5 ms·

Why would they be? I can see the political argument for the position.

dgellow 7y ago
It's a way to steal from the local community given that public transports are financed mostly by tax money and by tickets (a tax based on your usage of the infrastructure). They present it as if it was a political action. That's rather ironic IMHO. Free public transports just mean that you pay it through another way, and most likely mean that you remove the "use tax", thus increasing the contribution from people who don't actually use public transports.
- nailer 7y ago
  In one of the Nordic countries (at work so can't do research) they made PT free because ticketing maintenance costs were more expensive than ticket revenue. In other words, free PT could save taxpayers money.
  - Cederfjard 7y ago
    I think you're thinking of Luxemburg, rather than a Nordic country. Apparently some politicians are considering it in Denmark as well though.
- Mordisquitos 7y ago
  >Free public transports just mean that you pay it through another way, and most likely mean that you remove the "use tax", thus increasing the contribution from people who don't actually use public transports. Absolutely, and that is in fact their political stance. They believe that there should be no use tax on public transport and that people who don't use it should still be responsible for financing it. Their reasoning is probably based on the assertion that public transport causes positive externalities even for non-users, and that the resulting benefit to society as a whole outweighs the purported unfairness against individuals. You may or may not agree, it may or may not be a good policy, but it is a legitimate political stance. A separate issue is whether guerrilla tactics/direct actions such as these can be justified to attain a political goal in a liberal democracy, and yet another debate is whether these methods are even tactically useful in getting closer to their stated goal.
  - dgellow 7y ago
    To be honest, I haven't checked the content of the onion link so I don't know what their position is (or if they even communicate it), I will assume that you're describing their it accurately. > they believe that there should be no use tax on public transport and that people who don't use it should still be responsible for financing it I don't know for Manchester specifically but any public transport I'm familiar with is payed in huge part with tax money, so people who don't use public transports are already paying for it. But not the 100%, instead it's balanced with the use tax. So, is that the contention point, that it should be paid only by tax money? I don't understand what benefits that would bring. With this system, people using public transports the most (thus get the most value) would pay the less (if averaged per trip), how do you balance such a system? Concerning their action, what's the idea behind sharing their exploit other than simplifying the work of free-rider? That it is too expensive to design a use-tax system that works, thus make the 100% government funded solution more attractive?
- Aeolun 7y ago
  If that is your standpoint any form of activism like this is stealing from the community. On the whole, this is probably one of the least harmful things they could have released publicly.
  - dgellow 7y ago
    > any form of activism like this is stealing from the community Depends the actions you’re thinking about, but I would guess that’s likely to be the case, yes. > On the whole, this is probably one of the least harmful things they could have released publicly. Could you elaborate?
chumali 7y ago
> Why would they be? Because their position is naive and lacks any serious economic or political justification. Even assuming that their beliefs are sincerely held, this would not be the correct course of action to go about inciting change.
- izietto 7y ago
  It seems to me a political opinion this one too (I'm not parting for whichever)
- dagw 7y ago
  Because their position is naive and lacks any serious economic or political justification. When was the last time that stopped anybody from taking a political stance? this would not be the correct course of action to go about inciting change See question above.
- Beltiras 7y ago
  "Blacks should just sit in the back and petition for the law to be changed. There is after all a correct course of action to go about inciting change." I'll grant that the comparison is way out of proportion but would you have held this position in the 60's?
  - lonelappde 7y ago
    "I'm going to steal from the system (including all it's black users) until it stops being racist" is a bad way to fight racism, yes.
- Aeolun 7y ago
  You may hold a different opinion, but I think this is going to be reasonably effective in making the bus company fix their app.
dwild 7y ago
Simply because looking at vulnerabilities in a ticket system won't actually bring them any closer to actual free public transit. It may bring them more publicity though by the media that will talk about them, but they are also labeling this cause as being the criminal side.... which isn't really good (that's actually the strategy that multiple government use to push their agenda, making the opposite side seems like they are infringing the law).

It's a way to steal from the local community given that public transports are financed mostly by tax money and by tickets (a tax based on your usage of the infrastructure). They present it as if it was a political action. That's rather ironic IMHO. Free public transports just mean that you pay it through another way, and most likely mean that you remove the "use tax", thus increasing the contribution from people who don't actually use public transports.

nailer 7y ago
In one of the Nordic countries (at work so can't do research) they made PT free because ticketing maintenance costs were more expensive than ticket revenue. In other words, free PT could save taxpayers money.
- Cederfjard 7y ago
  I think you're thinking of Luxemburg, rather than a Nordic country. Apparently some politicians are considering it in Denmark as well though.
Mordisquitos 7y ago
>Free public transports just mean that you pay it through another way, and most likely mean that you remove the "use tax", thus increasing the contribution from people who don't actually use public transports. Absolutely, and that is in fact their political stance. They believe that there should be no use tax on public transport and that people who don't use it should still be responsible for financing it. Their reasoning is probably based on the assertion that public transport causes positive externalities even for non-users, and that the resulting benefit to society as a whole outweighs the purported unfairness against individuals. You may or may not agree, it may or may not be a good policy, but it is a legitimate political stance. A separate issue is whether guerrilla tactics/direct actions such as these can be justified to attain a political goal in a liberal democracy, and yet another debate is whether these methods are even tactically useful in getting closer to their stated goal.
- dgellow 7y ago
  To be honest, I haven't checked the content of the onion link so I don't know what their position is (or if they even communicate it), I will assume that you're describing their it accurately. > they believe that there should be no use tax on public transport and that people who don't use it should still be responsible for financing it I don't know for Manchester specifically but any public transport I'm familiar with is payed in huge part with tax money, so people who don't use public transports are already paying for it. But not the 100%, instead it's balanced with the use tax. So, is that the contention point, that it should be paid only by tax money? I don't understand what benefits that would bring. With this system, people using public transports the most (thus get the most value) would pay the less (if averaged per trip), how do you balance such a system? Concerning their action, what's the idea behind sharing their exploit other than simplifying the work of free-rider? That it is too expensive to design a use-tax system that works, thus make the 100% government funded solution more attractive?
Aeolun 7y ago
If that is your standpoint any form of activism like this is stealing from the community. On the whole, this is probably one of the least harmful things they could have released publicly.
- dgellow 7y ago
  > any form of activism like this is stealing from the community Depends the actions you’re thinking about, but I would guess that’s likely to be the case, yes. > On the whole, this is probably one of the least harmful things they could have released publicly. Could you elaborate?

chumali 7y ago

> Why would they be? Because their position is naive and lacks any serious economic or political justification. Even assuming that their beliefs are sincerely held, this would not be the correct course of action to go about inciting change.

izietto 7y ago
It seems to me a political opinion this one too (I'm not parting for whichever)
dagw 7y ago
Because their position is naive and lacks any serious economic or political justification. When was the last time that stopped anybody from taking a political stance? this would not be the correct course of action to go about inciting change See question above.
Beltiras 7y ago
"Blacks should just sit in the back and petition for the law to be changed. There is after all a correct course of action to go about inciting change." I'll grant that the comparison is way out of proportion but would you have held this position in the 60's?
- lonelappde 7y ago
  "I'm going to steal from the system (including all it's black users) until it stops being racist" is a bad way to fight racism, yes.
Aeolun 7y ago
You may hold a different opinion, but I think this is going to be reasonably effective in making the bus company fix their app.

dwild 7y ago

Simply because looking at vulnerabilities in a ticket system won't actually bring them any closer to actual free public transit. It may bring them more publicity though by the media that will talk about them, but they are also labeling this cause as being the criminal side.... which isn't really good (that's actually the strategy that multiple government use to push their agenda, making the opposite side seems like they are infringing the law).