Slashdot Mirror

and if it happens to your rental discover will not cover you. That will be 22K

They may or may not of used a hack to take the car but as a renter you will be on the hook if they fail to update there car software.

http://elliott.org/should-i-ta...

What I enjoyed most is the article linked to is actually a summation of the actual article... an aggregator (/.) linked to an aggregator (Consumerist), which linked to the blog (elliot.org). Lazy much? http://elliott.org/blog/hello-...

read http://elliott.org/ and just search for rent a car stores

The first one never happened and the second is suing for reinstatement based on violation for his civil rights. He'll win, too.

But while while we're playing "bad argument by analogy" let me have a go and maybe give you a better one. Even a fictional restaurant that may refuse to serve TSA agents can't take a person's money and *then* throw him out without delivering the product that was fairly paid.

That kind of underhanded tactic deserves harsh punishment. EA needs to be called to the carpet for this one.

This is lazy reporting, nothing more. If the AZ Star et al. had bothered to talk to Southwest about it, they might have gotten a clue. It is a sensationalist headline to draw eyeballs and gin up controversy where there is none.

In our latest update, we offered our definition, which states that “Force Majeure Event means any event outside of Carrier’s control” and so the “mechanical difficulties” we are referring to as Force Majeure events would be those outside of our control, such as airport mechanical difficulties (e.g., the airport de-icing system breaks) or Air Traffic Control issues (e.g., airport or regional tower goes down).

We are not referring to our own aircraft mechanical difficulties, which would clearly be under our control. Our policies and practices confirm this interpretation.

None of our procedures have changed — we still accommodate customers exactly the same as we did previously in the event of our own aircraft mechanical issues occur.

Quit trying to inject your "facts" into our parody-fest.
I was about to say something about adding "Not feeling like it" or "insufficient funds" to my list of Acts of God that do not require me to pay for my airline ticket, but then I saw your comment and I have to confine myself to this paltry idiotry.

Those aren't acts of god.

Indeed, and the only people calling them so are the people who are making up this story or falling for it. The contract language refers to mechanical failures beyond SWA's control as one variety of force majeure, at the same level as "act of God." The actual language of the contract:

Force Majeure Event means any event outside of Carrier's control, including, without limitation, acts of God, meteorological events, such as storms, rain, wind, fire, fog, flooding, earthquakes, haze, volcanic eruption or any other event, including, without limitation, government action, disturbances or potentially volatile international conditions, civil commotions, riots, embargoes, wars, or hostilities, whether actual, threatened, or reported, strikes, work stoppage, slowdown, lockout or any other labor related dispute involving or affecting Carrier's service, mechanical difficulties, Air Traffic Control, the inability to obtain fuel, labor or landing facilities for the flight in question or any fact not reasonably foreseen, anticipated or predicted by Carrier.

Read that carefully, at least three times.

In our latest update, we offered our definition, which states that “Force Majeure Event means any event outside of Carrier’s control” and so the “mechanical difficulties” we are referring to as Force Majeure events would be those outside of our control, such as airport mechanical difficulties (e.g., the airport de-icing system breaks) or Air Traffic Control issues (e.g., airport or regional tower goes down).

We are not referring to our own aircraft mechanical difficulties, which would clearly be under our control. Our policies and practices confirm this interpretation.

None of our procedures have changed — we still accommodate customers exactly the same as we did previously in the event of our own aircraft mechanical issues occur.

The story has already been debunked as the result of the deadly combination of a poorly worded contract, lazy reporting, and/or a confused Southwest spokesperson who commented on the initial report.

"Mechanical difficulties" refers those occurring at an airport or in the air traffic control system: For example, if a control tower has an outage which forces the closure of an airport; or if the fuel delivery system at an airport breaks down.

See: Truthsquadding the Southwest Airlines “Act of God” controversy: “Ultimately this is a reporting error run amok”

That would force people to be responsible for their actions. I think posting real names would also fix all the crap my son gets himself into on line. He would know that he can't get away with it being 13. His age would be verifiable.

Sigh. It doesn't work that way. I have a fairly unusual spelling for my last name. Even so, when I first Altavistaed my name when it first came online in the mid 1990s I found a minor league hockey goalie and an actor who appeared in Scarface with the same first name/last name spelling.

Today, there are "Steve Baur"s on all the social networking sites. None of them are me - I don't have a single social networking account.

Also, read this - http://www.elliott.org/blog/tsa-nabs-another-five-year-old-security-threat/

Wrong. There were several airlines that suffered complaints that laptops were failing on their planes. The table/trays were magnetic so they could be folded and stowed away. Turns out if you sit a laptop on top of a magnet, the hard drive soon fails.

TSA can't even differentiate between a 5 year old, and a terrorist, and you want to trust these asshats with your private info?

http://www.elliott.org/blog/tsa-nabs-another-five-year-old-security-threat/

He told delegates at the 2007 RSA Conference that there is a gap between the reality of security and the emotional feel of security due to the way our brains have evolved.

Which is why, a lot of times, you end up with security theatre, instead of real security.

With the question of insurance/liability having been brought up already, I can imagine such an underwriter requiring a space-tourist on a long voyage (to the moon, etc.) to HAVE to wear (at ALL times) some sort of "incapacitation device" that would render them, er, mostly harmless in the event they have an episode of "space rage" -- it may suffice to rely on their fellow passengers whacking 'em across the back of the head with a drink tray for "air rage" on domestic and international flights, as an emergency landing is at most a few hours away (plus the added complication of subduing a rowdy drunk in zero gravity (ok, ok, freefall) isn't a problem), but in space there's no place (or time) to pull over and invite the troublemaker to walk back home.

If this isn't a "feature" on the very earliest moon-tourism excursions, just wait until some jerk takes a dump on the drink cart and see how fast they invent a "remote-controlled Mickey patch"!!

This actually happened to a journalist after 9/11 - he had a darkly beautiful column describing the conversation he had with the airport security guy explaining that his powerbook had been perfectly functional until it fell off the ramp in front of said unconcerned security guy while he was being delayed for the wand search (and told to quiet down when he asked someone to grab the laptop).

Other horror stories have very similar sounding unconcerned people who threaten passengers for asking that their multi-thousand-dollar property not be broken.