ScarFace88
Forum Addict
Meanwhile, in Pennsylvania...
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/P...ar-says-he-was-just-trying-to-stay-awake.html
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/P...ar-says-he-was-just-trying-to-stay-awake.html
Oh, of course there are some examples of this and worse in other states and countries, but usually the company which does that either gets sued, won't survive long or something similar happens which works out good for the employee and bad for the company because there are those laws.
When you don't have such laws you can't get a stable job without the fear of being laid off the next day without warning or reason so you can't afford your obligations (car payments, rent, hell, even the basic food) anymore.
I rather have a stable, but a bit lower income with more security to at least have some time to get a new job after being laid off over a job which pays better but where I can be fired every day for no apparent reason, thanks.
In Germany you have a probation period where new employees can be laid off (or quit themselves) on two week's notice, usually the probation period is three to six months. Works fairly well.
Of course there is the occasional curious case from both sides, there will never be a perfect system, but in general employment protection laws should provide employees with some sort of security while not strangling companies too much.
I just hear (IMHO) far too many stories like that from the US where you can't be sure to be able to support your family (or even just yourself) the next day.
Yeah, because you are absolutely able to implement every patent you filed and ... oh, the other person who caused the accident had no fucking common sense, so why not sue the company which produced that piece of distraction?The Modisette family said Apple?s failure to either program a shutoff into the FaceTime program or give strong warning about using the app while driving is particularly egregious given the app fully engages visual components rather than audio ones as with regular cellphone usage.
What?s more, the lawsuit points out that Apple has the technology to incorporate such a feature, as evidenced by a pertinent software patent originally filed by the company in 2008.
The accident and death of the child occurred only 6 days ago. I'm thinking this suit was motivated less by the parents, and more by an opportunistic personal injury lawyer.Lawsuit blames Apple?s Facetime app for a car accident
Yeah, because you are absolutely able to implement every patent you filed and ... oh, the other person who caused the accident had no fucking common sense, so why not sue the company which produced that piece of distraction?
Lawsuit blames Apple?s Facetime app for a car accident
Yeah, because you are absolutely able to implement every patent you filed and ... oh, the other person who caused the accident had no fucking common sense, so why not sue the company which produced that piece of distraction?
That's why you have to have laws to wear seatbelts, otherwise there would be idiots who don't wear them and other idiots who sue car manufacturers because nobody told them that common sense and the laws of physics demand the use of seatbelts...
How big would the scream be from people? (and yes, it would shut down if you were a passenger too).
This is 99.44% certain to be an attempt to cash in.
We need to put caps on lawsuits. This happens way too much.
This is why I'm scared of the push for autonomous vehicles. Can't ban phone usage in moving vehicle for fear of upsetting the majority who use their devices while not operating said vehicle, but cannot continue to allow the operator the same access = everyone must ride in lifeless pods.The scream would be yuuuge, because of other modes of transport besides a car being shut down on top of car passengers.
I use and even work on my phone while on a train regularly, for example... including having the ticket on the phone.
Every 2nd person on a bus is staring at their phone.
Lots of people use phones on air planes, but I guess it could be smart enough to detect air planes by speed.
Then there's legal use while driving a car... if I attach the phone to an in-car holder, I can legally use it much like suction-cup mobile satnav devices.
The scream would be yuuuge, because of other modes of transport besides a car being shut down on top of car passengers.
I use and even work on my phone while on a train regularly, for example... including having the ticket on the phone.
Every 2nd person on a bus is staring at their phone.
Lots of people use phones on air planes, but I guess it could be smart enough to detect air planes by speed.
Then there's legal use while driving a car... if I attach the phone to an in-car holder, I can legally use it much like suction-cup mobile satnav devices.
We need to put caps on lawsuits. This happens way too much.
That's the point. I think this whole mentality of 'I'm not responsible for *accident/damage/disaster* because manufacturer/distributor didn't put every last single possible warning on something because they believe that there is still even a minuscule amount of common sense out there' needs an extreme reaction like making all the mobile devices unusable (yes, your kindles, phones, phablets, mobile DVD players etc) with the warning that: 'Because you cannot be trusted to not use these devices when it's stupid to do so, we're making it so you can't'.
Then get the popcorn and watch the mob hunt down the idiots that caused it.
The problem is that in America, courts can award punitive damages. In countries without punitive damages people can only sue to be compensated for actual financial losses that they've suffered, or are likely to suffer as a result of the other party's negligence.