Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

It's not a crime if we do it with an app

pluralistic.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 640 posts

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#161

Post by lesuorac »

alt227 wrote: post #59
maiar wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. The entire point of corporations is to shield individuals from penalties, but they don’t work. Business failure in good faith, where the shielding makes sense, is not really protected because bank loans require personal liability and because it’s impossible these days to recover from a damaged reputation unless you come from a family rich enough to hire its own PR firm. On the other hand, when it comes to letti…

I get the feeling this was the plan from begining.

Sure, the plan (of LLCs) was always to limit liability but initially _who_ could incorporate wasn't literally everybody.

Like the founding fathers ran their business as themselves. There isn't some Monticello LLC that Thomas Jefferson was CEO of so if TJ did something bad then he's personally liable for it. This is what's changed and is the problem, people get LLCs in situations they really don't deserve them in.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#162

Post by stickfigure »

9283409232 wrote: post #126
stickfigure wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt there are any regulatory or legal restrictions that prevent newcomers from selling frozen potatoes.

All of the FDA and USDA regulations and inspections.

...which even my local CSA seems to manage. Not saying there isn't a burden, but it's nothing like laying fiber or laws which specifically ban direct sales of automobiles.

If there was big money to be made undercutting Big Potato, someone would do it. Even my CSA grows potatoes.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#163

Post by gruez »

adminu wrote: post #133
constantcrying wrote: post #103

What a terrible article. The title and the first paragraph talk about how new business models are circumventing existing laws, which seems fair enough and actually quite an interesting subject. Then, there is a switch to the most traditional of businesses with the most traditional business models. Who, the author argues, are engaging in price gauging. In the second paragraph he claims that apps cause this inflation (…

> Then, there is a switch to the most traditional of businesses with the most traditional business models. Who, the author argues, are engaging in price gauging. In the second paragraph he claims that apps cause this inflation He is saying that the traditional businesses use an app that allows for a legal way of price gauging. > The last paragraph portraits a stunning lack of economic knowledge, as companies raising…

>The author claims, that these companies raise prices more than inflation based cost increases in production would allow for.

That's just supply and demand? People get mad that when there's an oil shortage, that oil companies raise prices above the cost of production, but they're happy to see oil companies' margin collapse when there's an oil glut.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#165

Post by ajmurmann »

golemotron wrote: post #114
Cheer2171 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh so it seems you are unaware that in modern societies, there is a thing where if laws are unjust, we have a whole system for changing them. It's called government. If your definition of 'unjust' is different than the political system's definition, you have to push for social change to change the political system. You don't get to short-circuit this just because you're an 'innovator'. How do you feel about protester…

What was the plan for fixing taxi service?

Especially while city governments benefited from the medallion scheme (and not even nearly as much as they should have)

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#166

Post by amluto »

ISTM this really wants legislative action more than FTC action. “Price fixing with an app” should not be something probably illegal due to complex Sherman Act arguments that result in it taking years for the government to do anything about it. It should be directly an unambiguously illegal, with strong penalties (3x damages?) for both the companies using the apps and for the companies making the apps. And enforcement should be fast: the government should be able to entirely shut down these apps via a preliminary injunction.

And yes, maybe there should also be penalties applied personally to the executives who break these rules. But that’s a can of worms and it might be unnecessary.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#167

Post by KennyBlanken »

__MatrixMan__ wrote: post #94
Ekaros wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's be honest hear. If you go to store and steal sack of potato. I doubt either the store or police will even attempt to track you anymore... Retail theft is just left to happen.

I've seen some pretty gnarly fights between grocery store security and shoplifters. Back when I worked in one I had to take our security guard to the hospital to have a bite wound treated. There are more of them nowadays, with guns prominently displayed. It feels like we're not far from a world where they stop bothering to chase them down and just start shooting them in the back. I think you just have a nice neighbor…

No, you didn't.

Loss Prevention in damn near any store are not allowed to even make physical contact with a shoplifter - it's a "you're fired" level policy violation.

LP document, try to get the person to stop by hanging around or chasing them out of the store, try to convince the person to drop stuff, and if the person cooperates, keep them hanging around until law enforcement shows up.

Companies don't want employees or customers to get injured and come after them for damages, which would almost certainly be worth far more than whatever the person is running off with.

There are a slew of cameras covering the parking lots for a reason - with photos and video of the person, the car, etc - it is trivial for cops and courts to handle.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#168

Post by djoldman »

fny wrote: post #31
djoldman wrote: post #16

It appears that the crux of the article is that a lot of price fixing is going on through the use of programs that suggest or encourage pricing among a few players, to the advantage of all the players and the disadvantage of the customer. Crackdowns do take time in the US but there is hope. See e.g.: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-sues-realp...

The current administration, however, plans to let M&A run wild. Oligopolies don’t need an app for uncoordinated price fixing. The fact that there’s a cartel that controls 97% of the frozen potato market is wild . This will only get worse without breakups.

Lawsuits are filed in this case as well:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/11/20/potato-ca...

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#169

Post by lesuorac »

greyface- wrote: post #125

> Inflation is one of the most politically salient factors of this decade > Inflation has lots of causes, it's true. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M2SL Algorithmic price fixing is certainly a not-insignificant part of the issue. But it's strange to see zero acknowledgement of the massive increase in money supply over the same time period. When doing causal analysis, we need to examine both the private sector and…

> But it's strange to see zero acknowledgement of the massive increase in money supply over the same time period.

Because when you look at inflation in the period of say ~2000 to ~2025 [1] it's really not very obvious that there's an increase in M2 from '08 onward.

Talking about M2 as a source of inflation is like shouting Red at a roulette wheel. Sure, sometimes the ball will land on Red but your shouting is a non-sequitur on the result.

[1]: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CPALTT01USM657N

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#170

Post by buggy6257 »

paulddraper wrote: post #142
ryandrake wrote: post #17

More like "It's not a crime if a corporation does it." The US treats corporations with kid gloves. They get away with so much, and in those rare cases where a regulatory body does anything , it's often just a strongly worded letter, a warning, a threat to one day send a strongly worded letter, or, in really rare, extreme cases, a company official gets called in to say a few words in front of Congress. Nobody goes to…

Please cite example of farting in the wrong courtroom. Either that, or your post is hyperbolic.

Yes. Yes it is. Congrats you cracked the code.
Post reply on HN