News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:A harassment campaign on Goodreads by whatshisface on Monday January 06, 2020 @05:37PM (#21974257)
Let's say you buy houses for cash and I put up a sign with your number on it. The police call you and find out that you do, indeed, buy houses for cash. They throw you in jail and I snicker, knowing that by breaking the advertising law myself but with your name I have put you out of business.

While I'm at it, I leave your business card at the scene of a heist.

Re:A harassment campaign on Goodreads by throwno on Monday January 06, 2020 @07:06PM (#21975097)
I was thinking this could be a good way to get lame blogs banned off HN. Just order some upvotes for it from one of those banned upvoting services. No one is going to believe someone else ordered it.
Re:A harassment campaign on Goodreads by SamReidHughes on Monday January 06, 2020 @08:00PM (#21975571)
They can remove the voters' voting power instead of banning the website. (This has happened with at least company's blog/employees, that I'm aware of, when I got asked as a contractor to help upvote.)
Re:A harassment campaign on Goodreads by t0ddbonzalez on Tuesday January 07, 2020 @04:46AM (#21978453)
I want to live in your town, where there's so little crime the police have time to investigate people who advertise on telephone poles.
Re:A harassment campaign on Goodreads by mschuster91 on Tuesday January 07, 2020 @05:13AM (#21978608)
In Germany such stuff is handled by the "Ordnungsamt" (office of public order, roughly translated). They're not policemen so they don't have the authority to arrest, but they can and will issue fines for littering, graffiti, improper advertising and the likes.

This way police is free to handle actual crime.

Re:A harassment campaign on Goodreads by csunbird on Tuesday January 07, 2020 @05:42AM (#21978747)
I guess they are slacking in Berlin because the whole city is covered with graffiti and random advertisement trash on every traffic pole.
Re:A harassment campaign on Goodreads by mschuster91 on Tuesday January 07, 2020 @06:16AM (#21978922)
At least graffiti and trash keeps the rents down, plus it looks nicer to the eye than the bullshit uber-clean concrete crap that passes for "luxury flats" these days.
Re:A harassment campaign on Goodreads by csunbird on Tuesday January 07, 2020 @07:46AM (#21979416)
Landlords are asking 800 EUR cold for one room apartments, it is unfortunately not cheap enough :(
Re:A harassment campaign on Goodreads by t0ddbonzalez on Tuesday January 07, 2020 @05:59AM (#21978837)
Indeed, "Ordnung muss sein, sagte Hans, da brachten sie ihn ins Spinnhaus" :D
Re:A harassment campaign on Goodreads by catalogia on Monday January 06, 2020 @09:21PM (#21976137)
>"Let's say you buy houses for cash and I put up a sign with your number on it. The police call you and find out that you do, indeed, buy houses for cash."

Suppose I were operating such a business with legal advertisements only and the detective asked me "Hey I saw a sign on a telephone pole saying you buy houses for cash, is that right?" why would I answer in the affirmative?

> "No, it's weird that you saw that. I don't post signs on any telephone poles, this is a highly reputable business.

They'd only say that if they're smart. Many of them probably aren't, and their guard will be down if the detective can do a passable "desperate alcoholic" impression over the phone. But regardless, I agree that false negatives are more likely than false positives.

Re:A harassment campaign on Goodreads by danShumway on Monday January 06, 2020 @09:54PM (#21976341)
If you're advertising on a telephone pole and a potential customer (or police officer) contacts you, here's how that conversation goes:

"No, it's weird that you saw that. I don't post signs on any telephone poles, this is a highly reputable business. However, as long as you're here, I definitely do buy houses for cash, and it sounds like you're interested in that."

Re:A harassment campaign on Goodreads by qrbLPHiKpiux on Tuesday January 07, 2020 @07:16AM (#21979231)
If I were a cop, I’d go full on Dexter Morgan and DNA, fingerprint the flyer.
Re:A harassment campaign on Goodreads by dvtrn on Monday January 06, 2020 @09:26PM (#21976174)
Because of the inherent and blatantly obvious disparity in the power dynamic that exists between the two parties in your hypothetical?

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/06/psychologist-explain...

Re:A harassment campaign on Goodreads by catalogia on Monday January 06, 2020 @09:33PM (#21976213)
If I didn't in fact advertise on telephone poles, then I would say that wasn't my sign.

If I didn't advertise on telephone poles but somebody else was trying to frame me, and then I proceeded to act as though those signs were my own, then why would I not deserve punishment? If those signs advertised my business and I neglected to disown the signs because I was greedy, I think I'd deserve to be fined by the city. If I admitted on a recorded telephone call with a detective that the signs were mine, even if they weren't, then I've screwed myself with my own greed, which is fitting and just.

Re:A harassment campaign on Goodreads by dvtrn on Monday January 06, 2020 @09:39PM (#21976256)
It feels like you're skipping through a few steps to create a specific conclusion in order to then refute it?

If a detective merely asks you "do you post signs with your name and number with an offer to buy houses", a lot more steps have to take place before reaching the point where you, personally and individually would see a fine for what is in more cases than not going to be a civil infraction that I would imagine, one can take photos of, go to your municipality and contest and say "those signs are illegal but are not mine, these signs are legal and belong to me".

Re:A harassment campaign on Goodreads by catalogia on Monday January 06, 2020 @09:49PM (#21976310)
> If a detective merely asks you "do you post signs with your name and number with an offer to buy houses",

You're missing the point were the detective specifically asks you if you placed signs on telephone poles and got a voice recording of you admitting you did place illegal signs. The real reason this doesn't happen is simply because detectives can't be bothered, not because it's an impossible case to make in court.

Re:A harassment campaign on Goodreads by dvtrn on Monday January 06, 2020 @09:52PM (#21976324)
The real reason this doesn't happen is simply because detectives can't be bothered

And because it's highly improbable that "yes, those are my signs" over the phone is enough to result in an infraction if they did.

Chances are, you're not even going to get the phone call in the hypothetical you're propping up, even from a clerk's office. If your name and phone number is on it, you'll likely just end up getting it in the mail without even the courtesy of a phone call to ask how your morning is going.

Re:A harassment campaign on Goodreads by catalogia on Monday January 06, 2020 @09:53PM (#21976336)
Chances are these scam realestate business do not have "clerks offices." The numbers on them are almost always local numbers and probably go to the personal cellphone of the jackass who hung the sign nine times out of ten. Legitimate realestate businesses usually don't need to scrap the bottom of the barrel like this.

The possibility of a false negative does exist, but the possibility of a false positive seems greatly overstated and I do not believe aversion to false positives motivates the lack of enforcement as was suggested above.

Re:A harassment campaign on Goodreads by dvtrn on Monday January 06, 2020 @09:58PM (#21976365)
Chances are these scam realestate business do not have "clerks offices."

I was talking about clerks of the local government agency who would have an issue with illegal sign placements...