That kind of argument is actually why I used the Petzl example: Petzl is allowing their buyers to do dangerous things by selling climbing gear that has a high chance to get them killed. And that's totally OK with adequate documentation.
-
For example, a wilderness guide will likely have you sign a waiver. But the waiver is worthless by itself: the part that protects them is the information (often via a discussion) you'll get about what risks you'll be encountering on that trip. Good guides do that.
These wilderness guides are offering a wilderness guide service. AT&T is not offering an "identity" service. The guides at Yoesemite won't give you information about Chinese pandas, because that's well outside the scope of their service and they need know nothing about pandas.
-
-
Nice example. If I were a wilderness guide and failed to tell my clients about the very high murder rate in the town we started the trip from - and multiple clients had already been murdered - I'd 100% hold them responsible even though it's not a wilderness hazard.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Similarly, phone company people do not and need not know how phone numbers are being used as a security theater shortcut for real security in the dizzying variety of new technologies such as cryptocurrency. That's Coinbases' business, it is not at all theirs.
-
Again, I'm not expecting them to know about a "dizzying variety of technologies" I'm expecting them to know about a few major ones and respond appropriately when lots of people are getting hurt.
-
Yes you certainly are expecting, e.g., for them to know that cryptocurrency transactions are irreversible (when the traditional banking transactions they are familiar with are not) and then warn about such dangers. That is very much Coinbase's business and knowledge, not theirs.
-
No I'm not. I'm expecting them to notice that lots of people are getting hurt, via well publicized hacks, over and over again. I am *not* expecting them to anticipate new threats. That would require in-depth knowledge. (that's what we expect from engineering...)
-
If you put out a product, and someone unexpectedly uses it in a way that gets them harmed, I think you shouldn't have any liability if you do nothing *until* this is a common occurrence. Then I'd expect you to at least warn about this common danger.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
This Tweet is unavailable
-
-
They offer identity service to all kinds of authorities so if they point to you for example in a criminal investigation you may become a strawperson
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.