you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 16 points 5 months ago (4 children)

People aren't generally opposed to the idea of differential algorithmic pricing, they're against the way it'll almost inevitably get implemented if allowed to be done without regulation / public involvement and oversight.

Ask a lefty if they're in favour of charging people fines based on net worth/income, rather than based on a flat rate. Speeding ticket? That'll be 0.5% of your annual salary, or 0.5% of your net worth, or a baseline minimum amount, whatever's higher.

The way it'll get implemented though, is more like "It's hot, so you gotta pay x2 for water if you're poor already". And "you're a privileged race/gender, you get X pricing, it's not discrimination if it's an algorithm doing it!".

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    You're comparing examples where the entity establishing the rate of a speeding ticket or a fine is the government as a consequence of you violating the law, to a company deciding how much they know you're willing to pay for a product or a service that may or may not a basic necessity such as water or food. Not quite the correct comparison.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 child)

    Ask a lefty if they’re in favour of charging people fines based on net worth/income, rather than based on a flat rate. Speeding ticket? That’ll be 0.5% of your annual salary, or 0.5% of your net worth, or a baseline minimum amount, whatever’s higher.

    As a Finn, I'm perpetually amazed when that's not how it works in every country. I'm not a lefty, nor poor, and I think that's the only reasonable way to handle fines.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment