4 ms·

> Caveat emptor The hell with that, the company should be shut down. Some poor soul will think it's a sweet deal. They're putting people at risk of the death p

by rmc 9y ago

> Caveat emptor The hell with that, the company should be shut down. Some poor soul will think it's a sweet deal. They're putting people at risk of the death penalty without telling them and implying everyone is A-OK.

sneak 9y ago
No, the harm comes from government agents. They are the guilty party. One step removed from that, the decisions of the courier to take such risks. Finally, AirMule. You've doubly-undirected the responsibility for the harm being done.
- vertex-four 9y ago
  AirMule are informing the second party (the "mule") that there is no risk. Exactly how is intentionally lying to your customers to the point that you can get them killed ethical? And how exactly is it the fault of the person you've intentionally lied to that they believed your lie? The ethical thing to say, in big, bold writing, is "we check as thoroughly as possible, but we can't be absolutely certain there's nothing illegal in the bag, and you're responsible to the authorities - to the extent of a potential death sentence - if that happens". In fact, this is hidden away all the way at the bottom of the terms and conditions! Of course, if they did that then they wouldn't have any customers. You can be ethical in the presence of other unethical actors - that the Government may or may not be unethical does not change whether your activities are ethical.
  - rmc 9y ago
    > AirMule are informing the second party (the "mule") that there is no risk. Exactly how is intentionally lying to your customers to the point that you can get them killed ethical? disruption!
  - Fnoord 9y ago
    > In fact, this is hidden away all the way at the bottom of the terms and conditions! Or not bottom but slightly above the bottom, since people may skim through and read first and last part only as a matter of verification. > Exactly how is intentionally lying to your customers to the point that you can get them killed ethical? I suppose its a survival of the fittest, to get rid of those humans ignorant or poor enough to deal with this. Would it pass the Darwin Awards though? And don't make the mistake that this business practice goes right for an X amount of times. A scammer on eBay can have hundreds of positive feedback before his exit strategy. As for the "These guys totally have you covered." in the original article, I wouldn't want to do business with someone who's manner of first impression is to advertises themselves as a hardcore gamer, a dancer (with that stale face), and a beer drinker. Doesn't give me confidence at all!
- nolok 9y ago
  I disagree with pretty much your entire message but I'm surprised so I ask: how is it in any way the fault of the governments agents ?!? They don't even have anything to do with that Airmul scam.
  - sneak 9y ago
    They are the ones perpetrating the actual violence by their own hands. I would have thought that obvious.

by rmc 9y ago

sneak 9y ago

No, the harm comes from government agents. They are the guilty party. One step removed from that, the decisions of the courier to take such risks. Finally, AirMule. You've doubly-undirected the responsibility for the harm being done.

vertex-four 9y ago
AirMule are informing the second party (the "mule") that there is no risk. Exactly how is intentionally lying to your customers to the point that you can get them killed ethical? And how exactly is it the fault of the person you've intentionally lied to that they believed your lie? The ethical thing to say, in big, bold writing, is "we check as thoroughly as possible, but we can't be absolutely certain there's nothing illegal in the bag, and you're responsible to the authorities - to the extent of a potential death sentence - if that happens". In fact, this is hidden away all the way at the bottom of the terms and conditions! Of course, if they did that then they wouldn't have any customers. You can be ethical in the presence of other unethical actors - that the Government may or may not be unethical does not change whether your activities are ethical.
- rmc 9y ago
  > AirMule are informing the second party (the "mule") that there is no risk. Exactly how is intentionally lying to your customers to the point that you can get them killed ethical? disruption!
- Fnoord 9y ago
  > In fact, this is hidden away all the way at the bottom of the terms and conditions! Or not bottom but slightly above the bottom, since people may skim through and read first and last part only as a matter of verification. > Exactly how is intentionally lying to your customers to the point that you can get them killed ethical? I suppose its a survival of the fittest, to get rid of those humans ignorant or poor enough to deal with this. Would it pass the Darwin Awards though? And don't make the mistake that this business practice goes right for an X amount of times. A scammer on eBay can have hundreds of positive feedback before his exit strategy. As for the "These guys totally have you covered." in the original article, I wouldn't want to do business with someone who's manner of first impression is to advertises themselves as a hardcore gamer, a dancer (with that stale face), and a beer drinker. Doesn't give me confidence at all!
nolok 9y ago
I disagree with pretty much your entire message but I'm surprised so I ask: how is it in any way the fault of the governments agents ?!? They don't even have anything to do with that Airmul scam.
- sneak 9y ago
  They are the ones perpetrating the actual violence by their own hands. I would have thought that obvious.