4 ms·

> In the last two years, the FTC has shown it will pursue big technology companies in consumer-fraud cases. It has accused Google, Amazon.com Inc. and Apple Inc

> In the last two years, the FTC has shown it will pursue big technology companies in consumer-fraud cases. It has accused Google, Amazon.com Inc. and Apple Inc. of wrongly billing consumers for unauthorized purchases made by children on mobile applications. Google and Apple settled the FTC complaint and agreed to refund money to consumers. Amazon said it would fight the lawsuit. That's a pathetic track record. Corporations have done crimes equivalent to mass murder and the "biggest case" the ftc has taken on is refunding a fucking app store purchase that was probably my fault for not keeping an eye on my kid? I almost hope amazon wins.

ptaipale 11y ago
"equivalent to mass murder"? Isn't that a bit of an overstatement?
- Ensorceled 11y ago
  The company [GM] continued to recall more of its cars over the next several months, resulting in nearly 30 million cars worldwide recalled and paid compensation for 124 deaths.[1] No, not really an overstatement. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_General_Motors_recall https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_General_Motors_recall
  - blisterpeanuts 11y ago
    It is interesting that people focus so intensely on these deaths while almost not caring about the other 32K car deaths per year (plus hundreds of thousands of injuries and billions of dollars in damages) just in the U.S. alone. One month is the equivalent of a 9/11, for which the nation mobilized and waged war halfway around the world. In my opinion all this bloviating about ignition switches, bundled browsers etc. misses the mark. We should be demanding much safer and more survivable vehicles. I sure don't want to die on the road or see my loved ones crippled by some drunk driver. Let's legislate survivability at highway speeds. Go back to the drawing board and come up with something that works--collision avoidance, prison for DUI, explosive bumpers--anything to reduce those numbers.
    - Ensorceled 11y ago
      I'm not focusing on those deaths at all, they are just one clear instance of a corporation killing a bunch of people. I'm appalled that you can simply run somebody over with a car and then say "oops, accidents happen" and walk away. I'm appalled that safety standards are so lax. I'm appalled that drunk drivers are not treated exactly like somebody who walks around a fires a gun randomly. I'm appalled that people who have become a driving hazard because of illness or infirmity are allowed to keep driving "for their dignity". The 32K deaths is why the self-driving car will rapidly take over the market once it is viable. The insurance companies will see to it.
    - ptaipale 11y ago
      I don't know exact statistics about the US, but in my country (Finland), it is getting very difficult to reduce the number of deaths in traffic by the kind of actions you propose. First of all, around one fifth of people killed in traffic have committed suicide. They take their car, take off the seatbelt, and drive as fast as they can and hit an oncoming heavy goods vehicle. That's bad, because it is very traumatic to the people who drive trucks and transport stuff. They get injured physically, and even worse, emotionally. You can't stop this by making better cars; you might stop it by having only Google-driven robot cars (so we go merry round with the discussion on how evil corporations are). And even then, if people can't kill themselves with a car, they'll find something else. Next, you'll be banning pedestrian bridges. Over one tenth of traffic deaths here are natural deaths. I.e. they are recorded in traffic death statistics, and they are used for justifying car and fuel taxes, but in fact it's the old man got a heart attack or a stroke, and died, and there's not a scratch to the car. Or just fell off the road on his bike. But it's still a traffic death here. Then there are the tragic accidents where a child is run over by a heavy goods vehicle. Most of this is not about speed; it's about noticing people who were in a blind spot. We've had three children killed in an few weeks in this nation in similar accidents, and that is too much. Here, some automatic detection technology will probably help a bit. But what's the bulk of traffic accidents? Mostly it's tremendous idiocy which is hard to legislate away. People who are DUI at four times the legal limit, are driving three times the speed limit, and running away from police because they don't have a driver's license, and they have no seat belts, and then they hit a tree and everyone in the car is killed. More survivable vehicles help, and in fact the development has been huge over the past years, but particularly the people who are gross idiots are also people who drive older cars, so they are less protected. And still, considering all this, I think road traffic is remarkably safe, and when I think how much people move around, accidents are few and far between.
  - ptaipale 11y ago
    This thread was about Google, and now you write aggressively about GM. No wonder it's hard to follow your line of thought. But even with GM and car security issues, I think it is an overstatement to say that they have done "mass murder". Yes, there have been some faults in GM cars, and recalls, and accidents, but overall, if we look at modern cars and traffic, I'd say they are remarkably safe. For instance, if we ride bikes instead, the likelihood of death per passenger km is about 10 times higher than with car traffic. I'm not aware who Google has "mass murdered". Google has surely had a profound influence on the society in most countries, and life has changed, but I can't see how the word "mass murder" fits in.
    - Ensorceled 11y ago
      Hmmm, I wasn't aware people were having trouble following my line of thought. They covered up a flaw that have been linked to over a hundred deaths rather than issue a recall or even a "don't put shit on your key chain" warning. I'm not sure what else to call causing a hundred people to die simply to protect your bottom line. Maybe you need to kill more people for it to be "mass"? The original commenters point was why are we chasing Google when there are other corporations doing the equivalent of mass murder. So absolutely no one in this thread, especially me, is accusing Google of mass murder. In fact we are saying the exact opposite. No wonder you are having problems following my line of thought.
    - crimsonalucard 11y ago
      >This thread was about Google, and now you write aggressively about GM. No wonder it's hard to follow your line of thought. This thread was not about google. I started it. Nowhere in my original comment did I mention google. The article may involve google I'm only remarking on a part of the article. My comment shifted the topic a bit to litigation and corporations in general. It seems quite obvious to me. I think the evidence points to your own ability to follow the thread then someone writing something about GM. >I'm not aware who Google has "mass murdered". Google has surely had a profound influence on the society in most countries, and life has changed, but I can't see how the word "mass murder" fits in. Dude when did anyone say "Google" mass murdered? Nobody said that. Read english man. When I said "mass murdered" I said corporations have mass murdered. People have mass murdered other people too. Both are true statements.
- crimsonalucard 11y ago
  Bit of an understatement. You ever heard of an industry called big tobacco? Half a million killed a year, and they've made it seem cool to put these death sticks in your mouth. Honestly, even I think it looks pretty damn cool. Ciba-Geigy is another example. Read the reviews of the book: http://www.amazon.com/Toms-River-Story-Science-Salvation/dp/055380653X http://www.amazon.com/Toms-River-Story-Science-Salvation/dp/... These are just two random "success stories" I picked out of many failures. And even though I call them "successes" the results are still truly pathetic. if an individual rather than a corporation committed equivalent crimes they are tried in international court and hanged. Imagine the speed at which justice was served to Saddam Hussein versus a corporation.
  - ptaipale 11y ago
    I still can't quite follow. What have Google, Amazon and the FTC got to do with big tobacco? It seems to me that you're on a crusade against big corporations, regardless of what they are doing (tobacco, cars, search services or book sales) and you think they are bad just because they are big.
    - crimsonalucard 11y ago
      You can't follow the topic of the thread because it diverged two inches off topic? Let me spell it out for you. 1. I quoted a part of the article saying how pathetic that the FTC is for only attacking Accidental app purchases by kids. I claim it's pathetic because many corporations have committed crimes that are worse up to and including murder. Please note that nowhere did I say corporations are bad because they are big. 2. Then someone said my comment was too extreme. 3. Then I used an example, citing other corporations and murder as an example to prove my point. 4. You claim you're too stupid to follow the thread because if I'm not talking about google or amazon then I'm "off topic." You also claim that I think corporations are bad because they are big when I clearly never said anything of the sort. I'm saying some of the biggest crimes corporations committed involve murder and that the FTC only taking care of accidental app purchases by kids is rather pathetic. Get it smart ass?
      - 11y ago

ptaipale 11y ago

"equivalent to mass murder"? Isn't that a bit of an overstatement?

Ensorceled 11y ago
The company [GM] continued to recall more of its cars over the next several months, resulting in nearly 30 million cars worldwide recalled and paid compensation for 124 deaths.[1] No, not really an overstatement. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_General_Motors_recall https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_General_Motors_recall
- blisterpeanuts 11y ago
  It is interesting that people focus so intensely on these deaths while almost not caring about the other 32K car deaths per year (plus hundreds of thousands of injuries and billions of dollars in damages) just in the U.S. alone. One month is the equivalent of a 9/11, for which the nation mobilized and waged war halfway around the world. In my opinion all this bloviating about ignition switches, bundled browsers etc. misses the mark. We should be demanding much safer and more survivable vehicles. I sure don't want to die on the road or see my loved ones crippled by some drunk driver. Let's legislate survivability at highway speeds. Go back to the drawing board and come up with something that works--collision avoidance, prison for DUI, explosive bumpers--anything to reduce those numbers.
  - Ensorceled 11y ago
    I'm not focusing on those deaths at all, they are just one clear instance of a corporation killing a bunch of people. I'm appalled that you can simply run somebody over with a car and then say "oops, accidents happen" and walk away. I'm appalled that safety standards are so lax. I'm appalled that drunk drivers are not treated exactly like somebody who walks around a fires a gun randomly. I'm appalled that people who have become a driving hazard because of illness or infirmity are allowed to keep driving "for their dignity". The 32K deaths is why the self-driving car will rapidly take over the market once it is viable. The insurance companies will see to it.
  - ptaipale 11y ago
    I don't know exact statistics about the US, but in my country (Finland), it is getting very difficult to reduce the number of deaths in traffic by the kind of actions you propose. First of all, around one fifth of people killed in traffic have committed suicide. They take their car, take off the seatbelt, and drive as fast as they can and hit an oncoming heavy goods vehicle. That's bad, because it is very traumatic to the people who drive trucks and transport stuff. They get injured physically, and even worse, emotionally. You can't stop this by making better cars; you might stop it by having only Google-driven robot cars (so we go merry round with the discussion on how evil corporations are). And even then, if people can't kill themselves with a car, they'll find something else. Next, you'll be banning pedestrian bridges. Over one tenth of traffic deaths here are natural deaths. I.e. they are recorded in traffic death statistics, and they are used for justifying car and fuel taxes, but in fact it's the old man got a heart attack or a stroke, and died, and there's not a scratch to the car. Or just fell off the road on his bike. But it's still a traffic death here. Then there are the tragic accidents where a child is run over by a heavy goods vehicle. Most of this is not about speed; it's about noticing people who were in a blind spot. We've had three children killed in an few weeks in this nation in similar accidents, and that is too much. Here, some automatic detection technology will probably help a bit. But what's the bulk of traffic accidents? Mostly it's tremendous idiocy which is hard to legislate away. People who are DUI at four times the legal limit, are driving three times the speed limit, and running away from police because they don't have a driver's license, and they have no seat belts, and then they hit a tree and everyone in the car is killed. More survivable vehicles help, and in fact the development has been huge over the past years, but particularly the people who are gross idiots are also people who drive older cars, so they are less protected. And still, considering all this, I think road traffic is remarkably safe, and when I think how much people move around, accidents are few and far between.
- ptaipale 11y ago
  This thread was about Google, and now you write aggressively about GM. No wonder it's hard to follow your line of thought. But even with GM and car security issues, I think it is an overstatement to say that they have done "mass murder". Yes, there have been some faults in GM cars, and recalls, and accidents, but overall, if we look at modern cars and traffic, I'd say they are remarkably safe. For instance, if we ride bikes instead, the likelihood of death per passenger km is about 10 times higher than with car traffic. I'm not aware who Google has "mass murdered". Google has surely had a profound influence on the society in most countries, and life has changed, but I can't see how the word "mass murder" fits in.
  - Ensorceled 11y ago
    Hmmm, I wasn't aware people were having trouble following my line of thought. They covered up a flaw that have been linked to over a hundred deaths rather than issue a recall or even a "don't put shit on your key chain" warning. I'm not sure what else to call causing a hundred people to die simply to protect your bottom line. Maybe you need to kill more people for it to be "mass"? The original commenters point was why are we chasing Google when there are other corporations doing the equivalent of mass murder. So absolutely no one in this thread, especially me, is accusing Google of mass murder. In fact we are saying the exact opposite. No wonder you are having problems following my line of thought.
  - crimsonalucard 11y ago
    >This thread was about Google, and now you write aggressively about GM. No wonder it's hard to follow your line of thought. This thread was not about google. I started it. Nowhere in my original comment did I mention google. The article may involve google I'm only remarking on a part of the article. My comment shifted the topic a bit to litigation and corporations in general. It seems quite obvious to me. I think the evidence points to your own ability to follow the thread then someone writing something about GM. >I'm not aware who Google has "mass murdered". Google has surely had a profound influence on the society in most countries, and life has changed, but I can't see how the word "mass murder" fits in. Dude when did anyone say "Google" mass murdered? Nobody said that. Read english man. When I said "mass murdered" I said corporations have mass murdered. People have mass murdered other people too. Both are true statements.
crimsonalucard 11y ago
Bit of an understatement. You ever heard of an industry called big tobacco? Half a million killed a year, and they've made it seem cool to put these death sticks in your mouth. Honestly, even I think it looks pretty damn cool. Ciba-Geigy is another example. Read the reviews of the book: http://www.amazon.com/Toms-River-Story-Science-Salvation/dp/055380653X http://www.amazon.com/Toms-River-Story-Science-Salvation/dp/... These are just two random "success stories" I picked out of many failures. And even though I call them "successes" the results are still truly pathetic. if an individual rather than a corporation committed equivalent crimes they are tried in international court and hanged. Imagine the speed at which justice was served to Saddam Hussein versus a corporation.
- ptaipale 11y ago
  I still can't quite follow. What have Google, Amazon and the FTC got to do with big tobacco? It seems to me that you're on a crusade against big corporations, regardless of what they are doing (tobacco, cars, search services or book sales) and you think they are bad just because they are big.
  - crimsonalucard 11y ago
    You can't follow the topic of the thread because it diverged two inches off topic? Let me spell it out for you. 1. I quoted a part of the article saying how pathetic that the FTC is for only attacking Accidental app purchases by kids. I claim it's pathetic because many corporations have committed crimes that are worse up to and including murder. Please note that nowhere did I say corporations are bad because they are big. 2. Then someone said my comment was too extreme. 3. Then I used an example, citing other corporations and murder as an example to prove my point. 4. You claim you're too stupid to follow the thread because if I'm not talking about google or amazon then I'm "off topic." You also claim that I think corporations are bad because they are big when I clearly never said anything of the sort. I'm saying some of the biggest crimes corporations committed involve murder and that the FTC only taking care of accidental app purchases by kids is rather pathetic. Get it smart ass?
    - 11y ago