all 11 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 65 points 5 months ago

It won't. There've been sales before all this tracking. Only thing it threatens is raising the price arbitrarily for individuals.

  • source
  • [–] 51 points 5 months ago

    Can you imagine as an old person you hang outside of a grocery store: psst, hey kid I'll give you a dollar to go buy me some back medicine. They know my card number and its 50% cheaper if you buy it for me.

  • source
  • [–] 39 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    Won't somebody think of the scammers?!

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 31 points 5 months ago

    I'd consider that a worthwhile trade.

  • source
  • [–] 28 points 5 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 27 points 5 months ago

    Now do a ban on rent surveillance and any system that uses “data” to “adjust” rent.

  • source
  • [–] 22 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    These people depend on us having goldfish memory… they be right to a great extent.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 13 points 5 months ago

    Boo fuckin' hoo.

    Charge what you need for a modest net profit. Surveillance pricing is just the perfect refinement of capitalist cruelty.

  • source
  • 32 comments in c/nottheonion@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 52 points 5 months ago

    LOL, OH NOOOOOO. "Let us absolutely rape your wallet, or else..."

  • source
  • [–] 45 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    Discounts, sales and similar tactics have worked fine for decades if not centuries, without customers being recorded.

    Their claim is bullshit.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago

    It's not a claim it's a threat.

    And I will take no discounts to fucking surveillance pricing.

    The boycott is permanent. Brick and mortar can't change prices during business hours.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 45 points 5 months ago (-1 children)
  • [+] 30 points 5 months ago
    [removed by mod]
  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-2 replies)

    Fine by me. If it's stupid surge pricing with occasional "discounts" or a straight price for everything then I'll take the later.

  • source
  • [–] 35 points 5 months ago

    They're trying to convince us that surveillance pricing actually benefits us. Lol

  • source
  • [–] 32 points 5 months ago

    Oh yeah, that's the problem... All the companies falling over themselves to give out extra discounts to consumers.

    “Why is the government stopping us from charging our customers LESS??”

  • source
  • [–] 82 points 5 months ago* (3 children)

    I think they misunderstand what people are complaining about.
    People don't want discounts for one person while another gets overcharged. It's a good thing if it threatens discounts. Everyone wants to pay the same price for the same thing.

    Discounts can be annoying even when they're "fair"
    It's annoying when something was discounted yesterday, and now you have to pay more. Or when you just bought something last week, but now you could have saved a bunch because it's some arbitrary special day. Temporary discounts of any kind are inherently unfair and manipulative.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago

    People don't want discounts for one person while another gets overcharged.

    Yeah, maybe you have more faith in humanity than me, but I think there are tons of people who would be ok with this assuming that they're the ones getting the discount.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 26 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    Your “discounts” are being subsidized by someone else’s over charges.

    What ever happened to charging enough to cover your overhead and have middle class life?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 25 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    There have been discounts back in time where retailers did not have personal information on that level. What happened to stickers like "10% off" for all customers?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 23 points 5 months ago

    "discounts"

  • source
  • [–] 18 points 5 months ago

    God they're so transparent.

    "But the discounts we want to give our customers!!!"

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 5 months ago

    Kill it with fire.

    I have already pre-boycotted digital pricetags in brick and mortar stores. I will just drop all my shit and leave. You will not get my money if you're changing the prices on customers like that.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 5 months ago

    They wouldn't do it if didn't enable them to extract more money from us.

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 5 months ago

    Sounds like the rich when they threaten to leave if they don’t get their own way. If he gets voted in we will leave.

    If they don’t like it they have every choice leave or not trade.

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 5 months ago

    I think most of us understand economics well enough to see that there's no difference between a selective discount and a selective price hike.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 5 months ago

    It's not a threat, it's protection money

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 5 months ago
    [–] 5 points 5 months ago

    If this isn't the most ridiculous thing ever. Surveillance pricing is effectively a price fixing event across all industry. Old America wanted healthy competition to best serve citizens. Me, I thought old America was bad for its citizens.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago

    I’ll take my chances.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago (5 children)

    Got a source that you can read without subscribing? Even killing Javascript doesn't get the full page to load.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (4 children)

    Edit: had an archive.ph link to the non-paywall article, turns out we shouldn't use archive.today or any of it's affiliated links. They were behind a DDOS attack on Wikipedia, so I'm done with them, as everyone should be.

    Now to find another paywall bypassing site!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 5 months ago

    not on wikipedia but on someone who published open-source intelligence on the site operator, and using visitor traffic, while also masquerading as some random person who sighted the operator a tiny bit and editing archives to keep the identity theft up

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 1 point 5 months ago (2 children)