Hacker News Reader

Comment by LabMechanic | Hacker News Reader

Suppose you've paid for content (apps, movies, music, games, or services). If your seller can terminate access at any time and for any reason, are you okay with that?

The 'don't like it, don't buy it' sentiment appears shortsighted, especially considering that both Android and iOS are operated by two major corporations.

Think of banking apps, for example. Banks usually do not favor a tampered OS.

Consider:

  False Sense of Security: A Study on the Effectivity of
  Jailbreak Detection in Banking Apps

https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8806743

PS: Yes, you might use another OS, but how would you do your online banking with it? Explain.

Another point to your "don't like it, don't buy it"-argument:

Suppose you buy a device; further suppose the state is not involved (no warranty). Your device breaks down the moment you bought it, and there is no refund. How do you deal with that, especially if you are low income?

View on HN

>>Suppose you've paid for content (apps, movies, music, games, or services). If your seller can terminate access at any time and for any reason, are you okay with that?

Sure. If those are terms of the sale then those are the terms of the sale. The seller offers terms. The buyer either accepts them or doesn't.

>> Think of banking apps, for example. Banks usually do not favor a tampered OS.

Ok, something of a different case, but sure. Banks offer a service, and decide which platforms to offer it on. Banks have denied customers access to banking to specific clients all the time. Lots of Web sites have died for lack of banking services.

If the seller is not willing then there's no transaction to be made.

>>Suppose you buy a device; further suppose the state is not involved (no warranty). Your device breaks down the moment you bought it, and there is no refund. How do you deal with that, especially if you are low income?

This has happened throughout history forever. It's so common there's a -latin- term for it (buyer beware) Caveat Emptor.

Which is why govt -does- get involved. And why, well, do your research before buying.

Obviously all sorts of industries have all sorts of regulations. Companies take liberties. Govt adds regulations to limit egregious behaviour. But fundamentally the seller offers something, negotiate if you like, or walk away.

Fundamentally you're not -entitled- to anything. If you don't like it, don't buy it.

If you're okay with companies screwing you over, good for you!

I believe online services and digital goods should have regulations. When I pay for something, I want a guarantee. Cancelling my purchase anytime for any reason shouldn't be allowed.

Imagine it's 1998. You buy software on a disc (a game). Now, in today's digital world, it's like I'm taking back your disc without a refund. That's not right. Even if it is just a "license" you are buying, if you have something (proper) physical, you can still use your product.

>> If you're okay with companies screwing you over, good for you!

I'm not. Which is why I choose who I give my money to. Its their choice to do what they do, and my choice nor to buy.

>> I believe online services and digital goods should have regulations.

Cool. Feel free to lobby for, vote for and garner support for regulations.

>> When I pay for something, I want a guarantee.

So do I. Which is why I choose not to do business with those that don't offer one.

>> Imagine it's 1998.

Well, remember for me, not imagine, but OK:)

>> You buy software on a disc (a game). Now, in today's digital world, it's like I'm taking back your disc without a refund.

Probably a bad example since I have lots of game disks from the 90s. The vast majority no longer work (OS reasons, hardware reasons, copy protection reasons). All my floppy disks are dead. I still have a CD Rom reader, but those are rare now too. -some- Windows games work. None of the DOS ones do. None if the Apple ones do.

So probably not a good example. But even then we (mostly) understood the life of those games was limited. The hoops we jumped through, the specialised hardware to run them, IRQs, Config.Sys - and, good times.

Music on cassette tapes? Movies on VHS? All digital stuff is temporary. No amount of regs could have saved that.

Maybe that's the difference. This is not new (to me). It's been this way forever. And if you don't to support companies with bad habits, then just don't give them money.

Its still -your- choice.

I get your point, which boils down to "your money, your choice".

I am trying to bring across that having warranties for digital stuff makes sense, just like we have them for physical products. It's about fairness. Companies shouldn't delete things (especially paid ones) without a good reason; it should be reasonable, not just based on their whim.

The "sole discretion" thing is not fair. It's like saying companies can do whatever they want (e.g., polluting your neighborhood, risking your health). Imagine a world without any rules (like no government, no police). We'd probably go back to "smaller tribes" because surviving alone would be tough. A "big tribe" (i.e., a country) is okay, but a global one is a bit too much to handle. Even the US is divided up into smaller states.

Anyway, all I am arguing for is: there should still be some rules (i.e., warranties) to keep things fair.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com