You've got to be kidding me...seriously

This is a discussion on You've got to be kidding me...seriously within the A Brief History of Cprogramming.com forums, part of the Community Boards category; Originally Posted by IfYouSaySo When I buy a cup of coffee, I expect it to be hot, but not so ...

  1. #16
    Rad gcn_zelda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    942
    Quote Originally Posted by IfYouSaySo
    When I buy a cup of coffee, I expect it to be hot, but not so hot that spilling a little bit of it can cause 3rd degree burns in less than 2 seconds (clearly that's unreasonably hot, isn't it)? And that was the root cause of the injury (not the fact that it was spilled)?

    Anyway, I'm not saying that the parents don't bear some responsibility. And maybe the girl was partly to blame also (poor decisions on her part). But it's also fair to say that there might be a legal basis for holding myspace responsible to some extent.
    Yeah, I conceded the McDonald's case.

    I guess if they can find some way to safeguard Myspace... otherwise, I think it's kind of a pointless suit.

  2. #17
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Hermosa Beach, CA
    Posts
    446
    30 million represents 1% of myspace. So if myspace isn't willing to invest 1% in it's value to provide safeguards for children, isn't that in itself negligent?

    Also, if you read the article, the 2.7 million award was a punitive damage award, and it represented 2 days of coffee sales for McDonalds. And an appeal judge reduced the settlement to less than .5 million, and the plaintiff later settled with McDonalds for much less than that even. So the 2.7 million wasn't really too much, and it wasn't really paid out. But the process resulted in McDonalds reducing the tempurature of their coffee to safe levels.

    The myspace thing could work out in a similar way.
    The crows maintain that a single crow could destroy the heavens. Doubtless this is so. But it proves nothing against the heavens, for the heavens signify simply: the impossibility of crows.

  3. #18
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Hermosa Beach, CA
    Posts
    446
    All involved are likely at fault to greater and lesser degrees, i.e. the parents are to blame (the bad parenting argument), the kid was an idiot (should have known better argument), the 19 year old she met up with clearly committed a crime, and myspace should really have had better controls in place.

    The thing that is probably really ........ing people off with this is that one guilty party (the parents/the kid) will possibly profit from the mistake of another guilty party (myspace); and the larger guilt probably lies with the parents. Unfortunately, it doesn't mean that myspace isn't going to be liable.
    The crows maintain that a single crow could destroy the heavens. Doubtless this is so. But it proves nothing against the heavens, for the heavens signify simply: the impossibility of crows.

  4. #19
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,517
    Exactly how do you think myspace is liable?
    And what do you think myspace can do to protect itself?

    And what about AIM, Messenger, Yahooo, etc...
    And what about parking lot owners where the most rapes are reported to happen (parking lots, yes)?

    And what about Cprog when someone here meets someone else in here and goes about rapping them?

    Don't you agree the main responsible for this is the man who rapped the girl? Do you really think myspace is responsible? Do you think Cprog will one day be responsible (god forbid)?

    And if the girl meets the rapist through you. If you introduce both not knowing what he was capable of? How much money are you willing to pay in compensation?
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  5. #20
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Hermosa Beach, CA
    Posts
    446
    Exactly how do you think myspace is liable?
    I have no idea, I'm a programmer not a lawyer.

    But I have a feeling that the crux of the issue is that myspace is catering to a young audiece, but there aren't safeguards in place which try to prevent problems that it is reasonable to forsee. Of course the rapist is responsible. Read my previous post and you'll see that I believe that all involved are in some way responsible. And I think that is what bugs you--that the mom, who is to some degree responsible for what happened, is shifting the blame and attempting to profit from myspace (who might also be responsible to some degree).

    In an ideal world everyone would admit some amount of guilt, and myspace would do whatever is necessary to correct the problem. But the reality is that the mom is probably dealing with some serious guilt issues and may never be capable of admitting that this was her fault, and myspace won't do a damn thing unless a lawsuit is brought against them.
    The crows maintain that a single crow could destroy the heavens. Doubtless this is so. But it proves nothing against the heavens, for the heavens signify simply: the impossibility of crows.

  6. #21
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,517
    Unfortunately we don't live in an ideal world. Rapists wouldn't either.

    Myspace doesn't have to do a (quote) "damn thing" (end quote), because they are really not responsible, IfYouSaySo.

    Look at it this way, there is no way they can stop this. It was a young girl today, but what about adults? Are you going to tell me that just because instead of a teenager we had a grown up woman being rapped, she would be somehow more responsible for what happened to her?

    And what about if the teenager meet the guy on a bar? Is the bar liable? On a mall? Is the all liable? On friend's party? Is the friend responsible? And again.. if you had introduced them? Are you responsible?
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  7. #22
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Hermosa Beach, CA
    Posts
    446
    I was arguing that we don't live in an ideal world, so you don't need to let me know. I was pointing out that without a lawsuit, things might not get done. I understand that you don't think anything should be done. I simply think that it couldn't hurt if something was done, and myspace is certainly in a position financially to do something about it, even if it is only within their site.

    In answer to some of your questions:

    What would a teenager be doing in a bar? Aren't they 21 and over where you live?

    A friends party? My friends don't invite 14 year olds to their parties. The last time a random 14 year old was at the same party as I was, I was probably only 15 or 16. Generally people don't hold parties with kids and adults.

    What makes you think that I would set a 14 year old up with a 19-year old? Is that something you would do? And don't take my remark as an insult, I'm just pointing out that it wouldn't happen--I wouldn't do it and neither would you.

    You bring up other adults. That is a separate issue. We live in a society that thankfully tries to provide extra protections for children, on the assumption that they can't always fend for themselves. So any adult argument is really irrelevent.

    A mall is also a different situation. Its a public hangout, but it's primary purpose isn't social networking. But this is your best argument, and I really don't have a complete answer to it.
    The crows maintain that a single crow could destroy the heavens. Doubtless this is so. But it proves nothing against the heavens, for the heavens signify simply: the impossibility of crows.

  8. #23
    Moderately Rabid Decrypt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI, USA
    Posts
    300
    Should myspace.com have "controls" in place? Maybe. They do cater to kids, that's a good point. It would certainly be the responsible thing to do to have some kind of monitoring. You can't just have a no kid to adult interaction rule. Maybe monitoring the contacts people make. If one adult's kid-interaction to adult-interaction ratio is high, they do some investigating. Some other type of monitoring, maybe, but I don't know what. Should it be their legal obligation to do so? I'm not so sure. I really don't think so, but it's iffy at best.

    IfYouSaySo, you really hit the jackpot, I think, when you say what really gets people (myself included) ........ed off is that the mother will be the one to profit from this. Not only will she not be punished for borderline neglect, she'll end up $30M richer for failing to protect her child. Job #1 on the parent must-do list.

    Even without that, though, I'm still not convinced myspace.com should be held financially liable.
    There is a difference between tedious and difficult.

  9. #24
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    35
    WHY should myspace be responsible at all? Why is it that people feel that myspace should take security measures? Are there any laws which say they have to? People should be thankful that they put in any safety measures at all. Maybe ethically speaking, they should have been more careful. But there is no legal statute saying that they must keep minors from communicating with adults. And if there was, just how would you propose to do that? Credit card verification? Like a 14 year old will have a credit card...Or more legitimately, that someone's parents are going to send off their credit card information to some 'unknown' company just because junior wants to publically list his favorite things and talk to 'friends'?
    Or how about a signed consent form sent to myspace with a copy of the parents driver's licencse? That's worse than the credit card idea..................You might argue, "but that will let parents know what their kids are doing online...". Exactly. Congratulations. You have just realized it's the parent's sole responsibilty. There shouldn't be a need for a website to force parents to get involved with their children's internet activities. The parent's just should. Not only for their children's safety, but for their children's mental well being. Whether kids like it or not, they need the attention from their parents.... Which brings me back to the ethics. Maybe, instead of websites forcing people to know what their child is doing online, YOU SHOULD PROTECT YOUR OWN FU**ING CHILD!!!!

  10. #25
    & the hat of GPL slaying Thantos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    5,681
    Anyone care to link the actual article that is the source of this discussion?

  11. #26
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    35
    google: "myspace lawsuit austin"

    First google return:
    http://www.statesman.com/news/conten...20myspace.html

    (not sure if i've read this one yet... hope it's not biased)

  12. #27
    verbose cat
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    209
    Parents shouldn't let their kids run around online unsupervised anymore than they would let them run around a public park unsupervised. A 10-12 year old kid is just as naieve and in need of supervision online as a 3-4 year old kid at the playground. They are both places where at those ages the kid simply does not have the experience to know what is dangerous. If you don't involve yourself at least a little in what your child is doing online, you are letting him run around the playground while you take a nap or run to the store.

    It is much easier for the wackjobs to pretend to be other kids online obviously, but what solution should Myspace implement? Maybe have software flag any conversation where at least 1 person is a minor and an address, phone number or time is given out, then have a moderator read the log and report anything illegal to the police? Myspace would have to hire an army of moderators to filter through all the hits they would get, and still probably wouldn't be able to keep up (maybe a "premium account" would have this feature enabled so Myspace doesn't lose their precious profit margin). Add to this that wackjobs would be applying for moderator jobs (how better to thwart that premium account protection?) Users (kids and wackjobs alike) would wise up and learn how to thwart the flagging software (and the whole security cycle begins). Any protection you can think of would suffer from these kinds of problems and seem somehow inadequate. That's not to mention the privacy concerns and identity theft issues. (Who would they hire to be moderators afterall? Would the potential moderator need a security clearance or would the Non-Disclosure agreement and honor system work here?)

    The bottom line is that parents should pay attention and get involved in their kids lives (if not already involved as good parents should be). Whether the wackjob followed the kid home from the park or set up a meeting online, the fault is with the wackjob for doing the heinous act. No one has ever blamed a public park for getting their child molested, have they?
    abachler: "A great programmer never stops optimizing a piece of code until it consists of nothing but preprocessor directives and comments "

  13. #28
    Slave MadCow257's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    735
    Quote Originally Posted by Yoshi
    In Hong Kong, if you do this, you will:
    It will spread

    Quote Originally Posted by Decrpyt
    I'm not saying it's the kid's fault.
    Why not? She is 14, not 10. If you have a parent then at that age you should not go on at date (at all?) but especially with a 19 year old.

    Quote Originally Posted by Statesmen news
    In May, after a series of e-mails and phone calls, he picked her up at school, took her out to eat and to a movie, then drove her to an apartment complex parking lot in South Austin, where he sexually assaulted her, police said. He was arrested May 19.
    Sue the email! Sue the phone! Sue the apartment complex!

    This was a deliberate act on the part of the girl, there was a long line of communication with someone she knew to be much older, and then agreed to go out. Speculation: she was not assualted but did so willingly, now she isn't living up to the resonsibility and is instead blaming people. To blame My Space is ...

    I could see another case that has alot more basis then this one, and even then it should go back to the parent. Or just shut the site down.

  14. #29
    C noobie
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    25
    Isnt the parent the one who should get sued(well, legal action ), seeing as how she didnt responsibly monitor her childrends actions? Can I sue the phone books if some guy uses it to find the address of someone and rape them?

  15. #30
    Moderately Rabid Decrypt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI, USA
    Posts
    300
    I said it wasn't her fault, meaning not entirely. As I said later in that very paragraph, she did things that put her in a bad situation. I put it in bold letters to ward off the people who would stop reading there, and say I was such a horrible person for blaming the rape on the rape victim.

    It comes down to this: A 14-year-old girl made stupid decisions. A parent (or parents) failed to effectively monitor their child. A 19-year-old raped her.

    He could have met her at school, the mall, a park, some other teen hangout, it doesn't matter. Three people failed this little girl. Herself, her mother, and a guy she trusted.

    The girl's punishment is clear: she was raped. She's already been punished too much for a few dumb decisions. She should know that, if I may sort of quote Salem, if she's going to dance on the broken glass of dumbass decisions, she's got to expect the occasional cut.

    The rapist's punishment is clear: Jail. The legal system will take care of him. Hopefully his cellmate will, too.

    The mother's punishment is not as clear: Can this be considered neglect? I doubt in the legal sense, but it's not a bad question to ask. Where do we draw the line on parental neglect? If a parent doesn't provide the basic needs: food, clothes, shelter, etc. its considered neglect. What about safety? Isn't that a basic need of childhood?

    Whether or not mom is punshed for this, there is no way that myspace.com should pay out $30M. Not to her, not to anyone.

    And shutting the site down is ridiculous.
    There is a difference between tedious and difficult.

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. You're kidding, right?
    By Govtcheez in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 12-11-2004, 08:06 AM
  2. PASSINAG A bidimansional array at a function
    By ABitLazy in forum C Programming
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 06-15-2004, 12:46 AM
  3. you have GOT to be kidding....
    By RoD in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 12-14-2002, 10:43 AM
  4. USB mouse support
    By bennyandthejets in forum C Programming
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-09-2002, 07:15 AM
  5. Very dangerous code...
    By Magos in forum C++ Programming
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 11-11-2001, 01:01 AM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21