cross-posted from: https://feddit.online/c/tech@feddit.online/p/2110072/new-york-city-council-approves-landmark-legislation-banning-surveillance-pricing
Next: EVERYWHERE ELSE
That makes three states and two major cities by my count.
2/3 of the US states will have some flavor of ban within the next year or two.
States shouldn’t even have to touch this. The national Congress needs to take this over and stomp it out. It’s a bipartisan issue every voter would get behind.
Wow, “landmark legislation banning surveillance pricing”. No idea what it means. I know the meanings of every word separately though…
Landmark legislation is law that changes the legal landscape, aka: it’s a trendsetter or underpins important legislation.
Surveillance pricing is setting prices based on observations made of an individual, in the vast majority of cases through cookies and other online tracking.
So this is formative legislation which bans the use of individualized pricing based on a person’s habits or history.
Headlines just have a whole different linguistic standard. I think It’s a fun little cultural relic, but nowadays there’s no need to keep them as short as possible, as long as they’re under the character cutoffs most aggregators have for post titles.
Yeah, a bit weirdly phrased to me as well, but the first line of the article clears it up
Speaker Julie Menin’s legislation will prevent companies from using personal data to offer different prices to different New Yorkers
Isn’t that just price gouging?
They can overlap. Price gouging means charging excessively high prices, especially when people have little choice during shortages or emergencies. Its basically demand based pricing, a fairly normal economic principle, taken to extremes.
Surveillance pricing means using personal data to estimate what you’re willing to pay and tailoring your price accordingly. Two people could be buying the same product at the same time and see different prices because the company thinks it can squeeze more out of one of them.
It still allows mass gouging you cant be price gouged different than anyone else though. So stops price tags that would change by who’s near them.
Yes, that’s better. But titles are important. Why would I even click on the link if I don’t understand the title? “Draft prediction of isomorphic amino-acids transition schedules”.
I click on it because I don’t understand the title. It’s not even clickbait or exaggerated, just a bit oddly phrased. With the added context of that first sentence, the title also makes perfect sense.
It’s only oddly phrased if you aren’t used to headline style writing, aka headlinese
Literacy really is on the decline, nowadays, isn’t it?
Sorry, I mean: You not read.
Literally a summary in the first sentence of the article.
