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

TripAdvisor warns users over Thai hotel that legally pursued reviewer

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 45 posts

Re: TripAdvisor warns users over Thai hotel that legally pursued reviewer

#31

Post by EliRivers »

dkdk8283 wrote: post #24
tw04 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Perhaps put the "kills" in the proper context of 240,000 / 350,000,000 and then evaluate the relative risk vs. sacrificing one's privacy. Those are some pretty horrible numbers you're attempting to use. 350m people haven't been infected, so it's nowhere close to 240k/350m. It's closer to 240k/10m. As for privacy: if we were told we'd need to be permanently tracked from now until the end of time, I think just about e…

I would have agreed with you had I not witnessed the passing and renewal of the patriot act. Back then I was in favor of it, too. I think it’s naive to think contact tracing will ever be rolled back. I fear it will be a new permanent surveillance tool. I would rather keep my personal liberty.

"Contact tracing" is asking people who they've been near, and then checking on them as well. It can't ever be "rolled back" any more than "asking someone a question" can be rolled back.

Re: TripAdvisor warns users over Thai hotel that legally pursued reviewer

#32

Post by EliRivers »

CodeWriter23 wrote: post #15
EliRivers wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you must know I was referring to contact tracing. I’m against it. On the face of it, that's an interesting position to take. We know someone has a communicable disease that kills, we wonder if people he's been in contact with might also have it and might also be spreading it and dying of it; finding out seems like quite a sensible idea. What's the objection?

Perhaps put the "kills" in the proper context of 240,000 / 350,000,000 and then evaluate the relative risk vs. sacrificing one's privacy.

That feels pretty messed up. If you knew you had a communicable disease that other people might have caught from you, and be spreading it themselves, and some people dying, and you get asked "who might you have spread this to" you'd refuse to answer on privacy grounds.

Would you even call them yourself to tell them you might have infected them? I guess if you'd been to somewhere that you didn't know everyone, you'd just have to take that as an unavoidable sacrifice they're making for your privacy.

Re: TripAdvisor warns users over Thai hotel that legally pursued reviewer

#33

Post by Chris2048 »

tw04 wrote: post #21
dkdk8283 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s a quick and strong reaction. Do you have a problem with women in tech? If you must know I was referring to contact tracing. I’m against it. I’m anti lockdown too. I get ostracized every time I bring it up.

>If you must know I was referring to contact tracing. I’m against it. I’m anti lockdown too. I get ostracized every time I bring it up. Generally speaking, when you're pro something that provably kills innocent people, just because the alternative is inconvenient for you personally, you're going to get ostracized. "I'm for drunk-driving because I don't like paying or waiting for Ubers and I drive a big truck so I'll…

Highways and fast food kill innocent people too, yet society weighs the benefits.

Re: TripAdvisor warns users over Thai hotel that legally pursued reviewer

#34

Post by seibelj »

evgen wrote: post #30
seibelj wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s more complicated than this. Covid is barely worse than the average flu for healthy young people, yet even those with no contact with at-risk groups must still disrupt their lives for seemingly no reason. IMO this is unfair to them and also prevents herd immunity from developing. Furthermore outbreaks are happening in places even with more strict protocols. Overall I think the damage from the reaction to the pand…

> It’s more complicated than this. No, it really isn't. You are just trying to pretend it is because the current solutions do not fit your particular worldview or cause you some temporary inconvenience. > Covid is barely worse than the average flu for healthy young people, Not true. We are really starting to understand the long-term consequences of even 'light' covid cases so I have absolutely no idea why you thought…

There is no evidence of longterm damage in healthy people, just anecdotal reports. Millions of people have got this disease and recovered. We often hear with shrill panic reporting about mass groups getting infected, like the Ozarks around 4th of July, then no follow up reporting because everyone recovers.

Here is a graph of who is dying in Massachusetts from Covid https://www.boston.com/news/coronavirus/2020/09/02/who-is-dy...

It’s overwhelmingly those above 80 years old. Completely disrupting the economy and lives for people under 40 makes no sense no matter how you want to warp logic.

Re: TripAdvisor warns users over Thai hotel that legally pursued reviewer

#35

Post by CodeWriter23 »

justinclift wrote: post #27
CodeWriter23 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My factual numbers aren’t “bad” simply because you choose a different perspective. Notice how I am respectful of your position despite your attempts to bully me into joining some concept of unanimous consent you have contrived here. The reality is, very strong correlation of Vitamin D deficiency to hospitalization and death. But I’m not here telling you to be reasonable and dose Vitamin D to protect yourself and take…

> Contact tracing the old fashioned way is 100% sufficient for me. Errr... you said you are against "contact tracing". I (personally) took that to mean "the old way". But it sounds like you're against the automated phone app thing? Well, I am too. My phone isn't capable of running any of the apps anyway, so it's kind of moot in my case. Regarding lockdown, in my state (Victoria, Australia) we're just now starting to…

The nuance of this discussion is the use of personal tracking technology as a means of contact tracing. At least that's the way I read it, starting a few layers up the comment tree.

Re: TripAdvisor warns users over Thai hotel that legally pursued reviewer

#36

Post by CodeWriter23 »

EliRivers wrote: post #32
CodeWriter23 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps put the "kills" in the proper context of 240,000 / 350,000,000 and then evaluate the relative risk vs. sacrificing one's privacy.

That feels pretty messed up. If you knew you had a communicable disease that other people might have caught from you, and be spreading it themselves, and some people dying, and you get asked "who might you have spread this to" you'd refuse to answer on privacy grounds. Would you even call them yourself to tell them you might have infected them? I guess if you'd been to somewhere that you didn't know everyone, you'd j…

I never said I would disclose my locations I have visited in the event I become infected, so you can stop your virtue signalling. I said I was against having my every move tracked by a device. I simply don't believe we are at that point where we need to know where everyone is every moment of the day.

Re: TripAdvisor warns users over Thai hotel that legally pursued reviewer

#37

Post by im3w1l »

This is retaliation; they are trying to scare people into not exercising their legal rights. If trip advisor wanted to be responsible they warn foreigners - who might not know about the local laws - about all Thai establishments, rather than point fingers.

Re: TripAdvisor warns users over Thai hotel that legally pursued reviewer

#38

Post by 9HZZRfNlpR »

evgen wrote: post #30
seibelj wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s more complicated than this. Covid is barely worse than the average flu for healthy young people, yet even those with no contact with at-risk groups must still disrupt their lives for seemingly no reason. IMO this is unfair to them and also prevents herd immunity from developing. Furthermore outbreaks are happening in places even with more strict protocols. Overall I think the damage from the reaction to the pand…

> It’s more complicated than this. No, it really isn't. You are just trying to pretend it is because the current solutions do not fit your particular worldview or cause you some temporary inconvenience. > Covid is barely worse than the average flu for healthy young people, Not true. We are really starting to understand the long-term consequences of even 'light' covid cases so I have absolutely no idea why you thought…

Stop spreading misinformation, there is no such thing, we have only anecdotes and we have millions of people infected so we should know by now. HN mods should come down hard to people spreading misinformation and panic, straight from conservative radios playbook. Do better!

Re: TripAdvisor warns users over Thai hotel that legally pursued reviewer

#39

Post by treeman79 »

idrios wrote: post #13
dkdk8283 wrote: post #2

Chilling effect. Imagine where the US is headed with online censorship and cancel culture. If you publicly disagree with controversial views you’re in for a bad time.

Depends on the medium. Don't ever say anything against the grain on Twitter (or really any medium that encourages media to go viral). But at least HN is (usually) a good, moderated forum where opposing viewpoints can be heard with judgement for the argument and not the arguer. A difference the US has with the situation in the article is the Thai hotel was able to get law enforcement involved -- I don't think the US h…

Been seeing more anti-free speech people here. Or maybe the censorship is perfectly fine as long it’s our team mindset.

   But if you keep your arguments here well written and reasonable usually it’s fine.

Re: TripAdvisor warns users over Thai hotel that legally pursued reviewer

#40

Post by belval »

I am not sure what's incorrect here, or the conclusion that the article wants me to draw.

The client: Decided to post a (possibly fake) review on a hotel he was staying at. The hotel: Sued the client as is their right I suppose. TripAdvisor: Gave the above information to their new clients so they'd know that leaving a bad review could be met with legal action from the hotel.

Nothing wrong happened here? Why shouldn't TripAdvisor be allowed to inform their customers? Why should the hotel not use the law of their country to sue an individual?

Give me a break, most hotels have some bad reviews which, when the hotel is actually good will be drowned in good reviews. TripAdvisor could say that they are alligators in the pools for all I care, they are a private entity...

Post reply on HN