Live data from Hacker News

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

pluralistic.net

281–290 of 640 posts

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

#281

This is the way our world works. If you steal a potato, you will be arrested immediately and the case will be resolved in a few weeks or months. If you illegally fix the price of potatoes and steal billions from the market, you will be allowed to operate for years in the open while a lengthy civil procedure eventually may ask you to give 1 or 2% of what you stole back in fines. Don't blame the potato theives or potat…

Politicians don’t exist in a vacuum. People are to blame too. So are business owners.

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

#282
post #76

This is all a result of a lack of active market regulation. The government needs to step in actively to keep a free market from collapsing into one of the natural end states. But the US has consistently been far too passive and accepts greedy companies far too readily. If a single company can sell almost 100% of an essential good, they need to atomatically lose the power to set their prices and margins independently.…

> The government needs to step in actively to keep a free market from collapsing into one of the natural end states.

Which is what, exactly? The US is per capita richer than almost all EU countries by a huge margin (with a few small exceptions mostly enabled by regulatory arbitrage targeting US money), so forgive me if I don't take your seething commentary about the US economic apparatus very seriously.

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

#283
More like "not a crime if a cartel of corporations does it" - not so sure it has much to do with an "app".

Useful analysis of consolidation and resulting price increases due to "inflation", even if the title could use re-wording.

Interesting that -- especially in an election cycle -- the government is blamed for "inflation", whereas a large contributing factor -- and the main one in this case -- are companies which control a market segment leveraging opportunities (COVID supply chain breakdowns, etc.) to increase their profits at the expense of the Average Joe.

We recently had to do a shower remodel. The salesperson told us that the price was 50% higher now than it was pre-pandemic. Prices shot up during the pandemic due to the known supply chain issues, but never went back down even after those supply chain issues are resolved.

Another good example of this are road bikes (I'm a cyclist): You could get a nice carbon bike for $2500 before the pandemic. Now it's $5000 for essentially the same thing. This is not explained by supply chain issues or an increase in the money supply.

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

#284

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…

Exactly - theres a lot of stuff that if an individual/small business owner did, they'd be personally onerously fined or jailed.. but corporations get a pass. Corporations also have a lot of money to pay good lobbyists & lawyers such that laws are pretty forgiving, loopholes are found & exploited, and finally they are vigorously defended if the government ever does try to crack down.

Ubers behavior during its growth phase, and even now is a good example of this. The latest letter of the law vs spirit of the law thing Uber did was circumvent the NYC law to try and ensure Uber drivers get a fair minimum wage.

To avoid having to pay any difference to make up the hourly wage to drivers, Uber runs an algorithm which kicks drivers out of the app randomly if demand gets too low, without warning or indication of when they can get back in. It can be minutes or hours. So the drivers remain on the road, driving/idling, waiting to get back into the app. The "work" is still getting done, but it doesn't count against Uber.

Imagine a small restaurant doing similar, deciding at random slow times instead of sending staff home for the day, they assign them no tables and mark them as off-the-clock. When demand picks up again, they get assigned some tables and resume making money.

The whole independent contractor on-demand app market is an automated exploitation engine.

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

#285
post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess if our goal were to stop this sort of corporate behavior, we would remove the requirement of a crime being intentional for corporations.

Isn't that already the case? For instance Wells Fargo was fined $185M for fraudulently opening accounts customers didn't want[1]. Wells fargo (ie. management) weren't scheming to fraudulently open accounts. They only set aggressive sales goals, and that caused some employees to go rogue and commit fraud themselves. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wells_Fargo_cross-selling_scan...

How do you know that lacked intent? It just sounds like cover for intent

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

#286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe? It should at least be debatable, not taboo, to consider. One's investment into a criminal enterprise could arguably be contributing to or encouraging that crime. Having this nearly-impenetrable corporate veil that shields decision-makers, footsoldiers, and funders (both institutional and retail investors) from consequences of their actions seems like the extreme end of a spectrum that should be explored. But w…

So you propose putting 40% of the population of the US who have money invested in the S&P 500 in jail?

I’m not proposing that at all. False dichotomy. Is it possible that there is a reasonable middle ground somewhere between “shield everyone involved in corporate wrongdoing” and “send every investor to jail?”

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

#287

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.

hacker news discovers literary devices

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

#288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if there's clear evidence to this, it's illegal

under what statute would this be illegal?

The same one that makes price fixing illegal.

Go look up price fixing, and tell me why that statute wouldn't apply here, if you remain unconvinced.

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

#289

Does anybody know whats stopping ethical and slightly less greedy companies from outcompeting these conglomerates? Its a question I keep coming back to because if the market were efficient then competitors should be able to use that same data to undercut big potato (or big whatever). This never seems to happen.

In some cases, the answer is "use some of that money you're raking in to bribe competitors not to compete". https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/topics/competition-enforceme...

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

#290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is one master plan tho: might is right. It gets pushed back, but it seeps through every contention wall we have put up so far.

A flaw in human nature, but not a plan . There was no board meeting where people came up with it and set out a roadmap and had milestones and KPIs. It’s an emergent property and it sucks, but there’s no conspiracy.

Then what is coordinated lobbying
Post reply on HN