue, not the actual abuse.

Re:Where is the money coming from?

[Mashiki]

Nope. It's a shakedown just like Al Sharpton. If they wanted to start working on the PR problem, they're start by phasing in all drivers to have a background check like social workers/primary care workers are required to have. It's far more indepth and goes beyond a surface background check. But, they(along with other ride-share companies) keep pushing that they're not cab companies. Cab companies require actual background checks in most countries besides having a chauffeurs license. They could actually one-up cab companies and become a dominant service just by marketing themselves on that.

Re:Where is the money coming from?

[AmiMoJo]

Don't forget that the drivers are just a temporary stand-in for self-driving cars. They aren't planning on keeping them around for any longer than they have to. Their only concerns are keeping costs down and covering over the problems with PR until they can get to the self-driving stage and fire most of their workforce.

Re:Where is the money coming from?

[Mashiki]

Those self-driving cars are still likely a decade or more away as it is. It's not like automotive companies haven't tried all of this stuff on smaller scales and run into the same problems over and over again. Even going as far as to convert live pickers(lift trucks) and shunts(trucks that pick up trailers and back them into the loading dock) in warehouses to a "on rail" system where there's a guide wire in the floor/ground to help the trucks and lift trucks know where they're going and they'd still drive off, hit things and so on. There also will always be people who won't trust auto-driving cars too. Their biggest problem is staying afloat like the other ride-sharing companies because they're running out of VC cash.

Re:Where is the money coming from?

[AmiMoJo]

This is Uber, their self driving cars don't have to be particularly safe or reliable, just cheap. I mean, if people are willing to risk assault and rape just to get a cheaper taxi, the odd self driving car going off a bridge won't stop them.

Re: Where is the money coming from?

[Anonymous Coward]

Nah man. You won't get off for change.
  Try 5 billion for starters, and that is just a warmup for the lawsuits.

Re:Where is the money coming from?

[kilfarsnar]

I keep hearing that Uber is throwing away money to make their name. Is this another example of that, and if so, where did they get the cash? Or are they actually making money now? Last I heard they were maybe profitable in the US, but still just flushing money down the toilet in China.

Heh, I was just thinking, "This is easy for Uber, it's not their money anyway!" They get their money from venture capital. They have raised a stupid amount of money; even stupider considering they don't actually make any money. Last I heard Uber subsidizes about $.40 of every dollar they charge for rides.

I don't see how Uber ever makes a profit. But life has shown me that I'm not always the great visionary I sometimes fancy myself to be, so who knows. They already pay their drivers shit, and if they raise their rates too much they will lose their ability to undercut taxis. That Uber is so cheap is a big reason for their success. I don't see fully autonomous cars becoming viable before they run out of money. So it remains to be seen if they can keep their ridership while ratcheting up their prices.

Re:Where is the money coming from?

[kilfarsnar]

The Fed prints electronic money, funnels it into some investment companies, which then burn the money on investment/welfare for Uber. It's just turning the US dollar into the Zimbabwean dollar.

The US possibly to default on its debt is not going to help: https://www.bloomberg.com/news.... The US is already a Third World country w.r.t. its infrastructure, so perhaps it will also become one financially. E.g., with the end of the petrodollar in sight, what will the US really have to offer to the world, besides a flashy phone (on which it can barely can make any tax dollars)?

Because the Fed can print money, the US will never be forced to default on its debt. It will always be able to print money to pay its debts. That can cause other problems, no doubt. But default or bankruptcy are not among them.

Re:Where is the money coming from?

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course, this is social justice/feminism shakedown money.

They are basically the mafia. Nice business you have there... shame if someone called you sexist/racist. Oh, you want to donate... many thanks. Same time next year?

Re:Where is the money coming from?

[Anonymous Coward]

the solution is simple: film every trip.

More and more taxi drivers do this as the number of women who get to the end of the trip and demand they be let off the fare or they'll make a rape claim is staggering - and cameras are cheap today.

So taxi drivers are starting to routinely film all passengers.

Good.

Fuck off bitches. in fact, men should film every encounter with women.

For your own protection

Re: Where is the money coming from?

[dougdonovan]

thats a big turnover in drivers.

Re:Where is the money coming from?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well if we start with a $70 billion valuation... https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/15/whats-ubers-valuation-not-70-billion-dollars-roger-mcnamee-says.html

Less than 0.01% of the company. That's a huge amount, eh? Uber probably got $5 million free publicity for doing the thing, while contributing very little of their actual worth.

Re:Where is the money coming from?

[sexconker]

The US is already a Third World country w.r.t. its infrastructure

Our infrastructure isn't well maintained, but I take it you've never been to a third world country.

Re:Where is the money coming from?

[davester666]

Sure, it can keep printing greenbacks, but all it takes is a single time for Congress (or the Senate, I forget exactly how it works) to wait until all extraordinary means have been exhausted to keep paying the bills (except it's ordinary now, as we do it all the time) and then decide not to bump up the debt ceiling. And we are electing more and more wack jobs willing to do it, just "because we can".

Even Trump has said that he thinks it would be no big deal for the US to go bankrupt, because he's such a good dealmaker, he could then make a deal on the US debt. Of course, we now have a year of data indicating he is utterly incompetent at making deals, past getting a "I need a Pepsi now" button installed on his desk in the oval office.

Re:Where is the money coming from?

[drinkypoo]

Our infrastructure isn't well maintained, but I take it you've never been to a third world country.

Infrastructure is incredibly uneven. Much of the Interamericano is in great condition... but you can't drive through the Darien Gap! I don't see a lot of missing manhole covers in the USA, but they're [not] out there... but watch where you step in Panama or CR. They've got a lot of dirt roads, but actually, so do we. Go check out some aerial or street views of Clear Lake, CA.

Re:Where is the money coming from?

[Obfiscator]

I've lived in the US. I've lived in Europe. And I've lived in sub-Saharan African countries.

The US is not even close to a third world country with respect to its infrastructure.

Great protection racket

[Anonymous Coward]

Accuse company of misconduct, collect millions. Works like a charm.

Are they banning Trump from teh service?

[Anonymous Coward]

I mean how else are they going to claim that?

And what about other types of violence?

[CustomSolvers2]

It would also be nice if they could work towards preventing violence and assaults of any kind regardless of their characteristics. Considering a specific type of violence or victims more protection-worthy is discriminatory, short-sighted and, if you wish, violent with respect to other people/situations.

People considering acceptable any form of violence because of whatever reason and even actively supporting those behaviours are the problem. It doesn't matter their gender, race, ideas or whether they are alone or part of a group (well... the second alternative seems much more coward and censurable). The only thing that matters is the distorted perception of those who think that can unilaterally impose their will into others, either physically or in any other way, without consequences. Violence and arbitrary impositions are usually the resources of egoist, fearful and insecure people, who don't respect others and expect their positions to prevail no matter what, and you can find people like this everywhere.

Re:And what about other types of violence?

[drinkypoo]

It would also be nice if they could work towards preventing violence and assaults of any kind regardless of their characteristics.

Yes, they are. See, sexual assault is a kind of assault, and by reducing its occurrence, you can reduce the numbers of all assaults. See how that works?

Re:And what about other types of violence?

[cryptizard]

Okay... but if you get shot do you go to the hospital and ask them to remove all foreign objects from your body or do you tell them to take out the bullet? There have been countless accusations of sexual assault by Uber drivers, not so much other types of violence.

Re:And what about other types of violence?

[CustomSolvers2]

Yes, they are. See, sexual assault is a kind of assault, and by reducing its occurrence, you can reduce the numbers of all assaults. See how that works?

I think that the difference between the whole and a part of said whole should be quite evident for almost everyone. My point was to mostly focus on the whole thing (any kind of assault and violence against everyone) rather than just on a specific subset (sexual assault and violence against a specific group of people), by seeing it as a the same problem (violence-prone personalities) rather than specific sub-problems (sexual-assaulting-prone people). Additionally, by focusing on a subset you are expressly or implicitly considering other kinds of violence less bad or protection worthy. Hopefully, my point is crystal clear now.

Re:And what about other types of violence?

[CustomSolvers2]

There have been countless accusations of sexual assault by Uber drivers, not so much other types of violence.

Fair point. In any case, my comment wasn't just meant for this specific situation, but also in general. There seems to be an increasing number of people and policies considering specific types of violence and victims intrinsically different what, IMHO, is wrong and doesn't help to solve the problem. Violence-prone people are pretty much the same everywhere and in every context. Being understanding with certain kinds of violence means to somehow validate other types. The sad reality is that people who are regularly/systematically involved in violent situations are very likely to be violent themselves or to somehow support this or other forms of violence.

Re:And what about other types of violence?

[K. S. Kyosuke]

I feel it's like the efforts to convince more people to study STEM if there's a local shortage of competent engineers that somehow invariably converge to end up targeting girls. If you have 10%-20% women studying it, and similar ratios of high-schoolers' willingness to enter the college programme in question, it's reasonable to ask whether money is not better spent on trying to also convince the group of people who'll be more likely to get convinced. As soon as you're trying to convince a female that needs more convincing instead of a male that would need less convincing, you're already provably sub-optimal in your expenses since swapping the two, ceteris paribus, decreases your costs without changing the outcome. Likewise, the swaths of people willing to invest money into programs targeting only half of the population in other respects could easily be wasting money as well (not to mention offending quite a lot of people).

Re:And what about other types of violence?

[stephanruby]

The two types of violence that Uber can actively help with

1. For those passengers that have doors visible from the road, you can ask your driver to wait and make sure you safely get in your place before they drive away. Many women take advantage of this when they live in a sketchy neighborhood and are returning home at night. It sure beats taking the bus.

2. Passenger-on-driver violence. You may not like the type of background check an Uber driver gets, but the real problem is that passengers do not get a background check at all, despite the fact that passengers are often the ones who travel drunk, or who outnumber the driver.

Re:And what about other types of violence?

[Anonymous Coward]

... people who'll be more likely to get convinced ...

Someone has decided that 40% of employees must be female and devotees run around madly when it's revealed that's not the case. I saw similar behaviour when communities had to be multi-cultural: In that case, the result was cultural isolation, in a large part, self-imposed; segregation; collapse of the community caused by segregation; gang-driven crime;a denial that subsequent gang violence was caused by said collapse.

It's about proving that society is doing the right thing, even when the people involved, hate it and suffer because of it.

IT insiders repeatedly notice there are better-paying office jobs, well-paying jobs that cater to female strengths, and a number of industries which do not receive similar criticism for having a shortage of male employees. No-one wants to hear those complaints.

Re:And what about other types of violence?

[CustomSolvers2]

Good samples of preventive measurements. And both of them applicable to a huge number of scenarios involving different people, attackers and aggressions. There is no need to be more specific.

Re:And what about other types of violence?

[Anonymous Coward]

There seems to be an increasing number of people and policies considering specific types of violence and victims intrinsically different what, IMHO, is wrong and doesn't help to solve the problem.

Yes, it does, if those policies are effective anyway. (Given that you haven't named them, it's impossible to ascertain).

Your mistake is assuming that a wide-spectrum broad-based solution is effective, when in reality, the problem is often quite narrowly focused in origin, and needs a particular response to treat it, or better yet, prevent it in the future.

Violence-prone people are pretty much the same everywhere and in every context.

If only that were so, but they're actually quite different when examined, painting them with a broad brush is often more perilous anyway, as you widely declare some group to be deranged, irredeemable, and just plain violent.

Being understanding with certain kinds of violence means to somehow validate other types.

Good luck getting rid of contact sports. And don't even think you can chastise the NRA.

The sad reality is that people who are regularly/systematically involved in violent situations are very likely to be violent themselves or to somehow support this or other forms of violence.

Which is nonetheless, not making those situations or their causation to be identical, and sometimes not even similar.

It's like fires. You can have a lot of different things burning, and while you might find a similar amount of damage, you could also find that they're quite different in origin and treatment.

Re:And what about other types of violence?

[CustomSolvers2]

I usually agree with any approach on the lines of better trying to solve the global problem by focusing on specific cases. But, as I see it, some people have stopped understanding violent and imposing behaviours as a whole and started looking for specific justifications, what has provoked a misunderstanding of the underlying reality. It is OK to focus on specific types of violence, but without forgetting that all of them are intrinsically identical and are outputted by basically the same kind of people: violent, imposing, arbitrary people whose behaviours are being systematically validated on quite a few fronts; in many cases, by the victims of this or other type of violence (who might not even know how to interact with others in a non-violent way). Anyway, from your post, it is clear that our positions are very different and I will better not continue with this discussion.

Re:And what about other types of violence?

[Anonymous Coward]

IT insiders repeatedly notice...and a number of industries which do not receive similar criticism for having a shortage of male employees. No-one wants to hear those complaints.

It's probably because you're tending to be in error about them, as for example, the lack of male teachers and nurses, is a commonly discussed problem, at best, you're just simply ignorant, at worst? You know they exist, but deny it anyway.

If you actually cared, you'd participate in those discussions, but you don't want to resolve them, you just want to use that as a deflection.

Re:And what about other types of violence?

[Anonymous Coward]

Textbook whataboutism.

Uber is contributing to a fund to address a major problem. You want them to instead contribute to a fund about a rather different problem because you don't want them to address the one they're putting money toward or something.

Aside from that, Uber is engaging in marketing rather than trying to solve the problem in question. Since the impetus for this marketing move is that they ignored many reports of rape and sexual assault, it would not address their business need to contribute to a fund for reducing all violent crime.

Re:And what about other types of violence?

[Anonymous Coward]

I usually agree with any approach on the lines of better trying to solve the global problem by focusing on specific cases.

Good for you, that's quite wise and prudent.

But, as I see it, some people have stopped understanding violent and imposing behaviours as a whole and started looking for specific justifications, what has provoked a misunderstanding of the underlying reality.

Without knowing who these people are, or happen to be saying themselves, that's a difficult perception to challenge, or even understand. I mean, I'm sure there are people who have provoked a misunderstanding of the underlying reality, but that can come from a variety of means, including those who seek to confuse, for their own reasons, or even those who just mean well, but got it all wrong.

It is OK to focus on specific types of violence, but without forgetting that all of them are intrinsically identical and are outputted by basically the same kind of people: violent, imposing, arbitrary people whose behaviours are being systematically validated on quite a few fronts; in many cases, by the victims of this or other type of violence (who might not even know how to interact with others in a non-violent way).

I don't know that anybody here is arguing against validation as that is a commonly recognized problem, (Well, ok, there are some who deny it, especially on the MRA front), but that doesn't mean that they're truly identical on a substantial level. I probably wouldn't even agree with your idea of arbitrary, that's an often misused word, in my experience, but you didn't expand on it, so I can't exactly say.

Still, there is a lot of problem on the other end, with thinking that they are all intrinsically identical, yet not realizing that they are quite different, and the contributing factors vary. Especially in cases where somebody is dismissed out of hand as deranged, which is the current excuse. There are certainly deranged people around, but that doesn't mean the actors of violence are all the same. This is the problem I have with Trump's recent tweets on the shooting in Texas.

And unfortunately, his pronouncements are treated far too seriously by the element that endorses him, making for a great deal of problems. While in Jared Loughner's case, there is evidence of derangement, or James Holmes, and maybe even Adam Lanza (I would possibly choose to attribute it differently, but it's hard to ascertain without him being alive), but not so much Devin Kelley, though I would consider it possible there is evidence to indicate such, it just has not been presented.

Anyway, from your post, it is clear that our positions are very different and I will better not continue with this discussion.

Well, that's your choice, but I suggest in the future, you alter your approach. Less focus on these programs, and more clearly identify your focus on whatever is really bothering you.

Your own postings could really be improved.

Re:And what about other types of violence?

[tietokone-olmi]

>Textbook whataboutism.

Textbook textbookism.

Re:And what about other types of violence?

[CustomSolvers2]

more clearly identify your focus on whatever is really bothering you

Nothing of this bothers me. I was plainly trying to help from my honestly distant and pretty comfortable position. I am not violent and don't like violent people. If I am ever involved in a violent situation, I would deal with it accordingly and accept the consequences. I don't need to come up with a generic set of ideas or a proceeding to eventually account for future improbable outcomes. I don't like generalisations/prejudices and will never tolerate them affecting me in any way. I was plainly trying to share some thoughts which some people, different than me and with other expectations, might eventually find useful.

Re:And what about other types of violence?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, they are. See, sexual assault is a kind of assault, and by reducing its occurrence, you can reduce the numbers of all assaults. See how that works?

I think that the difference between the whole and a part of said whole should be quite evident for almost everyone. My point was to mostly focus on the whole thing (any kind of assault and violence against everyone) rather than just on a specific subset (sexual assault and violence against a specific group of people), by seeing it as a the same problem (violence-prone personalities) rather than specific sub-problems (sexual-assaulting-prone people).

Your point was ill-considered, poorly presented, and faulty, for reasons that should be evident from examining the responses you will get.

Additionally, by focusing on a subset you are expressly or implicitly considering other kinds of violence less bad or protection worthy.

So what? I mean, there is already an established a pattern in the law that some crimes merit more or less punishment than others. Thus I guess the response would be...yes, we are, thanks for noticing our intent was to consider one a priority over others.

Hopefully, my point is crystal clear now.

I would respond to this by simply saying "No, it isn't" but that would be unfair to you. You still aren't especially clear, let alone as clear as crystal.

I think your biggest problem, however, would be that you're going to need to establish your bonafides, by establishing a pattern of opposition to the other forms of implementing focus, in order to validate your credibility.

Re:And what about other types of violence?

[Anonymous Coward]

sexual assault is a kind of assault

In many cases, it's absurd to classify "sexual assault" as "assault". For example, an unwanted kiss is widely considered to be a "sexual assault":

https://www.nbcdfw.com/investigations/Student-With-Autism-Kicked-Out-of-College-288108301.html

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/reminder-groping-and-unwanted-kissing-is-definitely-sexual-assault_us_57ff9f7be4b0e8c198a6642f

Nevermind the fact that women are notoriously ambivalent about whether they want to be kissed or not, and one really doesn't know whether the kiss was wanted until after the fact.

Was sleeping beauty sexually assaulted? Does the Disney film teach sexual assault? Did Has Solo sexually assault Princess Leia when he kissed her while they were inside the giant space-worm?

Re:And what about other types of violence?

[Anonymous Coward]

more clearly identify your focus on whatever is really bothering you

Nothing of this bothers me. I was plainly trying to help from my honestly distant and pretty comfortable position. I am not violent and don't like violent people. If I am ever involved in a violent situation, I would deal with it accordingly and accept the consequences. I don't need to come up with a generic set of ideas or a proceeding to eventually account for future improbable outcomes. I don't like generalisations/prejudices and will never tolerate them affecting me in any way. I was plainly trying to share some thoughts which some people, different than me and with other expectations, might eventually find useful.

What you doing is recounting what bothers you.

You're not going to get far if you're just proclaiming that "Nothing of this bothers me." while demonstrating how you are bothered.

It's perplexing if nothing else, and makes you seem befuddled.

Re:And what about other types of violence?

[CustomSolvers2]

You're not going to get far if you're just proclaiming that "Nothing of this bothers me." while demonstrating how you are bothered.

I am seriously not trying to offend you but I cannot imagine how else could I transmit these ideas. Since your very first comment I saw something off with you, at least, with respect to me, what I was saying and what I consider acceptable. That's why I said that better cutting the chat there. This last comment of yours has fully confirmed that initial assumption. I am expressly telling you what I think and you decide to not believe me (= calling me liar or person in denial) because of whatever misinterpretation you have made of my words, my personality or even the world we live again?! You consider that your random assumptions about what I think are more valid than what I say?!

Again without trying to offend you, it looks like you have problems of the worst kind: the self-inflicted ones, the ones that are there only because you want them to be there! I will stop it here by giving you just a quick little advice: go a bit outside whatever sub-world you are in and you will be surprised about how many alternatives, people having lots of (serious) problems and giving a crap about all what you care you can find out there. You don't even need to physically go anywhere, just use internet by trying to see, listen and learn, rather than thinking that you can "convince" anyone about your truths; or that your blind certainty about how you think that everything should be has an absolute value, at lease for me. Bye.

Re:And what about other types of violence?

[Anonymous Coward]

You're not going to get far if you're just proclaiming that "Nothing of this bothers me." while demonstrating how you are bothered.

I am seriously not trying to offend you but I cannot imagine how else could I transmit these ideas.

If you can't imagine how you can alter, even aside from improving your communications, that is indeed a serious problem, which you are oddly declaring as if you didn't realize how badly it makes you look.

Since your very first comment I saw something off with you, at least, with respect to me, what I was saying and what I consider acceptable.

Given your comments in this thread, I've noticed a poor articulation of your ideas, an inconsistent approach, and a lack of specific details.

For example, you're not saying what is off. Now I admit, I may be coming at you in an oblique fashion, but that's because I see no reason for a direct confrontation.

That's why I said that better cutting the chat there.

And yet you haven't. My suggestion is that if you are going to do so, which is in doubt, given your demonstrated failure to do so, in the future, you do so, without saying so.

This last comment of yours has fully confirmed that initial assumption.

You seem to be leaping to a conclusion then. Are you sure that you've validated it?

I am expressly telling you what I think and you decide to not believe me (= calling me liar or person in denial) because of whatever misinterpretation you have made of my words, my personality or even the world we live again?! You consider that your random assumptions about what I think are more valid than what I say?!

Ah, now you're getting specific. That affords me the chance to point of the mistakes in your approach.

See, the thing is, you could simply have acknowledged that your denial was in error, a mere mistake, but instead you chose to declaim further upon me, and present what seems a quite arrogant defense.

But given that you're expressly denying being bothered by something that you've been saying you've been bothered by, I certainly have little respect in the validity of your claims about your own words. Really, it's not like you served any intentional purpose by claiming not to be bothered by something, all you did was issue a denial of being bothered that made little sense given that you have identified(if poorly)a matter to which you have some degree of ire, and that's not even getting into the rest of my post that you ignored.

Indeed, your insistence on ignoring my own perceptions in favor of what to me seems to be a deeply flawed one(what with you going against a rather clear dictionary definition, much like the persons who say "It's not a threat, it's a promise" as if they didn't realize what the word meant), namely your aforementioned pointless denial of being bothered by something, well, that actually does not help your own credibility.

As far as it goes, I haven't quite decided you are a liar, that would require an intent of deception, but I would have to say I do think you to be somewhat ignorant, perhaps a little foolish, and I wouldn't deny that it is a nonzero likelihood that you may be lying if not to us, to your own self.

Of course, it's hardly unlikely, let alone impossible, that you feel that way about me, but whereas I can know when I am being genuine, if diffident you are not able to avail yourself of what I know and perceive in a direct fashion, but can succumb to the very tempting reaction of treating me as false.

I suggest you work your hardest to overcome that. It is not an uncommon problem, but it is a terribly vicious one. It is a challenge that is worth facing.

Again without trying to offend you, it looks like you have problems
of the worst kind: the self-inflicted ones, the ones that are there only because you want them to

Re: And what about other types of violence?

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice troll. Now fuck off.

Re:And what about other types of violence?

[CustomSolvers2]

See, the thing is, you could simply have acknowledged that your denial was in error, a mere mistake, but instead you chose to declaim further upon me, and present what seems a quite arrogant defense... etc.

Thanks to you and the other idiot below for reminding me, once again, that trying to be civil and understanding with "people" like you is impossible. All your posts since the very first moment have shown your clear lack of understanding and your fanaticism. You seem to believe that using many (in your head) difficult to understand words and repeating the same mantra over and over makes you look intelligent or being in control of the situation, but it proves right the contrary. It only proves that you are a very insecure person who sees manipulation and imposition as a right way through (ironically, your behaviour belongs to what I defined as violence-prone personalities; although you rely on different means than physical violence to impose your views). Nobody with even half brain cell will ever take you or your whole made up world of saying-nothing, empty nonsense seriously. You didn't understand why I said that there is something off with you?! You wanted me to be more specific, OK here I go: you are in complete and absolute denial, you are unable to understand even the simplest idea and to be part of virtually any kind of conversation. You are a fanatic in the strictest sense of the world. You come to me (or to anyone else) with a couple of ill-formed ideas by seriously thinking that you can impose them via systematic repetition (= cult technique). You don't listen. You don't understand. You don't provide anything other than pity (to those feeling it/expecting something from people like you, certainly not me). You just bother or are ignored/not being taking seriously.

I will make one last attempt at helping you understand. I will not reply to/read any other of your sad samples of in-denial nonsense. And just in case you don't get it (which you will most likely not get it), this is not a conversation (it never was, you were talking mostly to yourself and to the crazy misinterpretations you have been coming up with. BTW, a new advice: try to read whole sentences/paragraphs/posts and get the intention/context, rather than isolated words/expressions whose actual meaning is zero), this is a person having a lot (= myself) sharing a bit with someone having a very little (= you); enjoy my generosity or not, I don't care. Anyway... The summary is that my whole point from the start was that violence/aggressions are always an output of the same kind of personalities: insecure people wanting to arbitrarily impose their positions into others (e.g., what you tried to do here). They might do it out of need (committing a crime to get some food), but the most common reason, at least in rich countries, is ignorance, unhealthy expectations, low-self-esteem, unfairness/arbitrariness/egoism/nepotism (certain people expect a special treatment just for being them?!). Unfortunately, some of these movements have got some support (as Brexit or Trump or similar did, pretty much for the same reasons) and have provoked the appearance of quite a few misconceptions and bad expectations. When I see people extremely wrong, provoking problems to themselves and others voluntarily, getting locked inside non-existent jails made by their short-sightedness and prejudices, etc., I feel sorry for them and try to help. Not because of thinking that anything of this really affects me, but out of generosity and contributing towards making the world a better place. Not sure if unfortunately or luckily for me, I have fully confirmed that helping some people is completely impossible; no matter how easily they might stop having their problems (e.g., "all what you need to do is to listen"), they aren't able/willing to solve them. I am not sure about the reason for that (I am an extremely practical guy, always ready to change/improve/understand), I guess that it has to do with the fact that they don't want to accept the r

Re:And what about other types of violence?

[Anonymous Coward]

This is not a complicated issue. Person A should not take sexual action with Person B if Person A is in a position of power over Person B. This could be physical (as is the case with many male/female situations) or institutional (boss/employee, etc). If the lower-power person always makes the first move, the threat is gone.

Re:And what about other types of violence?

[CustomSolvers2]

Just in case I better clarify the difference between aggressive and violent behaviour. I am certainly an aggressive person on quite a few contexts, as proven by my previous post and quite a few other ones. Some people might even consider that, in some cases, my reactions might be a bit too aggressive and as harmful as physical ones. I personally don't agree with that and, in any case, consider my attitudes quite proportional (in many situations, just to be the less bad options and cut right away what isn't going anywhere). In any case and no matter what you think of my aggressiveness, it will never be used to force others to do whatever and this is where I see the difference between aggressiveness and violence (physical or figurative). Forcing others in any way to do anything is one of the less appealing scenarios I can think of. My usual reaction to a rejection is acceptation. Trying to persuade, somehow force, manipulate or similar anyone to do anything is extremely off-putting to me. I am equally incompatible with those wanting to impose whatever on me than with those expecting me to force them to do whatever. Not sure if this differentiation is fully supported by the proper definitions of both concepts but, at least, this is my intention when I use them.

Uber Commits $5 Million To Sexual Assault

[turkeydance]

with matching funds

So?

[Anonymous Coward]

So a taxi company makes a smartphone app, then donates some money. I'm confused as to why anyone reading this site would care about this story.

Chastity belts: $15 on Amazon

[sheramil]

That covers 333,333 drivers. Is that going to be enough?

Government dictating perception

[Anonymous Coward]

... help drive awareness ...

Here, the government joined the "domestic violence awareness" program 6 months ago: Now every announcement has a female as the victim. Plus, 90% of times the attacker is male but when it's female, there's a subtle message of: It's not real violence.

... fingerprinting is too burdensome ...

They don't want to pay someone to collect, store and search a fingerprint database.

They use Stuff White People Like as manual?

[DeplorableCodeMonkey]

This is straight out of this post from Stuff White People Like about "awareness." They're giving $5M, while not profitable, to make people "aware" of an issue instead of doing something practical like spending $5M to augment background investigation systems. Because that would be actually doing something. Making people "aware" of a problem is just mental and emotional masturbation for activists who should be working real jobs.

Re:They use Stuff White People Like as manual?

[Anonymous Coward]

... make people "aware" of an issue ...

The issue is: There's not enough people on my side for me to attack all the other people. This is a cowardly SJW using "awareness" as code for "pick a side". Since many of these issues are based on sex which is impossible to change, there will always be a significant number of people trapped on the losing side.

good PR

[Anonymous Coward]

"and in-app messaging to educate riders and drivers" - what to educate drivers in India not to rape their passengers (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-34578477)? You're going to need more than $5 million mate.
Seems like they're just paying off charities for good PR so they don't need to implement proper reforms e.g. finger printing drivers etc...
Maybe they'll need to spend that closer to home: https://www.recode.net/2017/7/11/15953794/uber-susan-fowler-manager-engineering-sexism-harassment

Re:good PR

[Dog-Cow]

How does fingerprinting someone prevent assault? It's not as if Uber doesn't know who the driver was if an assault is reported by a passenger.

Re:good PR

[Mashiki]

How does fingerprinting someone prevent assault? It's not as if Uber doesn't know who the driver was if an assault is reported by a passenger.

It doesn't, but it does let you track the passenger to the driver for instance. Providing that the driver is actually the driver, and not their second brother-in-law who's actually doing it.

The sexual assault one

[Anonymous Coward]

Uber Commits $5 Million To Sexual Assault, Domestic Violence Prevention

We should not tolerate a company spending so much money on sexual assault. Instead, they should be doing something to prevent it!

Re:The sexual assault one

[jonsmirl]

ww

The easy way

[Anonymous Coward]

Why make any effort to reform your broken, mysogenist culture, when it's easier to just write a big check to an outside group and claim a PR win for taking "women's issues" seriously?

Forget the money

[Anonymous Coward]

Uber Commits Sexual Assault, Domestic Violence

Yeah."Only men" again.

[Anonymous Coward]

Because psychological maiming... the preferred tool of the "meek"... doesn't leave outside scars. So it "isn't real". And one should "suck it up" Because "words can never hurt me".

Except that they can and do, as all sensory input alters the neural state, and it leaves neural scars which, unlike bruises, last a lifetime. And except for the fact that the mind is neurons, which are part of the body, which is real.

And no, dear SJW, that doesn't mean one can blame anybody for "triggering" one's obscure triggers. Nor that it is our job to build a "safe space" around you. If you can't handle the real world, you can't go outside! It just means that if I know that saying something triggers neural connections that trigger your pain center, AND I deliberately say them to hurt you, and leave mental scars, then I'm an abusive asshole, even *gasp* when I'm a woman or the thinnest weakest disabled child.

Re:Yeah."Only men" again.

[kilfarsnar]

Because psychological maiming... the preferred tool of the "meek"... doesn't leave outside scars. So it "isn't real". And one should "suck it up" Because "words can never hurt me".

Except that they can and do, as all sensory input alters the neural state, and it leaves neural scars which, unlike bruises, last a lifetime. And except for the fact that the mind is neurons, which are part of the body, which is real.

And no, dear SJW, that doesn't mean one can blame anybody for "triggering" one's obscure triggers. Nor that it is our job to build a "safe space" around you. If you can't handle the real world, you can't go outside! It just means that if I know that saying something triggers neural connections that trigger your pain center, AND I deliberately say them to hurt you, and leave mental scars, then I'm an abusive asshole, even *gasp* when I'm a woman or the thinnest weakest disabled child.

You need to start hanging out with a better class of women. If someone consistently hurts you, remove them from your life. And then move on. Resentment doesn't serve you.

Robots

[Anonymous Coward]

Making it more freely available will probably be the most significant change towards prevention in our current climate. Some people don't want to be educated, or will forget their training, or just feel frustrated (not singling out men, because what happened to me wasn't a man). I know it won't solve all of it, but it'll solve most of it.

Or legalize paying for it (it's mostly legal anyway with video).

Nice payoff there.

[Anonymous Coward]

You know this is just money to cover a multitude of sins. If we really wanted to fix things, a lot of (mostly male) heads would have to roll. But no, just throw some money around, and the sins are covered over.

Considering most Uber drivers are brown...

[Anonymous Coward]

..... this latest virtue signalling measure will be useless.

Rapey Uber drivers are closely correlated with how dark their skin is.

Arabs, Persians, Indians, Africans etc are mostly latent rapists coming from primitive and deeply misogynistic cultures.

Re:Considering most Uber drivers are brown...

[Anonymous Coward]

..... this latest virtue signalling measure will be useless.

Rapey Uber drivers are closely correlated with how dark their skin is.

Arabs, Persians, Indians, Africans etc are mostly latent rapists coming from primitive and deeply misogynistic cultures.

Trolls gonna troll!

Re: Considering most Uber drivers are brown...

[Anonymous Coward]

Accurate observation is not trolling.

That word does not mean what you think it means.

Fuck Uber!

[Anonymous Coward]

That bitch needs to be slapped!

And just be damned sure . . .

[sgt_doom]

. . . not to use either slimeball David Boies' law firm, or Israeli slimeballs at Black Cube or Kroll:

https://www.newyorker.com/news...

Bad ordering

[superdave80]

I had to do a double-take when I read this part of the list:

...No More, Women of Color Network...

I thought for a moment that there was actually a network devoted to getting rid of women of color :-)

Translation

[whyyisthissohard]

"Uber commits $5 million to mitigate fraudulent character assassination attempts from it's corporate enemies"