For me: Cancelling paid subscriptions should be as easy as subscribing. I hate the fact that they actively hide the unsubscribe option or that you sometimes should have to write an e-mail if you want to unsubscribe.
Companies changing the terms of their contracts on you.
Yes, but - in many of those contracts (particularly end-user license agreements) you agreed to them changing the terms of the contract. You also have an “out” - not using the product any more.
You’re right though: it’s slimy. Anything slimy thing can be put into a contract!
Source: I’m not a lawyer, but worked in an office with a lot of them, and worked with software license agreements in particular.
I’m so curious now. Do you know how those apply? I mean, can they change the terms on you without notice or is that notice legally required? And say they want to feed all your data of however many years to AI. If you accidentally use it once, do they get permission for everything? What if you agree only because you want to delete your data?
I have so many questions. lol
You usually get an email saying something is changing. Problem is, you’ve already paid and if it’s a material change, now you have to agree to continue using your property. Sometimes you don’t get a notice and it’s a “software update” that now pushes ads onto a product you bought and are now shit outta luck since you can’t return it. Samsung and Roku are bad for this.
Samsung and Roku are bad for this.
You’re buying the hardware; they provide the software as a service. Oh, sure, no agreeing to a unilateral change of conditions on the software means that your hardware is rendered worthless, but still… And yeah, that’s pretty much the way that actually works.
IP law can start getting pretty strange.
Advertising. At what point did we as a society decide that it was perfectly acceptable for companies to manipulate us - especially children - into buying shit we don’t need and didn’t even want until the ad sold us on it? It’s fucking wild.
It happened gradually, like frogs in a kettle.
When it was just a guy putting up a sign in front of his smithy it was kind of harmless. Ditto for having a single text-only paper ad for people who are new to town. But, it was a slippery slope.
Frogs will not stay in the kettle :)
Yes, it’s true. Let me know when a more scientifically accurate idiom comes along, though. I also still use “like a bull in a china shop”.
It was only like 6 months ago I learned that a bull will actually be extremely careful in a china shop (or equivalent) unless its concerned.
Are most of our idioms just wrong?
Yeah that’s kind of my point: society has not stopped to think about the fact that the water is at a full boil and has been for a while. If I had my way ads would just be a basic, boring, ‘This product/service exists, and this is what an independent panel of testers has determined about its functions and capabilities.’ There have definitely been products that were advertised to me that make my life easier and that I use every day, so I don’t want to lose the ability to discover them, I just also don’t want these companies putting their dick in my ass and whispering into my ear that I’m not good enough person as a person if I don’t like it.
And the fact that a lot of children’s TV shows are nothing but thinly veiled toy commercials. Hilariously parodied in Dinosaurs
Worst part is, those are usually the best ones.
Oh yeah, I grew up in the 70s/80s when that shit became rife. I loved Saturday morning cartoons until I got old enough to realize that they only existed to sell me toys (and to sell ads for other toys.)
Marketing wasn’t really a thing until sometime around the Industrial Revolution and post-WW1. Before then, we didn’t really have the capacity to produce more than what people needed. Marketing basically just consisted of “here’s my product, here’s why it’s superior to others.” But with the post-war boom and the rise in manufacturing, producers were suddenly able to out-produce the demand. So they invented marketing, to get people to buy things that they didn’t actually need. The idea of “create a problem so you can sell the solution” was born.
Ordered food at Sonic on their app. After I ordered, it popped up with ads for travel, various credit cards, etc. Completely crazy to me that they’re triple dipping on monetization now (sell me food, sell my data and then sell me other shit while trying to sell me food.)
I recently went to Sonic, didn’t use the app, and ended up with norovirus for free.
You can thank Sigmund Freud’s nephew Edward Bernays
Specifically his 1928 book Propaganda which basically created PR and modern advertising.
Adblocking feels to me like it should be illegal, but isn’t. I have adblockers on all my devices and haven’t seen an ad for years; it feels like a secret super power and stopped the web from looking like a trashy back alley.
I am always shocked when I have to use a browser without an ad blocker. How do people tolerate it?
I mean, I get it. I know many people have no idea about adblocking, etc. But goddam. It’s so awful without it.
Every time i accidentally open chrome instead of waterfox on my tablet jeeesus christ
Use DNS-based blocking. I put Tomato firmware on my router and block for all devices on my network. Rethink can selfhost DNS on Android too.
Interesting, I just use a private DNS on my phone set to dns.adguard.com and it catches most things, but I’d like to hear more about this. I’ve considered setting up a pihole but there are people in the house who work from home and need to do VPN shit so I’m reluctant to mess with that, but if I can just change the firmware on the router…
I love how I’ve lost all perspective on what a “normal” ad is. Whenever I see one I’m often either super confused at the approach or it’s so bland I just don’t care. Once you stop seeing them routinely they feel so ridiculous
Right! It’s kinda wild when you do see them. I always equate it to the feeling of being in a casino.
What really throws me is tv commercials. When I do see one, like in a waiting room or something, all I can think is, “people fall for this?”
They usually depend on just making you remember them (the most extreme example I can think of is the “I’m on a horse” old spice ad from like 15 years ago, which admittedly is very clever/funny/well executed), regardless of the message or context. They just want brand recognition a lot of the time. You’re at the supermarket, you see 10 of basically the same cereal, but this one brand of cereal feels more legit or just “draws you in” veggies of a subconscious association. In that way unfortunately it works most of the time, especially if you don’t have a strong opinion on a product.
This right here is why I think advertising is manipulation. Cause even the subtle shit where you’re like ‘That was weird’ and shrug it off is still affecting you days, weeks, even years later. I grew up in the 70s and 80s and there are so many fucking stupid ad jingles and slogans stuck in my head, half of them I don’t even remember who they were for.
I’m in the same boat, but you also have to remember that blocking ads typically involves blocking tracking too. You’re right they the ads are much more bland or misdirected but that’s because there’s little to no targeting data (probably just your IP address).
I’m mostly talking about the stuff I see on a TV when I’m in a waiting room or an airport or something
You should rawdog fox news sometime. Their cookie pop-up is WILD
Nah, I pay for my bandwidth, I get to decide what it does and does not get used for. Even if that’s not nearly as big a concern as it used to be in like the late 90s, it’s the principle of I’m not going to pay for you to shove your garbage down my throat.
And yeah I haven’t seen an ad in years and years on PC. People complain about youtube ads and I’m like ‘What’s that? I watch a lot of youtube and I’ve not seen an ad in like 10 years.’ Sadly on mobile that’s a little more complicated, but adding a private dns of ‘dns.adguard.com’ blocks most things.
It’s weird they don’t put more effort into stopping them, TBH. I’ve heard it’s because they’d rather collect extra analytics than do any foolproofing that might interfere with it.
EULAs that say ‘using this <whatever> indicates your acceptance of these terms’. Seems like it ought to be illegal but it’s super common.
Paying for anything and then being stopped from owning it should be illegal.
What the fuck am I buying software for if not to own it and have my privacy protected while using it?
Fuck EULA’s and the companies trying to push the boundaries of acceptable behaviour 😤 just for a couple extra bucks selling our data to the highest bidder.
100%. If buying isn’t owning then stealing isn’t theft.
Just because they put it in the terms doesn’t it legal.
It kinda does make it legal. If you don’t agree to the terms of the product, then you are using it illegally. It sucks, but that’s where the law is. I am typing this on a Linux laptop in Firefox, but those have terms and conditions, too!
That depends on the location/jurisdiction, but I do have a hard time believing that any court would uphold a EULA stating that you have to cook dinner for any Microsoft employee that happens to request it, just because to installed Windows 11.
I believe a fair number of juristictions also invalidate any EULA that’s only viewable after you’ve purchased a product so most software EULAs are worth less than toilet paper anyway.
EULA’s are widely honored and established law. However, anyone can push back on anything they put in an agreement.
To fight Microsoft, you have to fight Microsoft’s lawyers, in Microsoft’s jurisdiction. But you can’t sue them, because you already agreed to arbitration. And you’d have to pay lawyers in what would be a long, drawn out process.
If Microsoft demands things that are incredibly weird like what you describe above, there definitely would be a chance it could be appealed to a court and eventually see a judge. I think it would be a long and expensive process for both sides getting there. And Microsoft’s argument would be, “The user has the option to stop using it.”
There are undoubtedly severance clauses in there, so if a court deems a part of a license illegal, then it is stricken, and the rest of the agreement stands.
So, Microsoft’s lawyers only put things in the agreement that they are 99+% sure of wanting and winning. So they probably won’t request your spleen. They don’t want that. They just want your money, your data, and your eyeballs connected to your brain.
You know, I’m not actually sure how binding it is, aside from not totally. It must do something or they wouldn’t bother getting pretend consent.
Still has a chilling effect on pushback
Surprisingly a lot of clauses in EULAS are and get “stricken” (even though this one still stands).
For subscriptions, I highly recommend using disposable cards like Privacy.com (no affiliation, just a customer). If I want to try out Prime, or Starz, or a “free until…” promotional offer, I just spin up a card. It’s connected to my bank account, locked to that single merchant, and they can’t charge more than whatever spending limit I put on that card. Honestly, I don’t always even sign in to a service to cancel, it’s much easier to just pause or delete a card, and then they can’t charge you anymore. It’s free for us because they collect a small portion of the transaction amount (like Visa, PayPal, etc)…
Leaving a supermarket without buying anything
Sometimes I get so pissed they don’t have the main item I came for, that I go put everything back on the shelves, exactly where they came from.
That largely depends on what you take with you as you leave.
police being able to lie to you
The worst one they tell is "We’re cops, were not allowed to lie. "
Fuckers.
This is illegal in the UK
deleted by creator
“Are you an undercover cop” actually works in the UK?
Of course not that’ll be ridiculous… during questioning, arrest etc
A free trial automatically rolling into a paid subscription.
Having the door held open for you while walking towards it but changing directions in the last moment.
Yes, there’s a lot of rules that are out there, but that aren’t actually enforced. Facing the other way in an elevator was one example I remember from social sciences classes.
If I saw someone facing the rear wall/corner of an elevator but not acting unusual in any other way I think I’d feel like I was getting pranked somehow, lmao. I could go in and use the elevator and nothing could happen but one or more people facing the “wrong” way and I’d feel like I was the butt of a joke in some unfathomable way
I think it’s the unnecessary number of turns you’d need to make to actually use the elevator but still face the rear well while using it that makes it feel weird to me, but idk
I mean, it’s the same, you just turn around at the end of the ride as you’re leaving rather than the beginning. But, it’s simply not how it’s done.
Capitalism
Shooting plainclothes cops that execute a no-knock warrant on your home.
Seriously.
All states–ALL states–have a castle doctrine that allows you to use lethal defense to protect yourself inside your home. A no-knock warrant being executed by cops out of uniform means that you have a reasonable belief that your home is being invaded, and that your life is at immediate risk. Now, admittedly, you probably aren’t going to survive that exchange of gunfire. But the state is going to have a really hard time charging you with shooting at/killing a cop if you do.
I’m gonna assume by “all states” you mean “all states within the USA”.
I believe that most other countries call them provinces rather than states. But yes, if you live in a country that has a normal police force, and you don’t have to worry about out-of-uniform cops using no-knock warrants to kick your front door in, then this is definitely not going to apply to you.
In Indiana cops are not excluded from castle laws
About dozen States do NOT have a castle doctrine, and have duty to retreat laws instead.
No, castle doctrine exists in all states. You do not have a duty to retreat when it’s inside your own home in almost all cases.
In some parts of the US (at least, maybe nationally) the castle doctrine even extends to your car. It is thought of as an “extension” of your home/castle.
Edit: spelling
Very cool link! Wasn’t expecting China to have had such rules
Most investment instruments, apparently, going by the reactions I get when I explain shorting IRL. It’s like people think there’s only a few approved transactions and doing anything creative (or actually standard but clever) must be a crime. Feudalism’s over, guys.
Ripping a tag from a pillow that says “Under Penalty of Law: Not to be Removed By Anyone but the Consumer”
Going through TSA.
Cunts buying politicians.
Is that not illegal?!
Even before the current fucked up state of affairs, lobbying was (and still is) a thing.
The fucking president has a shitcoin that ppl are using to pay tribute.
The fucking president
… is Coin Operated.
Pretty much any tax avoidance loopholes. The more money I have the more I see how ridiculously skewed in favor of the rich everything is. My income is taxed at a lower rate than my capital gains, meaning that not only did I make several thousand dollars last year on stock sales I did literally nothing to earn, but I paid very little on taxes for it. There is also a scheme a friend of mine uses to reduce his tax burden even more by recording losses that only exist on paper by swapping between essentially equivalent assets. The system is designed to punish poor people for being poor and reward rich people for being rich.
A popular scheme I have seen is:
Owner registered and de-facto runs an incorporated Company. Company employs Owner and pays them a small salary (down to state minimum wage even), so Owner minimizes the income tax they pay.
The car Owner drives is owned by the Company for “business purposes”, which allows the car to be operated within 50 miles of the Company (and farther with supplemental insurance). Company counts the car purchase/lease, maintenance, gas as expenses, bringing down the bottom line.
Flights, travel, meals could be paid by the Company, as long as it’s tangentially “business related”.
The house Owner lives in (or several houses for the family) is owned by the Company and is rented to Owner for very cheap, so Company pays the taxes, maintenance, etc, breaking even, or taking a loss on this house. Again, this brings down the company’s bottom line.
Somehow, purchases for a Company can be exempt from sales taxes, too.
In the end, on paper, the Company is barely making any profit, but the Owner might be enjoying a nice car, nice house, and vacations. All for “business purposes” of course. While you pay taxes on your income and purchases like an idiot
It gets worse. CEOs take out zero interest, or exteremly low interest loans on corporate assets. They then use the money tax free.
I will say a lot of what you’ve discussed here is actually illegal but very rarely enforced. Pretty much every small business owner I know is pulling shit like this but it’s basically never enforced even though it’s illegal fraud.
