This is likely more than Uber's entire Netherlands annual revenue, I think.
> GDPR rules ban decisions made solely by computer algorithms when they have a significant impact on people’s lives, such as on employment, saying such decisions require meaningful human review and a way to challenge a decision.<p>The law Uber broke. I can’t believe they found it that difficult to follow something as simple as that.
> <i>something as simple as that</i><p>Dutch Uber drivers aren’t employees [1].<p>[1] <a href="https://nltimes.nl/2026/01/27/uber-drivers-freelancers-employees-amsterdam-court-appeal-rules" rel="nofollow">https://nltimes.nl/2026/01/27/uber-drivers-freelancers-emplo...</a>
That's irrelevant.<p><pre><code> The data subject shall have the right not to be subject to a decision based solely on automated processing, including profiling, which produces legal effects concerning him or her or similarly significantly affects him or her.
</code></pre>
Nowhere in article 22 [1] does it restrict the scope to employees.<p>If Uber processes data, and makes decisions based on that data in an automated way that significantly affects people, it is not allowed. That's all there is to it.<p>[1]: <a href="https://gdpr-info.eu/art-22-gdpr/" rel="nofollow">https://gdpr-info.eu/art-22-gdpr/</a>
They didn’t find it difficult, they found it expensive and figured they could avoid it. In the US, they’d probably have been right; in the EU, apparently not.
I am curious, if the algorithm provided the recommendation and a person had to say agree or disagree for each would that be against the law?<p>Uber may want to reconsider operating in the Netherlands- would be surprised if they get this much in profit from this region. Unfortunately for them these laws are EU wide.
We’ve gotta normalize linking to the underlying ruling. Uber says they didn’t automate any permanent suspensions and the regulator says they did; how can anyone interpret this story without more information on how the regulator determined this?
*Netherlands raises $1bn in <i>special taxes</i> from overseas operation.
No, it’s a fine because they broke the law. The EU fortunately takes that seriously.
Uber is breaking Dutch law.
I'm so tired of this talking point. Either follow our laws or get the fuck out of our market.<p>There's no special right for American companies to ignore our rules and when they get fined for breaking them, that's just <i>rule of law</i>.<p>Maybe there's been enough regulatory capture that big corps can ignore laws on the other side of the pond, but for now, we are still a society of law and justice.
And it’s also incredibly tiring to force legal paradigms of one country over another. Don’t like it? Don’t operate. Please don’t operate and whine how the country is not bending over backwards to your demands.
Reading the Guardian article - it feels that the decision is weakly motivated. It is not clear exactly what rules Uber broke.<p>>“Uber has committed serious infringements” by deactivating driver accounts without warning or human involvement, the organization’s deputy chair Monique Verdier said in a statement.<p>>“From one moment to the next they no longer had any income … A computer should not make decisions on its own that have (such) major consequences.”<p>If you manage to extract usable info from that quote kudos. To me it looks like regulator going berserk in reading the unholy mess that is GDPR.
Sorry how else are they supposed to do it at Uber scale?
Are you saying that we should allow a Uber to do whatever they want because of scale they are operating? It’s Uber choice to operate at scale. No one forced them to.
This is pure revenue extraction from American tech. The EU now makes <i>more</i> in fines from American companies than it does in taxes from its own tech industry. It is clearly impossible to fill these roles with humans without breaking the economic case for Uber, which is obviously the goal. Europe is so fucked man.
American tech companies just have a hard time operating in a legal system that isn’t bought and paid for.
If it's clearly impossible, how come Uber managed to become compliant in 2022?
Then Uber is fucked. "This is how you do it cheaper" isn't an escape hatch, and we shouldn't accept terrible behavior just because it's cheaper.<p>Disclaimer: I briefly worked for Uber and quit in disgust
> Sorry how else are they supposed to do it at Uber scale?<p>The people at Uber are ubersmart, so they can figure it out. If they can't, they don't know how to run their business in line with the law and should be fired.
Is following the law optional if you're able to break it at scale?
Yeah, I find the notion that human judgement is superior to algorithmic judgement to be pretty suspect… look at Jens Ludwig’s work on judges, it’s not like involving a human improves outcomes somehow
Well they can reduce driver pay and hire additional lawyers; the EU way.
Hire people?