Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

The Emerging RadioShack/Netflix Debacle

Soulskill posted about 5 months ago | from the you-forgot-to-run-the-jerkbag-test-case dept.

Crime 122

New submitter DigitalParc writes "RadioShack recently launched a promotion for 6 months of free Netflix service with the purchase of a laptop, tablet, or phone. This ended up being a fantastic deal, until the shoddy redemption site they were using for the Netflix code redemption was exploited and many of the codes were stolen. 'Users on slickdeals, a deal-finding and sometimes deal-exploiting website, found that the URL of the redemption website could be changed upon trying to enter a code, resulting in a valid Netflix subscription code being generated. Within hours, many of Netflix codes that were allocated to this promotion were stolen and some were redeemed or put up for sale on eBay.'"

cancel ×

122 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

RS is liable (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46349643)

If they can't find a way to invalidate some of those codes, they're liable for damages. Which is a shame; as much as people hate on RadioShack, I find them very convenient to pick up a piece of equipment that I need immediately.

Re:RS is liable (5, Funny)

mythosaz (572040) | about 5 months ago | (#46349815)

The preceding was post brought to you by the year 1981.

Re:RS is liable (-1, Flamebait)

netsavior (627338) | about 5 months ago | (#46349943)

"Piece of equipment?"
There is nothing there that 7Eleven doesn't sell cheaper and with better customer service... Except cellphones, which isn't exactly a niche.

Re:RS is liable (3, Insightful)

Cinder6 (894572) | about 5 months ago | (#46350115)

Honest question: 7-11 sells random audio adapters, cheap soldering equipment, and wiring?

Re:RS is liable (2)

StormCrow (10254) | about 5 months ago | (#46350363)

You mean you can actually still buy that at Radio Shack?

Re:RS is liable (1)

gnick (1211984) | about 5 months ago | (#46350469)

Las Cruces (At least when I was there) had 2. One for RC cars, cell phones, etc. Another one for EE students to buy components that most RS customers would look at and think, "Why would somebody want a metal toothpick? Especially one that flimsy?"

Re:RS is liable (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46350869)

A few days ago I went to radio shack to buy some capacitors. They also carry things like resistors, LEDs, breadboards, etc. They also have a lot of the MAKE electronics books and kits to learn electronics. I've also bought things like relays, soldering supplies, etc.

Re:RS is liable (1)

BronsCon (927697) | about 5 months ago | (#46351129)

Nothing close to what they had 15 years ago, though. Sad.

Re:RS is liable (1)

avandesande (143899) | about 5 months ago | (#46351839)

If the larger store I went to recently is an indicator they have started carrying quite a bit more like the old days....

Re:RS is liable (1)

geekoid (135745) | about 5 months ago | (#46352031)

No. its better the 15 years ago. Nothing compared to 25 years ago.

Re:RS is liable (3, Interesting)

Applehu Akbar (2968043) | about 5 months ago | (#46352559)

I'm old enough to remember real Radio Shack: discrete ham radio components hanging from the ceiling like bats in a cave. Big tubs of resistors and capacitors you could root around in. Racks of tubes. And...customers! I swear I'm not making this part up RS stores had customers in those days!

Those were the days when ham radio fans had hair, and did not have oxygen tanks.

Re:RS is liable (2)

BronsCon (927697) | about 5 months ago | (#46353505)

Dude, I'm not 12 :) I just happen to have worked there 15 years ago, so that's what I used as a point of reference. I was raised by a robotics engineer; I grew up in that fucking place... Seeing what it's become today almost makes me shed a tear... almost.

Re:RS is liable (2)

AK Marc (707885) | about 5 months ago | (#46352017)

Last I went to one (it's been years), they had no components. They recommended Home Depot, who did carry solder irons and solder. Radio Shack sold phones, toys, and not much else.

Re:RS is liable (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46352259)

It depends a lot on which ones you go to. Some store managers have removed the components completely, others still have at least all the basic sized resistors and a small selection of other things or more. Or in one case, I stopped at one to see they had a bare minimum number of components: some resistors and two sizes of caps to chose from, as if it were some kind of token.

Re:RS is liable (1)

geekoid (135745) | about 5 months ago | (#46352011)

The one near my house as a bunch of arduino boards, as well as electronic components.

Re:RS is liable (1)

netsavior (627338) | about 5 months ago | (#46351973)

I think many of the stores might sell real stuff somewhere in the back... but the last 2 I went to had nothing more than cellphones and headphones, nothing else.

Re:RS is liable (1)

SJHillman (1966756) | about 5 months ago | (#46352287)

Depends on the location. The one nearest my hometown is basically just cell phones and RC cars. The one near where I live now has a pretty decent selection of electronic components. The former one is in a mall, the latter has its own store in a shopping plaza, so that might be part of the difference.

Re:RS is liable (4, Informative)

TheCarp (96830) | about 5 months ago | (#46350545)

Last time I was there I picked up an LM7505 voltage regulator and a 24 V center tapped transformer. I mean yah, I would normally order that from mouser or someone else; or drive 45 minutes to the good hobby electronics store, but for just a couple of basic things, RS is not so bad.

Where does 7-11 keep those? Is it near the slurpees?

Re:RS is liable (1)

firex726 (1188453) | about 5 months ago | (#46351145)

Same here, that's the only reason I got by RS now.

I might pay an inflated price, but it's still only $1 in store compared to $0.25 online; so no big deal.

Their less techinal stuff, like an audio exten cable, are just bullshit though; $20 for a 3' stereo cable, not even a Monster, it was RS's store brand.

Re:RS is liable (1)

AK Marc (707885) | about 5 months ago | (#46352071)

When I last went to a Radio Shack (close to 12 years ago now) it was for speaker cable. They only sold the packages like you describe. I went to the same one 5 years before that and they had it by the foot on rolls. And electronic components. But in 2001, last I was in one, there was nothing like that at all. I guess they tried making a come back. But now, I'm nowhere near one, so I can't check again. Like the solder and iron I mentioned elsewhere, Home Depot was a better electronics store than Radio Shack (solder, and piles of speaker wire, though they call it electrical wire there).

Re:RS is liable (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46352303)

It seems more like $1-3 in store versus $0.01-0.05 online. For $10-20 you could order enough components online to duplicate whatever small stuff RS might be carrying and have it on hand yourself. For some real commonly used sizes, for a dollar order more resistors of a size or two than you are likely to use in a long time. And then every time I order special parts for a project, I through in some extra common parts, or if I need unusual sized caps or resistors, for a quarter more I can have a bunch extras in case I ever need them again. As convenient as a RS can be when you really need a part (assuming they even carry it), it is a lot more convenient, and a lot cheaper, to just have the stock in your house.

Re:RS is liable (1)

netsavior (627338) | about 5 months ago | (#46352013)

It is awesome that your radio shack is still a radio shack. Mine is not. You know those drawers full of switches and other breadboard components? Yeah those are gone, 'cause of some superbowl rebranding, or something.

Re:RS is liable (1)

Mike Buddha (10734) | about 5 months ago | (#46352371)

I haven't seen a single Radio Shack in the Portland area that doesn't have a cabinet of components. Not one.

oops (3, Insightful)

sootman (158191) | about 5 months ago | (#46349649)

I'm surprised Netflix would agree to a partnership like this and not be in control of how the codes were handed out.

Re:oops (5, Insightful)

Drethon (1445051) | about 5 months ago | (#46349717)

If Netflix sold the time codes to RadioShack up front, I don't think they particularly care what happens to them. Not that I found anything that says one way or the other what happened.

Re:oops (1)

Technician (215283) | about 5 months ago | (#46351747)

Codes should need tied to the unit serial number. When RS buys there inventory with the NetFlix deal, the website should require the device model/serial number pair to match the devices purchased by RS to be validated.

Re:oops (3, Insightful)

farble1670 (803356) | about 5 months ago | (#46353819)

If Netflix sold the time codes to RadioShack up front, I don't think they particularly care what happens to them

they certainly do care about customers being pissed off at netflix because of RS's screw up. i know, it's technically RS's fault, but companies don't want their name associated with any sort of bad experience.

Re:oops (4, Insightful)

maliqua (1316471) | about 5 months ago | (#46350087)

this seems to be a big deal for no reason, a large corporation has to eat the cost of a few Netflix subscriptions and get a website patched.

Re:oops (1)

asmkm22 (1902712) | about 5 months ago | (#46350271)

Well, apparently RadioShack must not be able to afford such a standard response. Or maybe some random manager is just trying to pass the buck in an effort to salvage a quarterly bonus or something. Either way, maybe they shouldn't have blown their wad on a superbowl commercial, and instead focused on just being a quality store where you can get electronics and electronic parts. Not every company needs to exist as a industry behemoth.

Re:oops (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46350323)

and instead focused on just being a quality store where you can get electronics and electronic parts

Except, that hasn't been true for a LONG time.

Radio Shack is now just a retailer of low end electronics, cell phones, and only the most basic of electronics parts.

They stopped being what you describe a very long time ago.

about the tim Iaasic Asimov was working for them.. (1)

Thud457 (234763) | about 5 months ago | (#46350767)

useless bitches got rid of the tube testers ages ago.

Re:oops (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46350629)

Why? Anyone who registers is a potential customer and counted in the ranks. It's all good for them. It's Radio Shat that gets splattered.

Re:oops (1)

LordKronos (470910) | about 5 months ago | (#46353195)

This isn't the first time this happened. In late 2012, there was a promo where you by an LG (I think that was the brand) HDTV and get a year of netflix for free. The problem was, you could just go onto the LG website and enter your serial number, and the website would accept any made up number as long as it started with the correct 2 or 3 digit sequence (or something like that). That was all over slickdeals too.

why not tie to phone numbers that RS asks for (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | about 5 months ago | (#46349695)

why not tie to phone numbers that RS asks for even when you are just buying batteries

Obligatory (1)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about 5 months ago | (#46349767)

Obligatory Seinfeld [youtube.com] clip.

Re:why not tie to phone numbers that RS asks for (1)

Aaden42 (198257) | about 5 months ago | (#46350423)

You know you can say, “No, thanks,” when they ask for your phone number, and they’ll still sell you your batteries, right?

Re:why not tie to phone numbers that RS asks for (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46350471)

Or do what I always do: not go to RadioShack to buy anything.

Re:why not tie to phone numbers that RS asks for (1)

gnick (1211984) | about 5 months ago | (#46350501)

553-2869. Or 867-5309. It's not like they call and verify before they give you the batteries.

Re:why not tie to phone numbers that RS asks for (2)

Charliemopps (1157495) | about 5 months ago | (#46350725)

Refuse to give your number and then I chew out the clerk. I even refuse to give my zipcode. I refuse to participate in data mining myself and they should be ashamed of themselves for asking.

Re: why not tie to phone numbers that RS asks for (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46351245)

Or you could just say not thank you.
The clerk does not care about your number or zip code.

Re:why not tie to phone numbers that RS asks for (4, Insightful)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about 5 months ago | (#46351289)

Thee clerk has a (crappy) job to do. You should be ashamed for yourself for venting about corporate policy decisions to a clerk who has nothing to do with them.

Re:why not tie to phone numbers that RS asks for (1)

AK Marc (707885) | about 5 months ago | (#46352119)

Yes, the clerk is "just following orders". If the orders are bad, the clerk has the option to not follow them.

Re:why not tie to phone numbers that RS asks for (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46353827)

And get chewed out by his manager for not following company policy. Or maybe fired, depending. Not worth the hassle, not when he can simply ask and let you say "no thanks" instead. Holding the wage slaves accountable for what their corporate masters decree is pointless and petty. And venting your rage at those same peons makes you the bad guy, not them.

Oh and your quote from the Nuremberg trials? Not applicable in this situation. In the actual court, "I was just following orders" was actually a valid defense - for low ranking grunts. You'll note that all the famous war criminals were not low ranking. Officers and fascist leaders were held to a higher legal standard, and could not pin their crimes on their superiors (because if they could, any culpability could be passed up the chain of command until it hit a dead end). The guy behind the counter at radio shack is the epitome of a low ranking grunt; thus you've chosen a poor analogy.

Re:why not tie to phone numbers that RS asks for (2)

Jeff Flanagan (2981883) | about 5 months ago | (#46351575)

The part where your shortcomings as a person enter the picture, and cause you to abuse the clerk is the larger problem.

Re:why not tie to phone numbers that RS asks for (0)

geekoid (135745) | about 5 months ago | (#46352087)

Yes, it's the clerks fault.
You're an asshole. You could simply say "No".
Of course I haven't been asked for any of the info in over a decades.

". I refuse to participate in data mining myself and they should be ashamed of themselves for asking."
dear lord, they might get information to make there store better fit your needs! oh lordy lordy!

Datamining, sheesh, so what?

Re:why not tie to phone numbers that RS asks for (1)

plover (150551) | about 5 months ago | (#46350871)

The Rat Shacks in Minnesota stopped asking for phone numbers over a decade ago. Hate on them all you want, but I recommend using current facts, not memories.

Re:why not tie to phone numbers that RS asks for (1)

Mike Buddha (10734) | about 5 months ago | (#46352415)

Yep. I haven't been asked for a phone number in a long, long time. I go in there looking for their closeout stuff pretty regularly.

Re:why not tie to phone numbers that RS asks for (1)

cdrudge (68377) | about 5 months ago | (#46352761)

They haven't asked for phone numbers (or anything else really) for ages. At least at all the stores around here.

Suits them well (1)

vikingpower (768921) | about 5 months ago | (#46349711)

In / on a US market, you are fully liable not only for what you do, but also for the consequences, even if and when unintended or unforeseen, of what you do. Or say.

Could someone "exploit" examiner.com (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46349713)

And "steal" that ad I refuse to watch before reading the article.

Debacle? (1)

Freshly Exhumed (105597) | about 5 months ago | (#46349751)

We've talked before about commercial web site glitches [slashdot.org] and the ramifications on consumers, but it seems to me that the same thing would apply in this case, with RadioShack being completely culpable. One other thing: TFA doesn't indicate any sort of Netflix legal action at this point, so maybe this supposed "debacle" isn't all that important to them.

Re:Debacle? (2)

DarkOx (621550) | about 5 months ago | (#46350063)

My guess would be Netflix does not care or does not care much. Radio Shack probably paid them something for those promo subscriptions. If anything Radio Shack will now have to buy more from Netflix to ensure they can provide them to their own legitimately entitled customers.

Even if it was a handshake deal where Radio Shack gets to offer a free month of Netflix to entice customers and Netflix gets a shot a retaining some of those subscribers who might not otherwise try the server they probably still don't really care much. It isn't as if Neflix does not offer a free month to all new subscribers anyway! I would guess Netflix's own promo system is smart enough to not let you sign up for a free month multiple times from the same billing address. Where as with these promo codes, each code is probably good for a month of service. So at worst they suffer a few dead beats for a short period. Bandwidth isn't free but I would still guess Netflix incremental per customer costs are very low. Who knows maybe even a handful of cheats will decide they like the service enough to hang around and start paying.

Also on the Netflix side, I'd guess if you use more than a handful of promo codes over a period of a year or so it triggers at least an automated account audit and they probably know what campaign the codes belong to; how far will they go to prove you did not buy 6 PCs from Radio Shack, I don't know. They can probably catch the worst abusers if they care to try.

its RadioShack btw (1)

RobertLTux (260313) | about 5 months ago | (#46350499)

yes speaking as one of the Sales Support folks that Corporate decided was "not needed" yes the service is middling to Ghastly.
(hint for the SMs if somebody comes in and tells you they need 3 640-2373 a 640-2184 any Salesmaker on the floor had better come up with a few things in the 27? series to suggestive sell BEFORE you even breath anything about cell phones)

the Name of the Store has been RadioShack for over a decade.

and the guy that greenlit this should be shot out of a cannon at the nearest Unemployment center.

Re:Debacle? (1)

farble1670 (803356) | about 5 months ago | (#46353839)

My guess would be Netflix does not care or does not care much

well, they should care. companies should care when their product is associated with a negative experience, even if it's indirect. it's the same reason that the coca-cola corporation does not want the news airing video of someone beating their spouse holding a can of coke. advertising (positive and negative) is to a large degree subconscious.

Slickdeals Dark Side (5, Insightful)

pwileyii (106242) | about 5 months ago | (#46349801)

I hate it when people have the impression that they are entitled to steal from others. I use the SlickDeals website and a lot of time they have some great deals, but if you dig deeper into the forums on that site, there is a dark side. This is my opinion, if you took a code and used it for yourself, you are stealing, but maybe the temptation was a bit too great. It is like finding a 20 dollar bill on the floor and keeping it. You know it isn't yours, but the person of irresponsible enough to lose 20 dollars so they kind of deserve it. If, on the other, you generated hundreds of codes and start selling them on Ebay, you are stealing and being a complete dick. That is like watching someone drop their wallet, pretending not to notice, picking it up when the person is out of sight, cleaning out all of the cash, and then tossing the wallet in the dumpster outside.

Re:Slickdeals Dark Side (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46349877)

If someone took codes and redeemed them / sold them, it's straight up fraud.

Re:Slickdeals Dark Side (2)

mythosaz (572040) | about 5 months ago | (#46349949)

There's a fine line between straight up fraud and obviously unethical (but within the rules) behavior by frequenters of deal sites.

Your average SD or FW user will gladly stack unintended coupons, order obvious price errors, price-match to after-rebate prices; they'll cycle and trade online payments to churn giftcards and reward points -- all because the fine print allows them to. Once you've decided that, "Hey, the system lets you, so it's fair game," or "They screw us, so lets screw them," it's not far to just trying to redeem codes by trial and error.

Re:Slickdeals Dark Side (1)

pwileyii (106242) | about 5 months ago | (#46350131)

Yes, and then they'll get mad when the obviously unintended coupon interaction doesn't get honored, the price error order gets canceled, or the store refuses to honor the post rebate price of an item. They try to screw the system and when the system fights back they start whining about it. I've used a few questionable deals, but those NEVER get on the front page of the Slickdeals, you have to dig into the forums to find them. In every case, the company acknowledged the error and didn't honor the deal. I didn't get mad because it was expected behavior. There are also deals that seem to be too good to be true, but are actually intended as a promotional tool. There have even been deals that weren't that great, but the company ends up refusing to honor them because if the unexpected number of responses to it (those make be feel a bit upset with the company). An example of that is a company offering a free one dollar item without purchase and then later telling customers they intended for it to be with purchase and then proceed put you on their email list anyhow.

Re:Slickdeals Dark Side (2)

jedidiah (1196) | about 5 months ago | (#46350235)

Do the rules allow for the attempted action or not?

That's all that really matters. If you created a bad set of rules that led to unintended consequences you don't like, then you should honor your side of the bargain. The fact that you are an idiot should not make you immune from your own stupidity.

This goes triple for corporations that are supposedly run by professionals and should know better.

"Gaming" the rules is the same as following them.

Re:Slickdeals Dark Side (5, Insightful)

mythosaz (572040) | about 5 months ago | (#46350289)

"Gaming" the rules is the same as following them.

To the autistic, with no understanding of (or regard to) ethics or morality, you're 100% correct.

Re:Slickdeals Dark Side (2)

afidel (530433) | about 5 months ago | (#46350515)

Contracts are contracts, if you think for one microsecond that a corporation won't do EVERYTHING in its power to screw you over using the fine print you're delusional AND lucky to have never been screwed in that manner. For the rest of us we've learned that the corporations have zero ethics or morals so we feel free to treat them in the same way. It's like people who feel they owe a former employer anything after they have left, why? I might feel an obligation to former coworkers as I've often developed personal relationships with people I'm around for around half my waking hours, but I feel zero obligation to the corporation once the employee/employer relationship ends.

Re:Slickdeals Dark Side (1, Flamebait)

mythosaz (572040) | about 5 months ago | (#46351163)

Thank you for illustrating my point.

actually, it's the signifier of our Age (1)

Thud457 (234763) | about 5 months ago | (#46350809)

"Gaming" the rules is the same as following them.

To the autistic, with no understanding of (or regard to) ethics or morality, you're 100% correct.

Or Wall street. Or the boardroom. Or Congress.

Re:actually, it's the signifier of our Age (1, Flamebait)

BronsCon (927697) | about 5 months ago | (#46351211)

Right. The autistic.

Re:Slickdeals Dark Side (0)

Lehk228 (705449) | about 5 months ago | (#46351893)

the rules are the terms of the promotion, the people exploiting a defect in the redemption site were criminal crackers, not much different from the guy emailing out viruses that steal your bank password

Re:Slickdeals Dark Side (2)

jandrese (485) | about 5 months ago | (#46350255)

I've never heard of Slickdeals, but your post makes it sound like the website equivalent of that friend who always has some scheme that's totally going to work this time and he's found a way to beat the system. But he's always broke and angry because his last sure-fire scheme didn't work out. Or worse, he's happy because he yelled at some poor CSR for an hour and got some token "go away" prize that was worth marginally more than his initial investment.

Re:Slickdeals Dark Side (2)

mythosaz (572040) | about 5 months ago | (#46350365)

Your average SD or FW post is just good deals - people posting things on sale or clearance, your basic YMMV closeout. ...plus the usual kickback from referral sites.

Your average SD or FW power user is busy combining those deals with price-matches to things that are obviously after-rebate or typos on models in competitive ads, etc.

Re:Slickdeals Dark Side (1)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | about 5 months ago | (#46350195)

2 kinds of really bad SD/FW users:

- ones that take advantage of the system to buy one for themselves

- ones that take advantage of the system to be ebay 'flippers', so they can resell, with no interest in the object, itself.

I hate the notion of flippers. the word even sound silly, used in this way, but its become a known meaning for this kind of person.

being a middleman and scimming profit is not something to be proud of! seriously. its not anything to aspire to, yet there is some glory that SD/FW people seem to take from this practice.

Re:Slickdeals Dark Side (1)

Arker (91948) | about 5 months ago | (#46351373)

The company you are ordering from will screw you on obvious errors every chance they get. On the rare occasions when they do not, it's called "breach of fiduciary responsibility" and is actionable. So yes, I do not see anything wrong with the little people treating them the same way in return. And I have no idea what SD or FW are, though they sound like they might be interesting.

Re:Slickdeals Dark Side (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46351729)

Except that's obviously not true. If I accidentally ordered 120 Netflix subscriptions because I was too stupid to figure out how to use their website, Netflix would not stick me with the bill (this is actually true, my mom somehow managed to order 4 separate subscriptions, Netflix sorted it out in about 20 minutes). And frankly, I pretty much guarantee you're the kind of asshole who would go apeshit if a company tried to screw you over an obvious error, even if that "obvious error" was you trying to fuck over the company but having it blow up in your face.

Re:Slickdeals Dark Side (1)

geekoid (135745) | about 5 months ago | (#46352657)

"The company you are ordering from will screw you on obvious errors every chance they get."
no likely. But you keep to your delusions.

" On the rare occasions when they do not, it's called "breach of fiduciary responsibility" and is actionable. "
Stop using term you clearly do not understand.

Re:Slickdeals Dark Side (2)

dysmal (3361085) | about 5 months ago | (#46350093)

Agreed. Slickdeals can be a very useful website but the stuff that some of the people openly brag about in the forums makes me ill. Fraud is fraud. If you're using one of those codes, it's fraud. Yeah you can blame it on bad security and whatever else makes you feel better but it's still fraud. You're getting something for nothing. It's not Porsche's fault that my car got stolen when i left the keys on the seat, the top down, windows open, but the doors locked. It's my own damn fault! (Note: I do not, nor have I ever owned a Porsche!)

Re:Slickdeals Dark Side (1)

imrahilj (3553503) | about 5 months ago | (#46350139)

Hit the nail on the head.

Re:Slickdeals Dark Side (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46350221)

(Note: I do not, nor have I ever owned a Porsche!)

So you stole each and every one of them, using the described method at least once, didn't you?

Re:Slickdeals Dark Side (1)

Obfuscant (592200) | about 5 months ago | (#46350959)

It's not Porsche's fault that my car got stolen when i left the keys on the seat, the top down, windows open, but the doors locked. It's my own damn fault! (Note: I do not, nor have I ever owned a Porsche!)

Well, if you left the keys on the seat with the top down and windows open, it can truly be said you never owned a Porsche, you were just making payments on one you were borrowing for a week.

Re:Slickdeals Dark Side (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46350481)

Yeah the whole community is pretty bad. Even when they don't exploit, they have a dedicated community that buys our the entirety of stock to flip ON THE FORUM TO OTHER POSTERS for profit. The moto x original deal was a nightmare, tons of people registering and getting like 30 reserve codes for phones, then selling them on the forum.

Re:Slickdeals Dark Side (1)

rolfwind (528248) | about 5 months ago | (#46350495)

Just a question, but have we become so stupid as a society that we need analogies for even simplistic situations to begin with?

Re:Slickdeals Dark Side (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46350953)

I don't see what entitlement has to do with it. It's an opportunity, and someone exploits it. Why exploit? Because fuck them, that's why.

another Radio Shack wonder (1)

wolfguru (913659) | about 5 months ago | (#46349919)

The 80's called - they want their web technology back.

Re:another Radio Shack wonder (1)

cbhacking (979169) | about 5 months ago | (#46351629)

What, the technology of the web from a decade before the web was invented?

I'm guessing you're a youngster, maybe don't even remember 1991. That was the year that both HTTP and HTML were first publicly described (though HTTP was version 0.9 and HTML was not yet standardized at all), and it didn't really take off until 93 or 94. The first few years certainly didn't have anything like the concept of HTTPS or dynamic content or "web applications" at all.

Get off my lawn! (I'm not quite 30...)

Re:another Radio Shack wonder (1)

HeavensTrash (175514) | about 5 months ago | (#46351915)

So... You don't remember 1991 either, is that what you're saying?

Don't you hate when (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46350025)

The gist on /. homepage is only missing the last few words?
For me this is a clickjacking technique that may force me to leave this site.

Vajk

NSA exploits (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46350077)

This is what happens if you let NSA insert root kits, modify routers and weaken security to allow STASI spying.
Say loudly, Thank You NSA

Is there really enough at stake to call this a deb (1)

JoeyRox (2711699) | about 5 months ago | (#46350079)

Seems like a first-world pebble in the road to me.

this is why... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46350121)

this is why we cant have nice things.

Is there a shortage of STEM 'people'? (1)

avandesande (143899) | about 5 months ago | (#46350305)

With the high profile issues lately such as the healthcare.gov, radioshack, mtGox... you have to wonder.

Re:Is there a shortage of STEM 'people'? (1)

PRMan (959735) | about 5 months ago | (#46350407)

There is a massive shortage of programmers everywhere. But universities keep churning out English, Math and Law majors of which we have massive gluts.

Re:Is there a shortage of STEM 'people'? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46350879)

There is a "massive glut" of Math majors? Please tell me you aren't serious. I graduated from Major State U., undergrad size some 24,000+ in 2009. Of the couple thousand to graduate that year, *5*, literally FIVE, got B.S. Mathematics degrees. I was one of them. Computer Science / Software Engineer? An order of magnitude more.

Glut of Math majors, hah, yea. I would LOVE to see a citation for that.

Re:Is there a shortage of STEM 'people'? (1)

geekoid (135745) | about 5 months ago | (#46352699)

it's a glut if only 4 were needed.

Radio Shack can't pay for good IT people and they (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | about 5 months ago | (#46350641)

Radio Shack can't pay for good IT people and they lost the tech guys when dropped that stuff they used to sell and became a shitey cell phone store

Lack of QA people (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | about 5 months ago | (#46350661)

They want to end users to be the testers for free.

Radio Shack (5, Funny)

fred911 (83970) | about 5 months ago | (#46350347)

You've got questions?
                                        We've got stupid looks.

Re:Radio Shack (5, Funny)

n7ytd (230708) | about 5 months ago | (#46350569)

You've got questions?

We've got cell phones!

Re:Radio Shack (1)

Trailer Trash (60756) | about 5 months ago | (#46351595)

You've got questions?

Hey, so do we!

Re:Radio Shack (1)

cdrudge (68377) | about 5 months ago | (#46352743)

When I enter the store and they ask me "Can I help you find anything?" I reply "Not likely."

So? (1)

Murdoch5 (1563847) | about 5 months ago | (#46350525)

Radio Shack has to honor the deal, they have to provide what they said they would.

Re:So? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46353421)

To people who actually bought the product, of course. The thieves will curse and cry, but they deserve nothing.

GnaIa (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46351053)

goD find something any p)arting shot,

Run some analytics on the web logs ... undo ... (3, Insightful)

BitZtream (692029) | about 5 months ago | (#46351363)

the problem.

Seriously, theres enough info in any default apache or IIS log to find the majority of the bullshit codes generated/stolen. Find anything that looks fake and kill it, anyone entering a killed code, have them call in to activate/get a new code, all these people who steal codes over the Internet generally aren't ballsy enough to make the phone call repeatedly, make sure the call comes from a good solid landline, no VoIP crap, sorry if it effects all 8 of you legitimate users of radioshack and netflix.

This is (just) a shitty long day for some sys admin somewhere who has to make up for some shitty developers mistake. This is pretty much the status quo is it not? Most if not all of the bad codes will be found out ... if they want to, it may be well worth it for them to have the accounts active anyway for the books or just for possible retention values.

This is a great example of the no press is bad press mantra. Both RadioShack and Netflix will see increased customer counts for people trying to scam it, slam dunk marketing.

Taken seriously... yeah, right. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46351791)

"Plenty of blame can also fall on the redemption website designers. Getting the trust of a large company such as Radioshack usually means that the job will be taken seriously, rather than having a major promotion be handle by as they put it "a website design in process"."

I don't see why... it obviously didn't get the Obamacare website taken seriously, and I'm betting the USGovt is a lot larger than RadioShack.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>