LufyCZ

joined 2 years ago
[–] LufyCZ 8 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Well don't think there's a point prosecuting someone (i.e. spending insane amounts of taxpayer money) if, in the end, you achieve "nothing", in terms of punishment.

There might still be indirect punishment in terms of a hit to public image but eh

[–] LufyCZ 1 points 10 months ago

Have you heard of gangs using restaurants as a front for other less legal businesses?

They do still serve pizza there. If it happens to cost $60 and it comes with a sack of white sniffy stuff is another thing.

But yeah keep pushing unlogical shit, it really works if all you're trying to do is scream into a wall.

[–] LufyCZ -3 points 10 months ago

Again, it doesn't do him any favors.

If you want to push your agenda, that's fine, but piggybacking off of a ruined life (in quite exceptional circumstances all things considered) doesn't do absolutely anything.

What's the point? Should the guy have gotten more? He can live like a king without a care for the rest of his life. If he has children, those can, too.

Or is it that Zuckerberg shouldn't be "allowed" to own his own company, which coincidentally is pretty successful?

Because if it's the latter, it's unrelated to this specific person, you could post it under a cute kitty vid and it'd have the same value.

[–] LufyCZ 1 points 10 months ago

Yep, fair enough.

[–] LufyCZ -1 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Have you heard of hotels? Venues?

Don't let hatred blind your judgement, it makes you look dumb.

[–] LufyCZ 1 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Yeah that's very far from the definition of a scam. A bad product isn't a scam, you know exactly what you're getting, it's on you if you "fall" for it.

[–] LufyCZ 1 points 10 months ago (4 children)

You're being unrealistic because he received that money over the course of a decade as a payment for actual services, even of the cost of said services might've been inflated to fit the pay offs.

This time, he'd suddenly be receiving stupid amounts of money into the company account, which the fine will be paid from. The same account that's currently (afaik) under the control of US officials.

It's just not that easy.

[–] LufyCZ -2 points 10 months ago (6 children)

Sure, it's not gonna be suspicious at all when the company's account receives tens of millions from a random international account.

Be realistic, you're free to hate Trump all you want, I don't like the guy either, but selling state secrets isn't the same as buying a kitkat at a grocery store

[–] LufyCZ 1 points 10 months ago (8 children)

Russia really doesn't have the tens to hundreds of millions of USD it's gonna cost right now.

There's a whole war thing going on and their USD accounts are frozen last time I checked.

[–] LufyCZ -2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Well it's true, to a certain extent.

If an employee (or a chatbot, for that matter), promised an egregious sum for no reason, I don't think the company should be liable either.

Imagine getting hired to do support, having a friend open a chat and you promising to give him a milion dollars. Makes no sense.

But getting mislead about ticket pricing and them then refusing to refund the fare at least partially (the part that they promised would not be charged) is absolutely something they should be liable for.

And lawyer fees plus some pocket money for wasting peoples' time, if getting a refund entails more than an email or two.

view more: ‹ prev next ›