Re:How I hacked Gogo inflight wireless Internet with Chrome
by tptacek on Wednesday August 29, 2012 @01:51PM
(#4450022)
He paid for product "A" and used product "B", and then wrote about the sticker price difference between "A" and "B" on a public website. Again: this is the definition of fraud. Your point is just that it's a small fraud.
To the extent that the insignificance of this fraud will preclude it from becoming a federal case, I agree.
In general: don't lie to people to win deals for yourself. At all.
Re:How I hacked Gogo inflight wireless Internet with Chrome
by lowboy on Wednesday August 29, 2012 @02:03PM
(#4450106)
Unless there's something differentiating the two services, product "A" and product "B" are the same product, with different prices.
I find GoGo's double pricing to be the most morally objectionable thing about this whole situation.
He did pay. The question now is, is this something roughly akin to switching price stickers on merchandise in a store. Since there's no specific requirement that a browser return an "accurate" UA string (whatever "accurate" even means for a UA string), this is closer to a company putting out a bucket with a sign saying "Honor System: suggested donation: $7.95 for phones, $15.95 for computers" and having somebody throw in $7.95 while using a computer. Not noble, but hardly something they should be punished for.