251–260 of 347 posts
I don't have a cell phone. What should I have done in this situation?
If you have plenty of spare time in your life you could just park anyway, and dispute in court that there is no physical way to pay, and they can't force everyone to own a phone.
I just can't fathom how a business would not care about the loss of revenue from making it THIS hard for the customers to pay. Is it possible that the parking prices in the city of the author are legally capped and are not reflecting actual demand? This would mean that the parking lot is basically filled every day anyways, and the business doesn't see any ways to increase revenue by improving satisfaction.
Depending on the place, if you fail to pay it's actually more valuable to them, due to fees.
As a computer programmer, I love it when technology allows us to automate things and do more with our time. But I also love the human connection that being greeted by a service professional offers; I don't mistake it for friendship, but it is valuable to me in its own way.
Socially, these kinds of jobs fill an important hole in contemporary western economics. The lower end of the pay-scale is being squeezed out of existence, gambled away on the slim chance of saving megabucks at scale from automation. Possibly the only downside is the unpleasant behaviour that members of the public might show towards service professionals. However, maybe a culture of mutual respect can be promoted more effectively when companies are not always data-harvesting, corner-cutting and penny-pinching as side-hustles.
I. Hate. Technology. I hate working in this field. I hate how unprofessional every company is, from the largest to the smallest. I hate how incompetent all the engineers are. I hate how no business I have ever worked for has ever trained its workers on anything but how to fill out a time sheet. I hate all the blog posts about inane technical details. I hate how people start building a solution to a problem they're no…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In my city, in the rougher parts it used to be somewhat normal to pay someone to "look after your car", of course you were paying them not to vandalise it while you were away! Especially popular on football days when parking near the stadium. It was only a couple of pounds or so. I haven't been to these parts of town for years so I have no idea if this practice still goes on.
There’s a popular swimming around here that’s near a rough neighborhood. One elderly gentleman from that neighborhood guards the cars at the swimming hole. He even got himself a shirt that says “security”. You pay $2 and he makes sure nobody busts the windows out of your car.
This story makes me sad and a little angry. The bits that stand out for me are: - The requirement to have a smartphone and mobile data service. - The requirement to run untrusted code (granting whatever "permissions" it demands) on her personal device. I think it's important that necessities and other basic services (including parking) remain equally accessible to everyone, not locked away behind expensive, often bur…
- Having an app store account of the country you are visiting.
Some of this apps are geo restricted and can't be downloaded with foreign app store accounts. Sometimes they can't process foreign cards or foreign phone numbers.
Bill my license plate. That is the UX I want.
A newer parking house in Oslo has this as one of the options for billing. Do nothing and this happens. (Road tolls already do this in Norway.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is common all over the developing world. I always give them a little something, despite the feel of extortion it has to it. It’s marginally better than begging, and they will really watch the car, and often help with parking and leaving. Fair enough.
In the one of the Third world countries I lived in, the more attentive ones would also put a piece of cardboard on your windshield. A nice touch. Not so much the guys that insist on spraying your windshield with soap at every traffic light.
"Party A pays 1 Pound Sterling for the item owned by Party B"
Crime: Party A blackmails Party B into selling them the item at a discount
Commerce: Party B offers the discount to entice Party A to try the item out, so that they can sell more at full price in the future
Altruism: Party B wants to give the item to a good home rather than destroying it (if that would cost them, then it's even mutually beneficial altruism from both parties)
Clearly it is the context about how the contract was made that distinguishes the situations. It would be a mistake to try to classify every possible contract as legitimate based on its semantics alone.