[Lorric]

I thought of a better one. Your kid tells you it costs $1. But it costs $100. Your kid is either lying or made a mistake. You buy the thing. Because it says $100, but you see what you expect to see, so you see $1.00.

Then you win a Darwin Award. Congratulations. Wear it proudly.

You are using this definition wrong. You're supposed to die due to great stupidity to win a Darwin Award.

Don't dodge the question.

[MatthTheGeek]

you can just tell matth is the kind of person who thinks the darwin awards are funny can't you

Of course they are. That's the whole point.

You are using this definition wrong. You're supposed to die due to great stupidity to win a Darwin Award.

Don't dodge the question.

If you are stupid enough to do something like that, you are likely stupid enough to die of great stupidity.

The question doesn't make sense. If I was stupid enough to do that, I wouldn't be smart enough to know I can claim the cash back.

[Lorric]

you can just tell matth is the kind of person who thinks the darwin awards are funny can't you

Of course they are. That's the whole point.

You are using this definition wrong. You're supposed to die due to great stupidity to win a Darwin Award.

Don't dodge the question.

If you are stupid enough to do something like that, you are likely stupid enough to die of great stupidity.

The question doesn't make sense. If I was stupid enough to do that, I wouldn't be smart enough to know I can claim the cash back.

Have you never misread something because you read what you expected to read? It happens. And it has nothing to do with stupidity. It's all subliminal stuff. A trick of the mind.

[Phantom Hoover]

Oh dear christ it's like watching a blithe optimist and an affected cynic face off against each other because that's exactly what it is. Is it just me or is HLP unusually confrontational of late?

[MatthTheGeek]

Have you never misread something because you read what you expected to read? It happens. And it has nothing to do with stupidity. It's all subliminal stuff. A trick of the mind.

Let me put it like this.

You're gonna call your bank and say "Hi. I'm calling you because I payed something 100$ thinking it was 1$".

What is the guy at the other side going to think.

[Lorric]

Oh dear christ it's like watching a blithe optimist and an affected cynic face off against each other because that's exactly what it is. Is it just me or is HLP unusually confrontational of late?

I actually consider myself a realist.

Define what definition of blithe you are using please.

Yes, there is a strange amount of confrontation around here lately.

Have you never misread something because you read what you expected to read? It happens. And it has nothing to do with stupidity. It's all subliminal stuff. A trick of the mind.

Let me put it like this.

You're gonna call your bank and say "Hi. I'm calling you because I payed something 100$ thinking it was 1$".

What is the guy at the other side going to think.

These others didn't call the bank. It's not fraud, it's back in the thread why you can get the cash back.

Anyway, unless you're going to cut out these kinds of answers, there really isn't much point in continuing with this.

[The E]

You're not helping, PH. If all you want to do is make meta-commentary about threads, use IRC.

Lorric: I feel like your scenarios are badly designed. You're assuming that I wouldn't be able to read the statements properly (I am paranoid enough about money that anything involving it will put me on high alert) and you're assuming that I would hand one of my own devices to my kid (Never gonna happen).

The thing is, I am reasonably well-educated in the risks inherent in this system. If I let a child of mine handle a device like that, I will make really really sure that there is no way in hell something like that would happen.
The only reason this is even a topic is because the parents affected by this were not aware of the risks involved. I am not one of those parents.

[Lorric]

You're not helping, PH. If all you want to do is make meta-commentary about threads, use IRC.

Lorric: I feel like your scenarios are badly designed. You're assuming that I wouldn't be able to read the statements properly (I am paranoid enough about money that anything involving it will put me on high alert) and you're assuming that I would hand one of my own devices to my kid (Never gonna happen).

The thing is, I am reasonably well-educated in the risks inherent in this system. If I let a child of mine handle a device like that, I will make really really sure that there is no way in hell something like that would happen.
The only reason this is even a topic is because the parents affected by this were not aware of the risks involved. I am not one of those parents.

Well you sort of already answered my question. I just want you and anyone else to not automatically think braindead idiot, there'll be ways for this to happen without it being gross stupidity. I was never assuming anything of you, more trying to create a feasible scenario that is not down to blatant stupidity.

But even such stupidity does not deserve to be punished more severely than several real crimes.

Stupidity and ignorance are not crimes. If stupidity and ignorance cause harm to others, then they can certainly become crimes. This is not the case here.

EDIT: The "punishment" is the time, stress and effort and possibly small expense it will take to get the money back.

[MatthTheGeek]

Stupidity and ignorance are not crimes.

Gotta disagree with that.

[Lorric]

Stupidity and ignorance are not crimes.

Gotta disagree with that.

Why?

[Cyker]

One point a lot of you are making is that the parents shouldn't have given the kids access to their credit card but I suspect you don't know how this stuff works.

Now, my experience is mainly with Apple i-whatever stuff as that's what schools mainly use, so I don't know if this applies to Android stuff too, but with Apple stuff it is trivially easy for a kid to run up charges inadvertently with the default settings on an iPad or iPhone.

The problem is that most people use a credit card to buy stuff from the AppStore rather than using vouchers, and once you do that the card is registered to your AppleID and any purchases *automatically* get charged to your card!!

The ONLY barrier is your AppleID login and by default i-devices only ask for it once, and once you've logged in it caches the ID until you clear it. The kicker is that loads of stuff requires you to be logged in to your AppleID to even work.

Because this happened to so many people in the US (Where people are a lot more litigious), Apple added an option (IIRC iOS6+) that, when enabled, means you have to type in the AppleID every time it's required instead of just once and caching it indefinitely.

This is a bit of a PITA as it turns out many things require you to type in the AppleID multiple times, but this sheds light on why they were caching it in the first place.

However, it is, by default, not set, so the owner of the device would have to know about it in order to take advantage of it.

It's also been said that if parents were supervising their kids when doing this stuff (Which, I agree, they should be, for that sort of age) they would have spotted this, but some of these games are dead sneaky and disguise the purchases so it's not immediately obvious whether you're buying something in-game or for real, esp. since as mentioned above they can just charge to your card so seamlessly.

The problem is most of these devices are easy to use so they are bought by noobs which makes them an easy target for this sort of grey-legal fraud.

It's just a symptom of the commoditization of computers into mainstream appliances for people who won't/can't spend the time to learn and it's not going to get better any time soon until we're locked out of our own machines like we are with modern cars!

Actually, this is a good life lesson in general: Don't let ANYONE or ANYTHING save your credit card details. (Or any details for that matter...!).
I got bitten by this by my insurance company on my first renewal (It turns out unless you tick the tiny box that says don't save my card details they auto-renew your policy unless you phone them and tell them not to!); Got charged a £10 'admin' fee to terminated it, but saved £100 transferring to a different company so it wasn't a total kick in the balls...

[Phantom Hoover]

Stupidity and ignorance are not crimes.

Gotta disagree with that.

holding yourself to a very high standard there

[Polpolion]

Stupidity and ignorance are not crimes.

Gotta disagree with that.

This is easily the silliest thing I've read all day.

[Apollo]

Stupidity and ignorance are not crimes.

Gotta disagree with that.

I don't think low IQ is a crime.

[Scourge of Ages]

Technically speaking, being stupid and/or ignorant is not a crime. However, it can very easily lead to things that are, and they hardly ever work as excuses to get out of trouble.

"But officer, I did not know there was a law against running red lights!"
"How??? You took the test, you have a license!"
"Well, I did get a few questions wrong on the test..."

[Lorric]

Technically speaking, being stupid and/or ignorant is not a crime. However, it can very easily lead to things that are, and they hardly ever work as excuses to get out of trouble.

"But officer, I did not know there was a law against running red lights!"
"How??? You took the test, you have a license!"
"Well, I did get a few questions wrong on the test..."

Yes. Ignorance of the law has never worked as an excuse. People often travel abroad and get burned because of it.

But the people in my links are not such people. They've committed no crime.

[Mongoose]

Exactly, nor are they being charged with one.  But if you're going to let a child play around with an expensive piece of technology that happens to have your credit card information stored on it, then you're pretty much reaping what they sow, and I'm not about to feel sorry for you.

[Mikes]

The company is more or less offering a product aimed at children and makes use of business practices that abuses those kids lack of experience.

In Germany we have laws against that - not sure about the US - but over here it would be an illegal business practice, no if, no but.

Furthermore, children (age 0-6) can not legally enter a contract so, as far as the law is concerned, there would not even be a purchase, which means the company is only in possession of the money but does not have ownership - i.e.: they have to give back every penny.
Children aged 7-18 need the explicit consent of their guardians/parents for a purchase to become legally binding so in either case the parents would have the law on their side - over here.
See... even if a child steals 50 bucks from their parents, heck, even if the child would use his/her own money, and buys something at a store, without explicit consent from their parents,.... the store would have to give the money back, if the parents disagree with the purchase, because the child can not enter a legal contract that would transfer ownership of the money. I.e. if over here a store sells anything to kids they better make sure they have the parents consent, explicitly, in person or in writing, because otherwise any judge will tear them a new one and rightfully so.

The US surely must have similar laws to protect minors, no? Just saying, over here it would a) not even be possible for the minor to enter a contract without their parents consent, even a completely legal one and b) this specific contract would be completely illegal because it abuses a minors lack of competence for monetary gain which is in direct violation of our laws for the protection of minors.

In other words: An only store better make sure they double check the identity of the person they are doing business with. If they don't then any sale they make may turn out to be null and void - over here.

[The E]

Mikes, have you actually read the topic? Because it doesn't look like you did. There are already safeguards in place so that children cannot make purchases in these stores on their own.

The problem is that their parents handed them devices that had the parents' credit card info stored on them. As far as the store is concerned, the purchases were completely legal, since all the identifying information was properly provided.

[Cyker]

"But officer, I did not know there was a law against running red lights!"
"How??? You took the test, you have a license!"
"Well, I did get a few questions wrong on the test..."

On a slight tangent, it *is* legal to drive through a red light in the USA if you are turning right!

I did not know that when I first drove over there...

There was much honking.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C8Pc2D48u2Y