Personally, I think it's a good idea and I wonder why they didn't do it long ago.

As for privacy, you have no reasonable expectation of privacy in a public place. An Uber car isn't any more private in theory than a train or subway. If you want privacy, stay at home or get your own car. Uber already knows where you're going if you use their service, so this only gives them access to any conversations you might have. Simple: keep your mouth shut in the car. Why would you have a super-private conversation in a cab anyway, with some stranger who's driving you right there?

There's an interesting law review article that covers expectations of privacy in uber / lyft:

https://ecollections.law.fiu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article...

> Simple: keep your mouth shut

Truly the best solution to privacy erosion.

I'm not sure why you think you should deserve any privacy in a conversation when you have that conversation right next to some stranger. If you want something to be private, you don't do it in public. This should be self-evident, hence why the terms "public" and "private" usually function as antonyms.

Or instead of this, actually put an effective vetting system in place for drivers. That would not require super-strict privacy control and the inevitable hack. (having this data would make uber the most juicy target for spy agencies)

There is no vetting system that can separate criminals from "normal people", beyond looking at obvious stuff like past convictions. Sex offenders don't look or act any different than the rest of us.

Given Uber's history, this feature is almost certainly not "for the good of the consumer". Audio data has a lot of value these days, and I imagine Uber has a lot to gain from having a large trove of it.

Why would this data be so valuable? In an Uber people are with a stranger in their car so they will probably not have super confidential conversations.