Hacker News Reader

Comment by saagarjha | Hacker News Reader

> Mr. West said the company struggled with the decision to commit to a safety transparency report for its rides, because he knows that it will be “disturbing” when the actual number of assaults that happen on Uber is announced — in part because of the company’s size and the ease with which customers can report an incident.

This seems like the wrong attitude to have…

View on HN

Not really, it's perfectly reasonable to fear overreactions from the public. They could even have the best number in the industry, but if the others don't publish and it sounds big, people will freak out.

Regardless of how the numbers compare, if they're bad, shouldn't it be the responsibility of the company to attempt to alleviate the problem (instead of just covering it up)?

I suppose they could technically do both, but not acknowledging problems of substantial magnitude could be considered endangerment. Like the mayor from Jaws.

You're absolutely right! It is beyond any doubt that it is Uber's responsibility to alleviate the problem as best they are able.

It may be possible that there could be some reasonable questions around if a publicity blowup is a helpful part of addressing the problem.

What if the numbers are not bad -- what if riding an Uber is safer than cab/bus/walking, but there's no way to know because the stats on cab/bus/walking are not known, so people wrongly assume they are lower than Uber's?

I just don't think the _possibility_ of a backlash (for defensible numbers, no less) justifies withholding information about personal safety. It's not like we're talking about sales figures, production stats, or other trivial things.

If people misread the numbers, for the reasons we've been talking, their reaction might put them in greater danger than currently.

What makes you think they aren't trying to alleviate the problem AND doing what they can to avoid public overreaction? The two aren't mutually exclusive.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com