HP executive boasts that its controversial ink subscription model is “locking” in customers::undefined

  • eric@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    64
    ·
    1 year ago

    The time for regulating these evil business practices out of existence is now. It’s clear they won’t do the right thing out of moral obligation, so they need to be made an example.

    • Holyhandgrenade@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      At the very least, no product (printer ink) should be legal to sell at a 2000% markup. Or design cartridges where you can’t use up all the ink.

    • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      No, that time was about a century ago when the Great Depression hit and USSR was trying their hand at an alternative.

      Our oligarchs, instead, thought the Austrian fellow had it going on.

    • GaMEChld@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      While I don’t disagree, there is also something to be said for being a savvy consumer. Stop buying their shit. Do your research. If people spent as much time researching their decisions as lamenting them, they’d be happier with their purchases overall.

      I haven’t paid for printer ink in over 10 years. I’m still on my starter cartridge for the laser printer I purchased that far back.

      • eric@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m in the same boat with my laser printer that I bought in 2014, but I still think we need new laws prohibiting predatory practices. Similarly, I’m savvy enough to successfully avoid scam calls, but that doesn’t mean I don’t think we need more regulation and harsher punishments for those people making scam phone calls.

        Modern civilized society shouldn’t require everyone to be aware of all the new technological advancements that can hurt them. Our govt should be responsible enough to effectively legislate and punish the offenders, and we should not resort to victim blaming in the absence of such legislation.

        • GaMEChld@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Absolutely. But that involves being politically engaged. We have a government that doesn’t serve the people because people aren’t engaged. People spend time arguing politics but can’t be bothered to vote twice a year. We have abysmal voter turnout rates in every metric.

          Our presidential elections are the highest turnout, and even that is laughable, and that’s arguably the LEAST important election. Mid terms are worse turnout than that. Off years worse still. And primaries, which I’d argue are the MOST important election because they let you change the core spirit of the two parties, have the worst turnout of all.

          We need to vote.

          • eric@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Agreed 100%, but this would be under the FTC’s purview, and we don’t directly vote for them, so it’s a bit more complicated than simply “vote.”

            • GaMEChld@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Everything is ground up. Local elections first, and so on and so forth. By the time you get to federal, the spirit of the entire government will have already shifted more towards the will of the people.

    • shalafi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      Or, and bear with me here, consumers could wake up and not purchase garbage?

      It’s been plain for a solid decade+ that consumer inkjets are garbage and money pits. If people keep buying, why should HP stop selling?

      Comes down to a basic question, “Does the government owe it to you to not hurt yourself?” Meh, sometimes yes, sometimes no. Crazy complex for a simple question, ain’t it?

      But if one can’t be assed to take 5-minutes of research before purchasing a printer, seeing how fucked up HP and inkjets are, I can’t help them, and it ain’t the government’s business to stop them.

      • eric@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        What a horribly naive and flawed perspective.

        “If people aren’t smart enough to avoid murderers and not get murdered, I can’t help them, and it ain’t the government’s business to stop murders.”

        • You probably
      • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, gambling, then lootboxes demonstrated citizens need to be protected from dark patterns. And their use by government officials (say by the George W. Bush administration) should be felonious.