OT: Public referrendums on destroying evil companies

[PvK]

In reply to the quote below, the current businesses behind the RIAA don't make much music at all, if any. Mainly they just monopolize the sales and distribution of the music, and reap billions of dollars off of the work of others, via cartel-like operations. They don't serve much useful purpose except for themselves, their stock holders, and the puppet stars who don't have enough actual talent to be successful musicians without a megacorporate hype engine behind them.

PvK

Originally posted by Thermodyne:
...
The RIAA is an evil solution, but the industry was left few alternatives. If the current situation continues, there will be little or no music industry left by the end of the decade. People and business have to make a profit; such is what makes to world go round. And the owner of a song or movie or code is entitled to charge for its use. Most bands make very little money as it is, and P2P has already adversely impacted the ability of new Groups to break into the industry. Just look at what has happened to the music industries profits and then graft it to CD-R sales and P2P net use. Do you want new music, or free oldies? That is where we are heading.

...

[DavidG]

So what's with McDonalds making the list? Don't like it don't go there. I've been there about once in the Last couple years. Now if they were like MS and say used illegal business practices to ensure that I had to have a Bic Mac because every meal I ordered anywhere in the world had to be eaten with a Big Mac and the Big Mac cause me all kinds of problems then I'd be pissed.
McDonalds is easy no ignore or avoid. MS not so much.

[Loser]

First, DavidG, seatbelts and motorcycle eye-protection are both matters of public safety and work to prevent bodily injury. That hardly compares to ad/spyware.

Second, there's a whole heck of a lot of software built into just about every thing you install. If a software maker wants to take Gator's money and include it in their package they're responsible for that bit of subVersion, and are risking their reputation.

Also, David G., I've gotten that dialog box and I don't have Gator. The Internet Explorer can be set to demand confirmation for any ActiveX action, including the installation of software, and I'm fairly sure it defaults to asking confirmation for that specific action. Of course, if you installed an IE upgrade from a third-party vendor, like an ISP or OEM hardware vendor, tags can be set in the installation that change these defaults.

Software will always have bugs, always. Requiring that a company put anything more than their reputation on the line is just unfair. Add to that the strange and eldritch ways that certain pieces of software work fine separately but clash together and you're putting Atlas' burden on anyone who wants to make any piece of software. You don't want to take the risk, you don't install the software. Yeah, it's expensive, but the law doesn't guarantee cheap computer services, and I don't think it should.

[ October 24, 2003, 12:18: Message edited by: Loser ]

[deccan]

I think it is true that the software industry gets away with things that would not be tolerated in any other industry. Legislating for things like minimum performance guarantees etc. is a perfectly valid subject for debate but then there is the question of whether or not we are willing to pay for it in terms of more expensive software and possibly less innovation.

[PvK]

Well I was mainly interested to actually poll and see what people's opinions were, and to offer a range of businesses some people don't like in various different ways, to see how it affected the poll.

Including McFonalds on the poll was also partly for humor, and also partly to see how many fellow McDonalds loathers there were.

As far as my personal opinion (which I didn't expect the majority to share - and I see they don't - hehe), my main objection to McDonalds is that there are so many of them, all nearly identical, depressingly pLastic, and their corporate agenda seems to be to cover the entire planet with them. Their annoying advertizing with actors pretending their food is wonderful, combined with their food being awful, earns them more animosity points. I think the world would be a better place if they were restricted to the US, Canada if the people want them there, and then maybe like one per foreign nation. When I visit an ancient foreign city and see McDonalds logos on the trash buckets and lamp Posts, I think they've gone too far. They're a megacorp driven by investment capital, so unless someone tells them it kinda sucks to have them everywhere, they're just going to keep spreading.

PvK

Originally posted by DavidG:
So what's with McDonalds making the list? Don't like it don't go there. I've been there about once in the Last couple years. Now if they were like MS and say used illegal business practices to ensure that I had to have a Bic Mac because every meal I ordered anywhere in the world had to be eaten with a Big Mac and the Big Mac cause me all kinds of problems then I'd be pissed.
McDonalds is easy no ignore or avoid. MS not so much.

[SpaceBadger]

Originally posted by David E. Gervais:
FYI: (and this might shock the **** out of you..) When a 'Gator' dialogue box pops up and asks if you wish to install it [YES] [NO].

Clicking on either answer will promptly install the spy/ad ware. In fact the 'Gator Dialogue' only pops up after it is installed.

You're sure about this?

Dang, I run into one of those dialog boxes a couple times a month I think, just surfing the web (seems like one of those freebie places, like fortunecities or geocities or something like that, pops up the box every time I go there). Always click NO, of course. You mean that each time that has happened the site has installed Gator on my machine?

Sigh, I guess it is time to hunt up and install some anti-spyware app - any recommendations?

SpaceBadger

[Phoenix-D]

Originally posted by Cyrien:

My post wasn't against computer manufacturing, who are still held accountable for the mistakes they make in their machines as are the auto inudstry and other manufacturing industries.
My point was that in all these industries, the automotive, the computer making, the banking, etc... there is always accoutability to the indivual Users for a product that fails. There is not the same level of accountability for software. And there should be. And if you want to go back in time then you can find accountability to the user for defective merchandise even 1000's of years ago. Checkout Hammurabis code. If the house you build for another collapses and kills the owner or son or slave etc... accountability for the job you do for someone else in the oldest written law code.

Mmm. And who is accountable if you select un unstable site to build your home on, and prevent the builders from learning of it?

Who is accountable if you let your tires go flat, but insist on driving on them anyway, and something goes wrong?

Essentially your accountability would drive the -smaller- publishers of software out of business. I can go into any PC store and put together at least 1000 combinations of software. Add to that OS and driver updates (even including ONLY those that improve performance or add features) and the number of possibilities gets ridiclous. And any one of those possibilites could cause a problem.

[rextorres]

Originally posted by DavidG:
So what's with McDonalds making the list? Don't like it don't go there. I've been there about once in the Last couple years. Now if they were like MS and say used illegal business practices to ensure that I had to have a Bic Mac because every meal I ordered anywhere in the world had to be eaten with a Big Mac and the Big Mac cause me all kinds of problems then I'd be pissed.
McDonalds is easy no ignore or avoid. MS not so much.

McDonald's because of their buying power has a HUGE influence on the way our food is produced so even if you never set foot in one if affects what you eat. There are many negatives examples of why we should care, but I will provide a positive one: McDonald's is one of the largest consumers of eggs and they decided not to use eggs from battery chickens - it's turned the egg industry on its head and battery chickens will soon be a thing of the past.

If you don't know - battery chickens are kept in a dark cage for their entire existance, they get stir crazy so their beaks are burned off so they don't peck themselves to death, their feet get fused to the cage, etc. A gruesome existance for a chicken. One might care, though, because all the anti-biotics the chicken needs to survive in this existance is passed on to us.

Anyway - an egg mcmuffin hits the spot now and then.

[narf poit chez BOOM]

Essentially your accountability would drive the -smaller- publishers of software out of business. I can go into any PC store and put together at least 1000 combinations of software. Add to that OS and driver updates (even including ONLY those that improve performance or add features) and the number of possibilities gets ridiclous. And any one of those possibilites could cause a problem.

my point, exactly. and with cars, at least you can tell if you have a flat tire - or a bad road interface.

[Cyrien]

Each person is indeed responsible for their own actions, as are the companies. Can they make sure that their software runs well and perfectly with every other piece of software out there? No.

Can and should they be held responsible for the quality of their own product running on its own? Yes.

Are they?
Why don't you check that Last EULA you agreed to on your software. It quite plainly says that they aren't.

Can a car manufacturer ensure that each of the hundreds of pieces that make up each car will work perfectly with any piece made by anyone else? No.

Can and should they be held responsible for the quality of their own product running on its own?
Yes.

Are they?
Yes.

Brief Exerpt from a EULA: Name of Company edited out.

4. Exceptions to Warranties; Disclaimers. Except for the above express limited warranty, blahblahblah disclaims any and all other warranties, express or implied, including any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for particular purpose. Blahblahblah does not warrant that the Software, its use, operation or your ability to use the Software will be uninterrupted or error-free or that all Software errors will be corrected . The warranty set forth above shall not apply to any defect or problems caused by any defect in any hardware or software used in combination with the Software, or use of the Software in execution environments not specified in the Documentation. Blahblahblah does not warrant that the Software or service will meet your requirements or that the operation of the Software will be uninterrupted or error free.

5. Limitations of Liability. In no event shall blahblahblah be liable for any damages to you or any other party whether arising out of contract or from tort including loss of data, profits or business or other special, incidental, exemplary or consequential damages, even if blahblahblah has been advised of the possibility of such loss or damages. Blahblahblah cumulative liability shall not exceed the license fee paid, if any, for use of this Software and Documentation. This section shall survive termination of this License.

Now the bold parts are intersting. So even if under the limited warranty you have damages that don't result from other software or a bad and unsupported OS and even if it was reported to them that hitting the F key five times in a row caused the software to format your harddrive even under those circumstances they aren't responsible. Even if they are responsible by some miracle of divine intervention then total damages payed by them to you shall not exceed the cost of said software.

So you lose 2 million dollars due to a fried server running software that the manufacturer knew before hand was faulty but did not inform you or do anything to correct it and it isn't their fault. So, that software company will probably go under now. Fat lot of good it does you and your now bankrupt butt that is penniless and jobless.

In fact the software people are probably still better off than you because they aren't responsible for you and hundreds of others losses and they could probably see their own collapse coming and prepared for it.

That sort of "Contract" is what I have a problem with.

Imagine signing a contract with a car dealer and in the contract it stated that even if the dealer knew that after ten miles distance it would explode and kill you he wasn't responsible.