Safety as DLC? Motorcycle Airbag vest will not deploy if you miss a payment

[DobertRownySr]

18 minutes ago, Sauron said:

Yeah, and your personal experience is obviously representative of the entire population including children and problem gamblers.

 

 

Clearly, game companies keep shoving microtransactions into full price games because nobody buys them.

 

Satellite radio isn't required for your airbag to work.

Until this becomes the norm and you can't not buy it if you want to drive a car.

It is not the company's responsibility to baby sit people who have addictions to spending money. A fool and his money are easily parted.
It's also on parents to monitor their kid's activities. If their child spends $40,000 on skins in a game, and they don't realize until months later, it's their fault.

[Sauron]

4 minutes ago, DobertRownySr said:

It is not the company's responsibility to baby sit people who have addictions to spending money. A fool and his money are easily parted.

Ah yes, I suppose then if I scam you that's on you for falling for it.

4 minutes ago, DobertRownySr said:

It's also on parents to monitor their kid's activities. If their child spends $40,000 on skins in a game, and they don't realize until months later, it's their fault.

It doesn't have to be $40k for it to be predatory and ridiculous. It's doesn't matter if the parents know, it's still predatory marketing directed at vulnerable audiences. Even if the parent tells them "no" the kid is still going to feel bad for missing out and pressured to spend their own pocket money.

[DobertRownySr]

3 minutes ago, Sauron said:

Ah yes, I suppose then if I scam you that's on you for falling for it.

Please explain what scam you are talking about. Last I checked, offering microtransactions isn't a scam.
1) The person gets what they paid for.
2) The product is advertised accurately.

3 minutes ago, Sauron said:

It doesn't have to be $40k for it to be predatory and ridiculous. It's doesn't matter if the parents know, it's still predatory marketing directed at vulnerable audiences. Even if the parent tells them "no" the kid is still going to feel bad for missing out and pressured to spend their own pocket money.

It doesn't matter how much it is. As a parent, your child should not have open access to your money.
When I was a kid (before I had my own income) I would ask my parents to buy me something (Game, DLC, Expansion, etc). Then they would either buy it for me, or tell me no.
It's called being responsible.

[Sauron]

Just now, DobertRownySr said:

Please explain what scam you are talking about. Last I checked, offering microtransactions isn't a scam.

I don't care, the argument you made can be used to defend scams just as easily. If you blame the victim you can justify almost anything. You could also theoretically avoid being murdered by carrying a gun and being trained in martial arts, that doesn't mean murder should be legal because if you let someone murder you it's your own fault.

1 minute ago, DobertRownySr said:

It doesn't matter how much it is. As a parent, your child should not have open access to your money.

I just explained why it's still bad even if the child gets no money from their parents.

2 minutes ago, DobertRownySr said:

When I was a kid (before I had my own income) I would ask my parents to buy me something (Game, DLC, Expansion, etc). Then they would either buy it for me, or tell me no.

I don't care about your personal anecdotal experience in a time when the videogame market was drastically different from now. There are large scale studies on both loot box gambling and microtransaction peer pressure that are far more reliable than a random person's childhood tale.

[lostcattears]

Woah Woah woah.... There would be no point in even having that option... You might as well delete it

[DobertRownySr]

3 minutes ago, Sauron said:

I don't care, the argument you made can be used to defend scams just as easily. If you blame the victim you can justify almost anything.

Except scams are completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.

4 minutes ago, Sauron said:

I just explained why it's still bad even if the child gets no money from their parents.

A kid "feeling bad" isn't much of an argument. Kids need to learn that they can't get everything they want. It's called parenting.

5 minutes ago, Sauron said:

I don't care about your personal anecdotal experience in a time when the videogame market was drastically different from now. There are large scale studies on both loot box gambling and microtransaction peer pressure that are far more reliable than a random person's childhood tale.

But you do care about kids "feeling bad" because they can't get a skin??????????

[Sauron]

Just now, DobertRownySr said:

Except scams are completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.

If you don't see how they're relevant then I guess that's your own fault

Just now, DobertRownySr said:

A kid "feeling bad" isn't much of an argument. Kids need to learn that they can't get everything they want. It's called parenting.

Systematically making kids feel bad over not having a product isn't the same as parenting.

1 minute ago, DobertRownySr said:

But you do care about kids "feeling bad" because they can't get a skin??????????

I do care about kids being exploited for financial gain, yes.

[DobertRownySr]

Just now, Sauron said:

If you don't see how they're relevant then I guess that's your own fault

How exactly? We're talking about microtransactions. They don't magically become scams just because you don't like them.

Just now, Sauron said:

Systematically making kids feel bad over not having a product isn't the same as parenting.

Sounds to me like a major 1st world problem if kid's biggest detriment is "feeling bad" over not getting a fortnite skin.

1 minute ago, Sauron said:

I do care about kids being exploited for financial gain, yes.

Then go protest Happy Meals, they literally only exist to get kids to beg their parents to go to McDonalds.

[Sauron]

1 minute ago, DobertRownySr said:

Then go protest Happy Meals, they literally only exist to get kids to beg their parents to go to McDonalds.

If you think this is a gotcha you're sorely mistaken, that is 100% correct. At least the toys aren't potentially unlimited additional purchases on top of the full price food though.

3 minutes ago, DobertRownySr said:

Sounds to me like a major 1st world problem if kid's biggest detriment is "feeling bad" over not getting a fortnite skin.

You can write off all types of child abuse that don't involve physical harm this way.

[DobertRownySr]

3 minutes ago, Sauron said:

If you think this is a gotcha you're sorely mistaken, that is 100% correct. At least the toys aren't potentially unlimited additional purchases on top of the full price food though.

Have you never had a happy meal? Each set of toys has like at least 10 different toys to get the kids to buy more than one. And by the time they go 10 times, the next set of toys are released.

3 minutes ago, Sauron said:

You can write off all types of child abuse that don't involve physical harm this way.

I don't think you understand what child abuse is. I'll give you a hint, selling optional skins in an optional video game doesn't match the definition.

[Kisai]

15 hours ago, Bombastinator said:

“Critical” is the key word though.  There’s a group of insurance agencies that put out safety verification tests which have done really a lot for automobiles. They’ve effectively mandated door bars and integral roll cages and air bags and seat belts and a bunch of other stuff.  Even headlights and how high bumpers can be.  The thing about motorcycles is theyre more or less just death traps to start with.  If they mandated safety features for those things the first thing they would do is ban them.  A lot of insurance companies don’t even OFFER motorcycle insurance. 

True. But also true of all small cars.

 

To quote someone who drove a big-rig until he retired from it, "They will bury you in it"

 

Mopeds, Motorcycles, and small 2-door smartcar/bug type of cars, are literately unsafe to drive outside of rural roads. Cities are usually fine for the small vehicles as long as you avoid the truck routes.

[Bombastinator]

2 hours ago, DobertRownySr said:

Please explain what scam you are talking about. Last I checked, offering microtransactions isn't a scam.
1) The person gets what they paid for.
2) The product is advertised accurately.

It doesn't matter how much it is. As a parent, your child should not have open access to your money.
When I was a kid (before I had my own income) I would ask my parents to buy me something (Game, DLC, Expansion, etc). Then they would either buy it for me, or tell me no.
It's called being responsible.

It’s a scam if the user thinks they are getting something other than what they pay for when they pay for it.  That is basically the definition of a scam: making the buyer think they’re getting something other than what they are buying.
 

People who conflate  not usefully prosecutable with not wrong are not precisely wrong, but they certainly aren’t right either. The two are different things.
  There are a couple of scams with this:

1. If you add up the monthly payments it’s not less expensive it’s MORE expensive. So hidden knife scam

2. It is possible to get away with murder in the US if you arrange it right and are rich enough to be able to do so.  The first time someone dies wearing one of these when it doesn’t inflate there’s going to be a wrongful death suit which the company will eventually lose.  It won’t even be close.  It will take a couple years though during which the people who effectively killed this person can hide their money and protect it from being seized.  The company will die and a bunch of people will lose their jobs, but the people who made the money from making life safety stuff DLC? They’ll have gotten rich by risking other people’s lives.  This thing is death and  horror waiting to happen for everyone but the company owners.

[DobertRownySr]

2 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

It’s a scam if the user thinks they are getting something other than what they pay for when they pay for it.

No, that's not what a scam is. What the user thinks has nothing to do with something being a scam or not. It's all about how something is advertised.

Perfect example is the people selling pictures of RTX 3090's on Ebay for like $2000. That's not a scam, because in the description they clearly state it's just a photo and not a real graphics card.

It's the user's fault for being lazy and not reading.

[PocketNerd]

We're truly in the darkest timeline...

 

Isn't unregulated capitalism great?!

[Bombastinator]

1 minute ago, DobertRownySr said:

I'm sorry, but please show me a single microtransaction that doesn't clearly state what the user acquires.

Most of them? The key here is “clearly stated” there’s all kinds of ways to obfusticate that.  The most popular one is the TOS box.  This isn’t about micro transactions though they’re generally not good as a group.  It’s about making a life safety device DLC and potentially shutting it off. 

[DobertRownySr]

1 minute ago, Bombastinator said:

Most of them?

Show me one. A loot box literally states you have a chance of getting whatever crap they have inside. It's clearly advertised.

[Guest]

On 5/7/2021 at 7:24 AM, givingtnt said:

Yeah, it's been out for a while iirc. kinda dumb.

But either way.. the best models are by far the ones with the cord you attach to your bike. Sure, you might pull it on accident.. but it's less dumb than those things that *also* have to detect the crash accurately..

 

I don't get this, so just before you crash you pull the cord? Im pretty sure 90% of crashes are not planned, how would you know? Thats so dumb. 

[Bombastinator]

1 minute ago, DobertRownySr said:

Show me one

No.  I do not feel like bestirring myself for your benefit. It’s nontopical anyway.

Edited May 7, 2021 by Bombastinator

[DobertRownySr]

Just now, Bombastinator said:

No.  I do not feel like bestirring myself for your benefit. 

Which just means that you can't actually prove your claims and you're just moaning for the sake of moaning.

[Bombastinator]

Just now, DobertRownySr said:

Which just means that you can't actually prove your claims and you're just moaning for the sake of moaning.

No.  It doesn’t.  The paper chase argument was old in the 70’s.  I don’t play.

[DobertRownySr]

1 minute ago, Bombastinator said:

No.  It doesn’t.  The paper chase argument was old in the 70’s.  I don’t play.

Ah the good ol' "research it yourself" defense that's very popular with flat earthers and religions.

I heard it doesn't work very well at winning arguments.

[Bombastinator]

6 minutes ago, DobertRownySr said:

Ah the good ol' "research it yourself" defense that's very popular with flat earthers and religions.

I heard it doesn't work very well at winning arguments.

I don’t have to.  You made a statement which had little to do with the thread though it might have actually worked in the unpopular opinions one.  Most people here have had to deal with micro transactions and know they’re mostly abusive crap.   Your argument is not actually about micro transactions though it’s about TOSes and legalese.  My statement was that if a loophole is found to legally abuse someone with, it doesn’t make it acceptable, it merely makes it unprosecuatable.  And not prosecuted and not wrong are not the same thing. You want to dig into specific example minutia that has nothing to do with the concept, and you want to waste my time to do it.  You’re argument is “I demand an hour of your time or I hereby declare myself correct” No.  

[DobertRownySr]

15 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

I don’t have to.  You made a statement which had little to do with the thread

Says the guy trying to compare Microtransactions with murder....

[divito]

While it's not a mandatory safety item, having it need to connect and check anything over the internet is plain ridiculous. 100% Uptime can never, ever be guaranteed, especially to such a degree where your safety needs to depend or be aided by it.

[Bombastinator]

3 hours ago, DobertRownySr said:

Says the guy trying to compare Microtransactions with murder....

No you were the one who brought up micro transactions. Still not sure why.  Maybe to take it off people being killed which is the point here.  That’s what life safety equipment does.  Keep people from dying.  It’s not a video game where you respawn. Life and death changes the metric a bit.   I was saying that if the turn off that safety device someone is very likely going to die or be crippled, assuming the thing works in the first place. If it doesn’t they will still die or be crippled, but not because someone flipped a bit and the device refused to work. There’s manslaughter, which is a kind of murder, and there’s wrongful death. The law makes a distinction between them. It the kind of thing the law has to do.  Myself I’m not the law. 
 

 

Probably only one death, unless they play it off successfully in which case there will be more.  Can’t do it forever though.  Eventually it’s going to start a major bruhaha lawsuit that will likely take down whatever company made it more or less screwing over the minor employees when the majority people run for the hills (this repetitively happens) The company will be killing someone for money.  It’s just a question if it’s legal or not.