181–190 of 196 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Frankly speaking, your moral framework needs work. Sincerely, the rest of society.
Its normal. You may disagree with my morality and me or other people may as well disagree with your morality, whatever that is.
The Twitter thread pointed to a BBC article [1] that certainly suggests that the UK’s regulators don’t think this is okay. I’ve found that Booking.com legitimately treats independent rooms as “only one left” (e.g., the B&B has named rooms, so there’s always just one of a kind for each) but I suspect any investigation into most of these sites leads to “this is full of misleading dark patterns”. [1] https://www.bbc.com…
Booking.com is horrible to use in my opinion. It is handy but you need to ignore the dark patterns on every. Single. Page. Honestly it makes me want to use the website less, and does not urge me to buy.
Using Booking.com, I could only find hotels that were too expensive or too far away. Using a different site, I found a really affordable one near the Oberhausen railway station, at half an hour from the Messe in Essen.
So Booking isn't even all that convenient. Yes, they have a lot, but they're also missing a lot. It pays to shop around.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Booking.com is horrible to use in my opinion. It is handy but you need to ignore the dark patterns on every. Single. Page. Honestly it makes me want to use the website less, and does not urge me to buy.
Last time I had a phone screening with the, I learned their entire codebase was in Perl, with no plans on migration to anything else. There were almost no unit tests anywhere. Most developers could push directly to production. Everything the girl on the phone said was horrifying and I decided not to continue. Their recruiter kept trying to call me over Skype though, and they offer more than most other companies of th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It isn't controversial. But we should teach people to think independently, rather than devaluing education and critical thinking. Why not have both? Businesses should have integrity and consumers should be able to apply a basic level of critical thinking. I don't think I placed blame on the victim, either. I'm merely pointing out people should think critically of what they read, because that has a lot of valuable app…
I think we should also teach people some epistemological self-defense. People caught on lying should be punished, hard . Lying to others is an inherently hostile act.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think we should also teach people some epistemological self-defense. People caught on lying should be punished, hard . Lying to others is an inherently hostile act.
Deceptive advertising is already under the FTC’s purview
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> their entire codebase was in Perl, with no plans on migration to anything else. There were almost no unit tests anywhere. Most developers could push directly to production. One of these things is not like the others. Not liking Perl is a valid personal choice, but doesn't say much about the codebase. The others are telling though. More so if it's true given that Perl has a very heavy culture of testing (the TAP pro…
The third hand knowledge I have of booking.com was that lack of unit tests was an explicit choice. I.e. they felt it was more efficient to just catch bugs in production and be quick to fix them than spend time in unit tests that got obsolete fast and add friction. I didn't buy in the narrative, but it was an interesting perspective.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Frankly speaking, your moral framework needs work. Sincerely, the rest of society.
Its normal. You may disagree with my morality and me or other people may as well disagree with your morality, whatever that is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Its normal. You may disagree with my morality and me or other people may as well disagree with your morality, whatever that is.
Any moral framework that attempts to justify outright lying in order to obtain personal gain at others' expense is not only not normal, it is also indefensible.
Whether its indefensible or not, is matter of your preference/personal value.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They might just have different moral values. This is why "values" is a terrible word to use to describe morals. Values are subjective things like modesty or frugality. Those are values, because how you dress or spend your money generally have consequences only to yourself. Something becomes immoral when it deprives another person of their inalienable rights; it causes them harm. Others' rights aren't subject to neg…
Same thing with morality, its subjective. There are no such thing as inalienable rights. Every right has to be earned and fight for.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the Lanham act applies, possibly[1]. This isn't typical false advertising, though, as it's not claiming their service does a thing it doesn't nor is it defaming a competitor, it's lying about interest in the service. Looking at the criteria: > (1) a false statement of fact has been made about the advertiser's own or another person's goods, services, or commercial activity; I think a fake number of people looking i…
I think you misunderstand- the parent comment you replied to is referring to ads on Google using a much, much lower price that isn't actually offered by the hotel; it's not referring to whether or not the number of people looking at the ad is misleading/false.