4 ms·
"I don't need a good thing, therefore it's bad."
by StavrosK 6y ago
"I don't need a good thing, therefore it's bad."
- jokethrowaway 6y agoThe reason I consider it bad is because it introduces a mandatory middleman between two consentient business parts. Just because people don't read contracts, it doesn't mean a nanny state should force companies to behave in a certain way. People can just not use those services or learn to read
- StavrosK 6y agoAgreed, consumer protection laws are overreach, they should just make better people. Why didn't we think of that!
- ben_w 6y agoLearn to read legalese? Unlike most people I’m comfortable actually reading contacts, but I’m self-aware enough to know that I probably misunderstand those contracts without even being able to identify which parts I am wrong about. The reason is simple symmetry: most people without computer science degrees make basic mistakes about computers, and I don’t have a law degree.
- soco 6y agoHuge legal departments fight for years with each other representing every other huge company. So it's not like a law degree solves problems (and some could argue a law degree helps create new sorts of problems)
- ben_w 6y agoWell yes, but to compare law degrees and computer science degrees: if a big legal battle is corporate pen-testers trying to hack an internal team’s security, my legal knowledge is someone who knows that CDs are different from USB sticks but can’t tell the difference between CDs and DVDs. To put it another way: imagine all you knew about computers came from watching films and CSI? That’s basically where I’m at with law.
- 8note 6y agoYeah, companies should be allowed to do anything they want. Walmart should be able to control all the roads going in and out of a town, denying all non Walmart groceries, then require residents to submit their nudes in order to shop at Walmart. It's all consentual because Walmart can get a contract, and no nanny state should be able to stop them.