11–20 of 131 posts
While it's great FTI reversed their decision (I'd hate to see this sort of thing become wide-spread), it's a little off-putting that so many non-users of the chip could force a company into something.
It's their driver, it operates in a specific way, perhaps responding to possible device output. Using it with non-compatible parts advertising themselves as compatible and any resulting behaviour, including unwanted, is the responsibility of the user. To play it safe, don't use any drivers with incompatible hardware.
There should be lawsuits. I really hope a class action gets started with people who were bitten by this. I'm serious. This kind of behavior needs to be nipped in the bud and made a massive example of, or else we will see it in the future.
We do not want to set a precedent whereby a company responds to customer feedback, and then gets hit by a huge lawsuit anyhow. That just incentivizes companies to dig their heels in, because it means there's no change in outcome between speedily responding and trying to stay the course, at which point staying the course is the only sensible choice. There's a time and a place for mercy, and giving positive feedback to…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We do not want to set a precedent whereby a company responds to customer feedback, and then gets hit by a huge lawsuit anyhow. That just incentivizes companies to dig their heels in, because it means there's no change in outcome between speedily responding and trying to stay the course, at which point staying the course is the only sensible choice. There's a time and a place for mercy, and giving positive feedback to…
They have already damaged my equipment. I don't give two shits about hurting a corporation's feelings. They've already hurt my physical items. Once they've gone down that path, it's now an actionable tort. I can't believe their legal team approved of this. They need to be made an example of.
Seems a lot of the posts on that thread are from HN visitors, many may not even have the equipment/chip in discussion. While it's great FTI reversed their decision (I'd hate to see this sort of thing become wide-spread), it's a little off-putting that so many non-users of the chip could force a company into something.
There should be lawsuits. I really hope a class action gets started with people who were bitten by this. I'm serious. This kind of behavior needs to be nipped in the bud and made a massive example of, or else we will see it in the future.
We do not want to set a precedent whereby a company responds to customer feedback, and then gets hit by a huge lawsuit anyhow. That just incentivizes companies to dig their heels in, because it means there's no change in outcome between speedily responding and trying to stay the course, at which point staying the course is the only sensible choice. There's a time and a place for mercy, and giving positive feedback to…
There is an untold amount of bricked gear out there. Those people are entitled to replacements and compensation for their time spent dealing with this malfeasance.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe they should reach out to affected parties and help them replace their destroyed equipment.
They really should. Class actions are an inferior mechanism for both parties anyhow. The lawyers sitting in the middle will make it so it's radically more expensive for the company, and the odds of the supposed "winners" of the class action suit will probably get uselessly small vouchers for service rather than actual replacement.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We do not want to set a precedent whereby a company responds to customer feedback, and then gets hit by a huge lawsuit anyhow. That just incentivizes companies to dig their heels in, because it means there's no change in outcome between speedily responding and trying to stay the course, at which point staying the course is the only sensible choice. There's a time and a place for mercy, and giving positive feedback to…
Maybe they should reach out to affected parties and help them replace their destroyed equipment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We do not want to set a precedent whereby a company responds to customer feedback, and then gets hit by a huge lawsuit anyhow. That just incentivizes companies to dig their heels in, because it means there's no change in outcome between speedily responding and trying to stay the course, at which point staying the course is the only sensible choice. There's a time and a place for mercy, and giving positive feedback to…
They have already damaged my equipment. I don't give two shits about hurting a corporation's feelings. They've already hurt my physical items. Once they've gone down that path, it's now an actionable tort. I can't believe their legal team approved of this. They need to be made an example of.
I disagree with the consensus. It's their driver, it operates in a specific way, perhaps responding to possible device output. Using it with non-compatible parts advertising themselves as compatible and any resulting behaviour, including unwanted, is the responsibility of the user. To play it safe, don't use any drivers with incompatible hardware.
As many have noted, all that's needed is an alert for the user that the driver's incompatible. That way the user can take rectification measures, be it getting new compatible chips/devices, or using unofficial drivers.