A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
Oh no. Loopholes. The surveillance isn't even banned, just some kinds of pricing.
How hard is it to just say "don't"? That would solve so many more problems.
What?
In the article.
While the law bans setting higher prices through surveillance pricing, it doesn’t address reducing prices. If a company raises its prices for everyone, and then offers individualized discounts, “suddenly you’ve arrived at the same outcome,” McBrien says.
That's how it's always been though? If the general price is too high odds are people will look elsewhere, no matter how many great coupons there are. To make the difference you'd have to peddle thousands or hundreds of thousands of individualized discounts and fundamentally change consumer behaviors. Technology that is at odds with how humans function often fails
Surveillance pricing hasn't always been, which is why a law targeting it should ban it.
To make the difference you'd have to peddle thousands or hundreds of thousands of individualized discounts
That's what they do here in Canada.