3 ms·

> Why are you comfortable giving them digital control of something you (in theory only) own? I wouldn't want it myself. I don't get why people think it's uneth

> Why are you comfortable giving them digital control of something you (in theory only) own? I wouldn't want it myself. I don't get why people think it's unethical though. Someone called it a 'crime' elsewhere. That boggles my mind. It's their product - they can offer whatever payment model they want. If it's a crap one then don't buy it. If enough people think it's crap the market will adjust. It's a luxury car, not baby formula.

horsawlarway 4y ago
> they can offer whatever payment model they want This is a distinct misunderstanding of acceptable capitalism. To be very blunt, it's simply not true. We accept the idea that "greed is good" when it comes to capitalism only because we regulate the cases where the market fails to align the interests of the customer and manufacturer. In cases where interests are aligned: Greed is good. The seller wants to take actions that increase profit, and that usually means either reducing the cost to produce the item, or increasing the real (or perceived) value of the item for consumers. Both of those are good things for all parties. In cases where interests are not aligned we regulate the ever-loving shit out of the market because we have incredibly detailed historical evidence that shows that it devolves to straight abuse. Things like - Cartels - Monopolies - Fraud - Misleading advertising - Contractual abuse - Unequal bargaining - Regulated goods (black markets) and several hundred other specific laws we have that only exist because without them people end up killing each other due to real (or perceived) injustice without them.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]