Slashdot Mirror


Consumer Revolt Spurred Via the Internet

sas-dot writes "UK's newspaper Independent outlines the brewing consumer revolt being fomented on the web. 'Consumer militancy' is becoming ever more common, as individuals join forces on the internet to fight back against the state and big business. Businesses from banks to soccer clubs have been the target of these groups, in each case facing the fury of consumers who feel they have been wronged. For example, 'A mass revolt has left the high street banks facing thousands of claims from customers seeking to claw back some of the £4.75bn levied annually on charges for overdrafts and bounced cheques. More than one million forms demanding refunds have been downloaded from a number of consumer websites. The banks are settling out of court, often paying £1,000 a time.' Are these kinds of organized 'advocate mobs' going to be the future of internet activism?"

50 of 309 comments (clear)

  1. Here in the United States by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Our businesses are smarter and have forseen the trend. They are rallying against the consumers who believe they have rights.

    1. Re:Here in the United States by DittoBox · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I know you're telling the truth but do you mind sharing *why* you feel this way? This comment doesn't deserve an "Insightful" rating unless he can back it up.

      --
      Good. Cheap. Fast. Pick Two.
    2. Re:Here in the United States by JonWan · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well customers do have rights, but so do businesses. I've run my own business since 1986 and people (in general) think you must be rich because you own a business. I have always used a modified version of an old saying, "The customer may not always be right, but it's OK to let him think so". I forgive late movie fees all the time. In fact my late movie fees exceed my movie rental income by a wide margin. Like wise I give refunds if people don't like my pizzas or I replace a pizza that the customer thinks is over or under done. I try to make my customer happy, but then you have people that try to take advantage of you. They bring a movie back and say it won't play "on their machine" and want another one, or they bring back the almost empty pizza box and say that the pizza was over/under done and want another. These people get what they want, but the are put on my "list" to see if it keeps happening. At some point I'll politelly refuse them and tell them why. This usually stops the problem and I don't lose a customer in the process. The problem is that when a business gets too big you start to lose the personal touch. You deal with employees that would rather be somewhere else, or a boss that has no stake in the business execpt a paycheck. I would like to make more money, but this is a one man operation and most of the time I am doing as much as I can. Getting bigger would require hiring people and the problem above would begin happening.

    3. Re:Here in the United States by mgiuca · · Score: 2, Insightful

      With all respect, you aren't a giant patent-wielding litigation-happy overlord. It's those companies which cross the line of "consumer rights".

  2. Must just be in England... by cayenne8 · · Score: 5, Interesting
    "'A mass revolt has left the high street banks facing thousands of claims from customers seeking to claw back some of the £4.75bn levied annually on charges for overdrafts and bounced cheques. "

    I'm actually surprised at the apathy shown towards the Bank of America fiasco of exploiting loopholes in the law to allow them to open accounts and credit cards for illegal aliens!!

    I figured there would have been a much larger rush of people to move their accounts away from them.

    I guess aiding and abetting law breakers just isn't enough to get the typical US citizen's ire up....

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    1. Re:Must just be in England... by hal2814 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "I guess aiding and abetting law breakers just isn't enough to get the typical US citizen's ire up"

      At least someone is getting money from illegal aliens in that scenario. I withdrew my money from BoA after Clark Howard brought to light the man who was jailed after he asked a teller to verify a shady check, she verified it was genuine, and then he was jailed for cashing that check since it was a fake check. But no, I don't particularly care that a bank is profiting from our government's inability to properly enforce immigration laws.

    2. Re:Must just be in England... by The+Zon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I guess aiding and abetting law breakers just isn't enough to get the typical US citizen's ire up....
      I'm more concerned about banks that help the super-rich hide their money from the IRS than ones that help impoverished migrant workers open up checking accounts. By the way, isn't it better that they're putting their money into the bank system, where it can be reinvested back into the economy? I thought the main complaint about immigrants was that they don't give anything back.
      --
      Some attitudes replaced or by cgi optimizes
    3. Re:Must just be in England... by NetDanzr · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I'm actually surprised at the apathy shown towards the Bank of America fiasco of exploiting loopholes in the law to allow them to open accounts and credit cards for illegal aliens!!

      Maybe people don't consider this to be a big issue. Usually, to spark a boycott, you need something really unexpected or shocking, which would rally the people into action. A good example of this is Shell, when it tried to sink an oil platform in the North Atlantic, which resulted into massive boycotts all over Europe. Or, more recently, Citgo, which saw a slump in sales after Hugo Chavez had his famous "Bust is Satan" speech at the UN (Citgo is owned by the Venezuelan government).

      The Bank of America case is different. What they did was neither shocking nor unexpected. At times when people speak of amnesty for illegals and when there are efforts to grant them driver licenses and scholarships to their children, giving them credit cards doesn't sound far-fetched enough to spark a large protest. (In addition, people are more interested in Smith's decomposing body and Britney's shaved head at the moment.)

    4. Re:Must just be in England... by ScentCone · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I guess aiding and abetting law breakers just isn't enough to get the typical US citizen's ire up....

      Yes, well, that would also involve not eating hot dogs from meat packing plants that are blatantly breaking employment laws, and not fueling the problem by hiring curb-side landscape workers completely outside the law. People can't have it both ways, and... they want to.

      But the whole credit-card-issuing thing brings a new, and especially noxious form of credibility into the illegal alien scenario. You can get a Visa/Debit card in Mexico, for example. So why not just bring your real account with you from home? Oh, right... because you're a criminal. The only plus side of this is that when an illegal is busted for one crime or another, and cut loose pending a trial date, there's a better chance of finding them by tracking their gas station purchases, etc. But... that's not worth the philosophical price paid for rewarding the initial law breaking in the first place. I would think that the legal immigrants would be up in arms over this dillution of what they work so hard to accomplish.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    5. Re:Must just be in England... by cayenne8 · · Score: 4, Interesting
      "By the way, isn't it better that they're putting their money into the bank system, where it can be reinvested back into the economy?"

      No...we should be enforcing existing laws, and possibly make some stronger ones that make it virtually impossible to earn a living in the US without proper, legal documentation for immigrant workers. If you withold banking privs, make it impossible to wire money, prosecute employers that hire illegal aliens and make it impossible for illegas to get a job, cut off all social services....basically make it impossible to live in the US as an illegal, dry up all incentive to come here illegally...THEN, you'll have solved the problem. They will leave if they can't work or get a govt. handout.

      I'll agree at the same time, there needs to be a streamlined method of legally getting citizenship (hopefully the end goal of all immigration)...and make it easier to get a temporary visa which would allow the above to be set up for a legal immigrant worker.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    6. Re:Must just be in England... by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Maybe people don't consider this to be a big issue. Usually, to spark a boycott, you need something really unexpected or shocking, which would rally the people into action. A good example of this is Shell, when it tried to sink an oil platform in the North Atlantic, which resulted into massive boycotts all over Europe

      Or, prior to the fall of Apartheid, BofA's massive investment in pro-Apartheid South Africa. Which is what got me to remove all my funds from their bank.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    7. Re:Must just be in England... by networkBoy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No, I'm worried about my future high-schooler aged child's cabbage picking job.
      People say that the reason the illegals do these jobs is because no-one else will. I call BS. This is easily like the fast food jobs in the city, a high-school or JC job for extra cash while still living at home.

      Mind you I don't fault the immigrants, illegal or otherwise for wanting to come here to better their life, but I firmly believe that starting off by entering the country illegally is the wrong way to do it. A large percentage of specific crimes in high immigrant areas (drug and robbery issues in LA for example) are committed by illegal (and often gang members) immigrants. While I realize that these people may be the minority of their total population, the easiest way to deal with it is deportation of all illegals.
      [ditribe]
      Christ make work visa's easier to get for Mexicans, I DON'T CARE, just stem the tide of people who are outside the system. If they have a work visa then they can get an international drivers license (no need for a state ID) and they can get a TIN (no need for a SSN) and with those two pieces of data along with their passport they can buy US car insurance if they drive. It's all within the existing legal framework. Enforce what we have and tell Pres Fox to go fuck himself when he complains about how we treat illegals in our country. Heaven forbid you enter Mexico illegally. You're below the child molesters in Mexicali prison.
      [/diatribe]

      Ta,
      -nB

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    8. Re:Must just be in England... by gfxguy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You know, it's a tricky situation. I like the policy of granting credit to someone without demanding a social security number, since that use is WAY outside the purpose of the SS number. Even FDR claimed the number would not be used for ANYTHING except social security when he helped create the program (moreover, he imagined it as a temporary solution to an immediate problem with a gradual fade out of the program replaced private retirement accounts, but that's another discussion).

      So I think it's great policy. That it can be abused by illegals is another matter.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    9. Re:Must just be in England... by gfxguy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'd like to add to what you said.

      I call it "the myth of the $6.00 head of lettuce." This is when someone complaining about illegal aliens gets nailed with the "yeah, but do you want to pay $6.00 for a head of lettuce? Because that's what it would cost if an American were picking it!"

      First of all, by most accounts, these illegals are well paid - well above minimum wage, and not the slave labor rates that so many like to claim they are making. The benefit to the employer is not having to pay payroll taxes, which is a huge hit to any company, and also not having to deal with full time employees that get paid whether there's any work or not.

      But let's say, for sake of argument, that the typical illegal only makes $3.00 an hour picking 30 heads of lettuce. Of course, any monkey can work a lot faster than that, but let's err on the safe side.

      That means that, out of the $1.29 I pay for a head of lettuce at my supermarket, only $0.10 goes to pay the worker who picked it.

      Now let's say that same guy gets paid $12/hour instead. It'd only be $0.40 to pay the worker who picked it. My cost would increase by $0.30.

      So, to all the idiots who say "yeah, but do you want to pay $6.00 for a head of lettuce?" I say "No, but I'll pay $1.59 to help keep out illegals and improve the economy in other ways."

      What part about "illegal" do people not understand? I have sympathy for people wanting to come here. My wife is from South America, it took years for her to become a legal resident (we'd already had one child). I spent thousands of dollars and countless hours taking her for medical exams, to get fingerprinted (several times, since they kept changing the rules about what they'd accept), getting documents translated and notorized...

      I'm not saying it should be that brutal, but I'm saying that I did put my money where my mouth is - there's a right way and wrong way to immigrate to another country. Illegally is the WRONG way.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    10. Re:Must just be in England... by P3NIS_CLEAVER · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The unfortunate thing though is that the farmer that makes a few extra cents profit costs us thousands of dollars when uninsured immigrants need medical care. While we have ensured that inflation of food prices stays low medical costs have skyrocketed.

      --
      Please sign petition to restore sanity to our banking system!!!

      http://financialpetition.org/
    11. Re:Must just be in England... by mspohr · · Score: 2, Informative
      I agree with you that a fence is a waste of money. Also, numerous studies have shown that illegal labor is not a drain on taxpayers.

      However, you can't really stop using the services and businesses of illegal aliens. In California, the entire economy is dependent on illegal labor. If all of the illegal labor left tomorrow, the economy would collapse.

      This is the real hypocrisy of the problem. Everyone is dependent on illegal labor so they shouldn't get upset but they do get up and make stupid statements.

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    12. Re:Must just be in England... by The_Wilschon · · Score: 2, Informative

      Our economy is bleeding money as a result...
      ...of a raging trade deficit across the board. I'd wager that "immigrants sending money home" doesn't make up a significant part of the trade deficit at all. If you're really worried about the economy "bleeding money", then the trade deficit is what you ought to be taking a look at.

      Enforcing immigration laws isn't going to work, and building a big fence is a waste of money. If you really want illegal immigrants to go away, stop using businesses that employ them.
      If we have unenforceable laws (about anything, including immigration), then those laws need to be changed. So yes, economic means perhaps are the proper way to make illegal immigrants go away. However, thinking that they need to go away because they make the economy bleed is sloppy thinking. Not pulling their weight in the tax system OTOH is a good reason to think they need to go away (or become citizens, one way or the other).
      --
      SIGSEGV caught, terminating

      wait... not that kind of sig.
  3. Soccer.. arggggggh! by Ckwop · · Score: 2, Informative

    Businesses from banks to soccer clubs have been the target of these groups, in each case facing the fury of consumers who feel they have been wronged.

    English: Football
    Spanish: fútbol
    Protuguse: futebol
    Romanian: fotbal
    Galician: fútbot
    Catalan: futbol
    French: le football
    Russian: futbol
    Turkish: futbol
    Serbian: fudbal
    German: Fußball
    Dutch: voetbal
    Norweian: fotball
    Swedish: fotboll
    Danish: fodbold
    American: Soccer

    The United States, it seems, is the only country in the world that prefers to use the name football to refer to a game that doesn't actually use the feet.

    All we ask is that you please call the biggest sport in the world by its commonly accepted name! :)

    Thanks in advance,

    Rest of World

    PS: Now if only we could get our overpaid under-performing team to win something...

    1. Re:Soccer.. arggggggh! by DoomfrogBW · · Score: 4, Informative

      Wrong! The football you are referring is aka soccer or "Association Football". There is also rugby football, etc. So your bigot-like comment is way off. See quote from Wikipedia:

      "The rules of football were codified in England by the Football Association in 1863, and the name association football was coined to distinguish the game from the other forms of football played at the time, specifically rugby football. The term soccer first appeared in the 1880s as a slang abbreviation of Association football, often credited to Charles Wreford-Brown.[18]

      Today the sport is known by a number of names throughout the English-speaking world, the most common being football and soccer. The term used depends largely on the need to differentiate the sport from other types of football played in a community. Football is the term used by FIFA, the sport's world governing body, and the International Olympic Committee. For more details of naming throughout the world, please refer to the main articles above."

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Football_(soccer)

    2. Re:Soccer.. arggggggh! by Skrynesaver · · Score: 3, Informative

      No, no other English-speaking nation in the world is on your side in this .. well, maybe Ireland.)

      Nope, In Ireland football is a game played with 15 players a side and run by the GAA
      Soccer is something played by delicate flowers who fall in a breeze and generally bring disgrace upon themselves and their nation and shouldn't be confused with sport being more in the realm of performance art.

      Though footie as played in Oz seems suited to a bunch of ex-crims, they really shouldn't be allowed abroad to perpetrate International rules on others ;)

      --
      "Linux is for noobs"-The new MS fud strategy
    3. Re:Soccer.. arggggggh! by ZombieRoboNinja · · Score: 3, Funny

      Japanese: sakkaa

      Score one for the bad guys! Yee-haw!

    4. Re:Soccer.. arggggggh! by mgblst · · Score: 4, Funny

      Why don't you ask all english speaking nations?

      Australia: Soccer
      Canada: Soccer
      USA: Soccer
      New Zealand: Soccer
      Britan: who cares, you all suck at it anyway!

  4. Consider my mountain bike... by AdamInParadise · · Score: 5, Informative

    A few months ago, I bought a nice mountain bike from a well-known vendor. Right from the start I had issues with the front crank. So I went online and founds hundreds of people having exactly the same problem on the very same model. It gave me a much stronger case to get the shop to replace the problematic part by another brand: they could not claim that it was my fault. So yeah, online consumer activist is good, but you already knew that, right ?

    --
    Nobox: Only simple products.
  5. Yes, yes they will by smooth+wombat · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Are these kinds of organized 'advocate mobs' going to be the future of internet activism?


    Yes, yes they will. See the current bruhaha over Bank of America and their giving credit cards to illegal aliens as well as allowing unapproved documents to be used to open accounts.

    Even, gasp!, Michelle Malkin is getting into scrum and accusing the Bush administration of ignoring and condoning the actions of Bank of America.

    One need only do searches for things like "lawsuit Match.com" to see that (maybe) consumers will be getting the upper hand. Until businesses bribe, er, lobby, Congress to protect them that is.

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
  6. Stating a general theory of political reality. by GodInHell · · Score: 4, Interesting

    We are the people. Individually we are weak. Together we rule the world.

    Those who oppress us cannot do so unless we help them. Those who go against our-selves rampant, shall suffer the only possible consequence.

    As humanity learns to speak with one another, breaking down barriers of distance, language, and culture, the existing governmental powers are going to have a very interesting dillema on their hands. One people, one world, one government.

    -GiH
    The preceding has been your dose of political idealism for the day. Overdosiong on political idealism may lead to conspiracy theories, or dellusions of power. Use only as recomneded.

  7. Mob activism against corporate criminals by maynard · · Score: 4, Insightful

    RE: that British bank scandal, the courts there determined that banks were breaking the law. This was then reported by the news (such as BBC) who published handy tips on reclaiming unfair fees.

    Is it thus fair to call a press which publishes information about this issue, along with all the people who makes use of that information, an "advocate mob" out to bully corporations out of their profits? In fact, who is the more organized here? The private companies with enough funds to hire PR agents, attorneys, and lobbyists, or those citizens who assert their rights as legislated by parliament and enforced by the courts?

  8. NFL? by tepples · · Score: 2, Insightful

    All we ask is that you please call the biggest sport in the world by its commonly accepted name! :) So by which name should we refer to the descendant of rugby played by NFL, CFL, and AFL?
  9. "Advocate Mobs"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Are these kinds of organized 'advocate mobs' going to be the future of internet activism?"

    Wait until such a "mob" hits Slashdot and demands journalism.

  10. yeah, let's talk about it! by Uksi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No it's not, because, frankly it doesn't affect anyone I know. People don't care. I don't care.

    If an illegal alien can go and open a bank account, it's fine by me. Bank of America is not in the law enforcement business, it's in the banking business. This alien is supporting an American business by opening that bank account.

    No, let's talk about predatory lending, sneaky credit card terms, deceitful charges, etc.

    Let's talk about MBNA (now part of Bank of America) and BofA being some of the heaviest hitters to push through new bankruptcy law that makes everyone a peon to credit card companies, regardless of circumstances! Let's talk about the fact that an amendment to limit credit card interest rates to 30% (yes, that's thirty f'ing percent) was rejected last yaer. Yes, credit card companies did not want their interest rate limited to a cut-throat ceiling of 30%!

    Let's talk about my platinum Bank of America card moving from 2 late payments (by even a day!) in 6 months to 2 late payments in 12 months to 1 late payment in 12 months before they bump your rate from a good APR to an insane 20%+ default APR. Let's talk about two-cycle billing (my roommate, who normally pays off his entire balance got bitten by this because he miscalculated and payed off a $1 less than the balance)

    Let's talk about CapitalOne (and some other predatory lenders) not reporting your credit limit to the credit reporting agencies, which is ILLEGAL to do, but there is not enough activism or pressure to change that.

    So yeah, let's talk about that, and then you can tell me why I should care that Bank of America issues a bank account to an illegal alien, when there are all these other topics out there that affect every damn American.

    1. Re:yeah, let's talk about it! by natophonic · · Score: 2

      While I'll agree that these are problems....these CAN be avoided by people that have self control, live within their means...
      Yes people, please do have the self control not to be diagnosed with a debilitating illness, ever get laid off or have a slump in income, or have your house burned down when your neighbor shoots off fireworks that land on your roof... *sigh*

      It's great that you got out of your self-created emergency by some 'miracle', and that it leaves you time to worry about things like 'ohhh noooesss the brown people are takin over mah country!'. Just keep in mind that not everyone else's emergency is self-created. Consumers banding together to take large corporations to task for *illegal* fraud and deceit is more worthy than brow-beating them for legal and legitimate business practices.
  11. Re:Must just be in England...1 Problem by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 2, Informative
    I figured there would have been a much larger rush of people to move their accounts away from them.

    The problem is that there are fewer and fewer acceptable choices every year as alternatives. BofA isn't the only bank you wouldn't want to do business with.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
  12. the bush administration is in pocket of big biz by Uksi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Big business profits motivate Bush administration's every single action:

    * ignoring BofA bruhaha
    * encouraging "guest worker status" to permit legal under-minimum-wage labor
    * signing the bankruptcy bill
    * pushing ethanol fuel (big ethanol lobby)
    * against discount drugs from Canada
    * crazy cronyism in Iraq (KBR, Halliburton)

    I mean, there is very little that's not big business motivated.

    1. Re:the bush administration is in pocket of big biz by AK+Marc · · Score: 2, Informative

      This requires either investigation (Judicial)

      What branch does the FBI fall under? The Attorney General is appointed by whom? The Executive branch is the branch in charge of enforcement. Judicial tries them after the executive investigates.

      Basically, Canada's government artificially limits the prices on drugs, and some people want that price control to apply in the U.S.

      Nope. People want to be able to exercise free-market buying. That is, if I can buy from anywhere, I buy wherever it is cheapest. If the drugs are sold for a loss in Canada, then the drug companies should leave that market. That's what a free market does. Blocking importation from Canada is blocking the free market so that the drug companies can gouge the Americans with inflated prices that are illegal to circumvent. I can buy a DVD player from Canada. Why can't I buy drugs made in the US from Canada as well? The US government claimed safety only, and never protecting profits. So you disagree with our government as to why such a ban should be in place. I don't think you even understand the issues. You obviously have only a tenuous grasp as to what the three branches do.

  13. Re:Soccer Clubs by ookabooka · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That's "football clubs" to the rest of us.
    Disclaimer: I am an American.

    Ah, but see, by saying "soccer" it removes all the ambiguity. Most non-Americans know what "soccer" is, they just think it is an incorrect term to describe that sport with 2 goals and a buncha guys kicking a ball around. Had the poster said "football" then the American population would assume the summary was referring to American football while the non-american population wouldn't be confused for they would expect to see "American football" to describe football and "football" to describe soccer; a clever non-American would however assume that since this is an Amermican website that the summarry was actually referring to American footbal by saying "football". So had the summary said "football" to describe soccer, only non-presumptuous non-American's would infer the correct meaning...By saying soccer, everyone infers the correct meaning, and a few people get pissed off and/or roll their eyes.


    P.S. I'm not arguing over which is the more correct term, thats a useless debate...Seeing as I am an American and a Slashdotter, I suppose I'm supposed to be double-arrogant and double-argumentative. . so yeah, soccer is THE correct term :-)

    --
    If you are about to mod me down, keep in mind that this post was most likely sarcastic.
  14. Re:Soccer Clubs by GungaDan · · Score: 3, Funny

    My solution has been to refer to soccer as "unamerican football." Things are a bit different with handball, though. American-style handball is either "handball" or "racquetless racquetball," while team handball is now either "handsoccer" or "dry water polo."

    --
    Eloi are stupid, throw morlocks at them!
  15. Banks have it coming to them by Alioth · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The banks have it coming, they really do. Unfortunately, when this happened to me, HTTP was brand new and only geeks used it, and I was still a student.

    I had to pay a deposit to my landlord for a new place I was going to rent. Unfortunately, due to a foul up which was entirely my fault, this put me something like £1 overdrawn (a trivial amount in anyone's book). So the bank sent me a letter that they were going to charge me (IIRC) £25 for unarranged borrowing and a further £3 per day for each day overdrawn! Then they took the £25 out just before my first pay day, making me overdrawn AGAIN, causing them to charge me £25 again for unarranged borrowing as a direct consequence of them charging me for the previous problem! You'd think before they charged you they would check that the charge wouldn't cause you to go overdrawn again and be charged again.

    Of course they refused to refund it. Natwest - bastards. They used to like also withdrawing the funds on a cheque written the day it hit the payee's bank, but not add the funds on a cheque you were paying in for 3 to 5 days.

    If my current bank tries that trick, I will move my account elsewhere - including my mortgage. I'll make sure it ends up costing them more than it does me.

  16. Bouncing Your Bank by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2, Funny

    A funny letter snarking a bank for bouncing a check against a pensioner now insisting banks deal with her own new defensive bureaucracy circulates the Net in an email claiming to be from an old pensioner. It reportedly was written by an Australian columnist as humor. But practically everyone can relate. And now, with our PCs, I hope to see everyone actually apply the policies and procedures the letter mentions.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  17. Also by geekoid · · Score: 2, Interesting

    yes, we should also put in some stronger laws that make it impossible to share music.

    Also, we should put governors in all cars so they can't go over 65MPH.

    Oh, and all computers should report to government agencies to help prevent crime.

    Here's on for you:
    In new Mexico there are farms the pay over 10 bucks an hour, and have benefits, and they can't find anyone to do the work. Picking is a very hard, and supprisingly skilled labor. Most peopel would rather take there 5 dollar an hour fast food job rather then pick.

    It used to be, migrant workers came to the US, picked, got paid, took the money back home with them and the end of the season.

    While here they would, of course, spend money.
    remember, this is to do a job NO LOCAL CITIZEN WILL DO.

    Of course, you could pay 100 dollars an hour, but all that will do is make it so everyone needs to get a 75% pay raise which would make 100 bucks not very valuable.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  18. consumer revolt by crimperman · · Score: 2, Informative

    Are these kinds of organized 'advocate mobs' going to be the future of internet activism?


    I'm not sure, probably, but one of the best I have seen so far is saynoto0870 which lists the equivalent geographical telephone numbers for the 0870 (national rate non-geographical) numbers that companies give out for support and such. ( Okay so it should have been called saynoto0870.co.uk but that's a little OT )

    Considering how long some of them keep you on hold, dialling non-geographical numbers (which are often excluded from discount pricing plans) can cost you a fortune.
  19. Wonder if the U.S. will see such benefits by mutterc · · Score: 2, Insightful

    (Disclaimer: I don't know if the U.K.'s any better than the U.S. in this regard):

    In the U.S., if consumer revolt ever becomes enough of a problem, the companies will just buy some laws making it illegal for consumers to collude against them, and/or crush complainers under the weight of the civil court system.

  20. Re:Newsflash!! by moeinvt · · Score: 2, Insightful



    "Most peopel also know that immigrant workers are good for the US . . ."

    So truth is now a function of popular opinion?

    Illegal immigrants are great for the factories and construction companies that can get them to work for sub-minimum wages. They're just a burden on the rest of us that have to pay taxes to build the public infrastructure and fund the public services that everyone uses(and illegals don't pay for). It's also a documented fact that illegals ship substantial portions of their earnings back to their home countries, so the wealth doesn't even circulate in the rest of the economy. Not to mention the grave security risk of having 20 million illegals that we know nothing about running around our country. That's supposed to be a "benefit to the US"?

    Who's a whacko? Somebody that dares to defy the status quo and question insane government policies?

  21. Law Breakers by Sloppy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I guess aiding and abetting law breakers just isn't enough to get the typical US citizen's ire up....

    Americans don't have any respect for the law, because the law doesn't have any respect for us.

    There's just no way someone can look at the American revolution and its causes -- the very principles that the country was founded upon -- and then look at today's America and not see hipocrisy. The Drug War?! DMCA!? All the creepy shit that's been happening since September 2001? Even little day-to-day stuff, like speed traps that are set up to generate revenue instead of improve safety.

    It's a joke. Today's America is an "us versus them" situation where "them" is the government itself -- which is supposed to be us. The only law that Americans respect is this law: don't get caught. Why would you expect anyone to get their ire up over breaking immigration law? Most Americans don't know jack shit about what the immigration laws are -- all we know is that the laws are probably unfair, and almost certainly arbitrary and not tuned to maximize any particular political ideal -- neither racist protectionism nor freedom and the power of diversity. There are no ethical principles upon which any of our laws are based; they're all made from compromises between competing special interests. Why should anyone expect immigration law to be any different?

    It's not worth getting upset over. (Except when you're in the crosshairs.)

    --
    As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  22. Re:Soccer Clubs by rudeboy1 · · Score: 4, Funny

    We should also consider the evolution of the sport since its birth. Back in the day, leather helmets were worn, with minimal padding. This was in the days long before super agents and scouts were hand picking the biggest, meanest ogres they could find. Long before the days where a bone shattering hit was expected on every tackle. Give me the best runningback from the early days of football, and I'll laugh my ass off as he gets trampled to death 10 out of 10 times by the most mediocre backfielder in the NFL.
        The modern American football pad set evolved from intense competition, where everyone was looking for a better edge. However, it is my opinion that the inception of hard plactic components that spurred our current suit of armor look. Would you rather get speared in the gut by a guy wearing a thick, soft leather helmet, or a guy wearing a bulletproof shell on his head? Thus it became necessary to wear hard plastic shoulders as well as elbow, knee and girdle pads.
        As far as the purists accross the pond mocking American football, I say, if you hadn't spent the majority of the 20th century without 2 nickels to rub together, your rugby would have evolved similarly. If rugby was a billion dollar industry like American football, you would be importing only the most ferocious animals alive to play the game. Competition would spur the need for stronger, lighter protection, and eventually, the only difference between American football and rugby would be that nifty little gay pride celebration you chaps call a scrum.

    --
    Raging in an online forum won't do anything for the world around you. To see change, you must take action.
  23. Market transparency ... by golodh · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The only thing the Internet does in this case is to make communication several orders of magnitude cheaper (in time, money, and efort). This in turn makes the market more transparant.

    Apparently, in the cases mentioned in the article, businesses were doing things that prompted their customers to leave when they found out that what they were faced with was "policy" instead of just "bad luck".

    Market transparency is great ... it forces businesses to be honest and to actually compete on value instead of relying on (modest) barriers (including ignorance) to keep their customers. If a business uses practices that hurt it when the public finds out about it (as was the case here), can those practices be either good or reasonable? What's not to like?

    And look at the flip side of the coin ... if people are happy with the way a business works they will write about that too.

  24. Re:Soccer Clubs by CmdrGravy · · Score: 4, Funny

    As a purist from across the pond your plasticy standing about game might produce a load of hugely muscled ogres but for strength, stamina, endurance and speed you'd be better off with rugby players. I just read that your teams are actually 2 seperate teams because your players just can't hack playing the full match ! Incredible, especially since they stop for breaks every 5 seconds and those girlish gossipy chats they always seem to be having.

  25. Re:You overlooked a major issue by operagost · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sneaking into a country to help your family maybe be illegal, but it is not wrong.
    Based on whose morality? If we are truly a secular society, the law is king. If you don't like the law, change it through participation in the democratic process (and the judicial system itself, to an extent).
    --

    Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  26. AC Here in the United States is ...? by OldHawk777 · · Score: 2, Funny

    AC is indeed insightful, because to be insightful you must be observant of situations, people, processes ... and then be able to (via epiphany or logic) derive a reasonable or accurate description of facts and/or causes of the situations, people, processes ... conditions.

    I do not know who AC is, but if I did I would click-friend the person AC. AC's ability to observe and derive personal conclusions that indeed do reflect reality in the USA, EU, China, Russia, Canada, Mexico ... is beyond insightful ... it is prescient. I regret that I have no moderator points today to provide to AC.

    Ditto: "I know you're telling the truth but do you mind sharing *why* you feel this way? This comment doesn't deserve an "Insightful" rating unless he can back it up." This is a statement in conflict (I feel) with logical use of words. You know AC is truthful implies that you may be in possession of facts that would support AC's insightful observations, but then you ask AC for feelings, rather than more facts to support those you appear to already have obtained by some real data collection. It was just odd to me the way you worded your comment, which I understand when folks use ESL. The support you provided to AC ... I am sure is appreciated by AC.

    JonWan: "Well customers do have rights, but so do businesses." is incorrect, because rights as in "Civil/Human Rights" cannot be reserved or legislated to cover any institutions with "RIGHTS". Institutions (society, businesses, governments, religions, clubs, marriage ...) are created by "Civil Law" mandated by "Human Citizens" any institution can be dissolved, terminated, destroyed ... by "Civil Law" when mandated by "Human Citizens" for whatever reason. However, when a "Human Citizens" is destroyed, terminated, dissolved ... by an institution then a crime against humanity has occurred, this is true for capital-punishment, war, famine, genocide ... :"FOR ME" only self-defense to protect the life of family, friends, others and self is justifiable, but might be punishable by an institutions following the letters of the law, legal yes, but never would it be justice. Institutions cannot think, feel, and/or act in anyway, institutions are inanimate objects created and controlled by "Human Citizens". My observations, make me believe, that USA prison populations should be 50/50, one half murders, pedophiles, drug-dealers ... the other half should be politicians, CEOs/CFOs, market-traders, pseudo-prophet/televangelists ....

    Having said the above, please notice I do not include SBA/AFF [Small Business Americans or American Family Farmers in the Western Hemisphere]. I know the SBA/AFF are as fucked as the rest of US, EU ....

    --
    Unaccountable leaders are masters, and unrepresented people are slaves. How do US and EU fare?
  27. Re:You overlooked a major issue by rhakka · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The existence of a law has no correlation with the prescence of morality. Many immoral things have been and are still legal. Many things that could very well be considered not only moral, but righteous, are illegal.

    You're right that attempting to change a situation through the democratic process is important, and that to some extent law is a social contract we all deal with to get along a bit better... but that does not mean that all laws should be obeyed, and it MOST CERTAINLY does not mean that any particular law is MORAL.

    Sometimes, you do need to break laws.

  28. Re:You overlooked a major issue by rhakka · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well, that's fine. But don't pretend that law is the ultimate arbitration of morality, that's all. Law and morality are not even passingly related. And incidentally, I think you'd find that if your family is living in abject poverty, you'd do whatever you could to help or protect them, so on purely moral grounds I'd have a hard time faulting an "alien" for trying to get work here. Their action may be Illegal, sure, but not immoral. They are still human beings doing the best they know how to. If, for some reason, we feel the need to protect ourselves from them, then so be it. But that doesn't make them immoral people, nor necessarily us immoral, unless you're advocating for extreme violations of basic human rights like torturing them to make an example or something perhaps.

    Basically, if someone wants to treat them like criminals then they should feel free, but they should at least man up and admit that the "illegals" or "aliens" are people who aren't necessarily some slavering horde of theives and rapists. It's not ok to justify the actions behind some guise of "morality". if it's justified then it may be a pragmatic reality, but it's not a moral question, and pretending something is a moral question when it is not, ironically, often allows quite immoral behaviour to be justified, so I'm a little distrustful of people using it lightly. People tend to more extreme reactions if they paint their target as an immoral being.

    Not saying you were; you were just asking a question. Just explaining my reaction and its cause.

  29. Nothing new. by Irvu · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Honestly, this kind of networking is what has happened before as have mass runs on stores and banks of the type described. The only difference is in how the groups are organizing and the speed with which it is happening. And Amen I say. The public does not exist to serve the state or business. Those fat bastards exist to serve us!