this post was submitted on 10 Feb 2026
573 points (99.7% liked)

A Boring Dystopia

15490 readers
1329 users here now

Pictures, Videos, Articles showing just how boring it is to live in a dystopic society, or with signs of a dystopic society.

Rules (Subject to Change)

--Be a Decent Human Being

--Posting news articles: include the source name and exact title from article in your post title

--If a picture is just a screenshot of an article, link the article

--If a video's content isn't clear from title, write a short summary so people know what it's about.

--Posts must have something to do with the topic

--Zero tolerance for Racism/Sexism/Ableism/etc.

--No NSFW content

--Abide by the rules of lemmy.world

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Adderbox76@lemmy.ca 1 points 12 hours ago (3 children)

It absolutely sucks, but from a company perspective it's not about greed, it's about legal liability. If they provide food to a charity and someone gets sick from it, they are responsible for it. So the legal danger of giving away your "close to be expired" food is fraught with corporate danger.

Does it suck. Yes. Absolutely. But Joe opened them up to a potential lawsuit.

[–] village604@adultswim.fan 9 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

In the US they're already shielded from liability by the Bill Emerson Good Samaritan Food Donation Act (and have been for 30 years)

So Joe didn't open them up to anything.

The real reason they do this is because there's always going to be some employee who abuses the system, so it's easier to do a blanket ban than police their employees.

Not equally enforcing the rule for everyone would actually be what opens them up to a lawsuit, because the fired employee can say, "but you let Bob do it once so you're discriminating against me." The employee probably wouldn't win, but winning a lawsuit is expensive.

[–] plz1@lemmy.world 9 points 12 hours ago (1 children)
[–] korazail@lemmy.myserv.one 8 points 11 hours ago (2 children)

This really should be the first go-to.

Old goods? Assign liability to the food bank and let them handle sorting.

Tossing perfectly edible food in the trash because it's no longer pretty and (acknowledging) I won't buy it, it is just insane.

I try to buy bruised food when I can because I know others won't. a wrinkly bell pepper, cucumber, or zucchini will be exactly the same once I chop it up and put it in my meal.

[–] village604@adultswim.fan 2 points 10 hours ago

In the US, both the business and the food bank are already shielded from liability. It's been that way for 30 years.

[–] Adderbox76@lemmy.ca 3 points 11 hours ago

I absolutely agree. I wasn't trying to defend the company's practice. Just explaining why they make those kind of decisions.

[–] czardestructo@lemmy.world 1 points 10 hours ago

Everyone misses this point. Lawyers have turned into leeches of society sucking the empathy and fun out of everything so everyone is scared to get sued. On the flip side its so god damn easy for corporate lackeys to say 'no cuz lawyers' just to make their job incrementally easier rather than actually doing it. Its a shitty cycle and I've seen it too much in corporate America.