A Florida father says a Lyft driver attempted to charge him a $75 damage fee using what appeared to be an AI-generated image showing a fake mess inside the vehicle.
It’s the natural order of things, but that doesn’t mean its acceptable or should be the norm. I think its a very grounded argument to say that reducing poverty by improving social safety nets and ensuring that the lowest paying jobs can actually support someone would then decrease crime.
People in impoverished areas have also successfully reduced crime rates by using community-based initiatives. See Baltimore, for instance.
“Committing crimes” isn’t some inherent quality of being poor, so writing people a pass for screwing others over just because that person was poor is an asinine take.
Especially if you’re gonna try to argue that disproportionally policing poorer areas is an injustice with no evident/rational basis.
I ain’t write a pass for shit, the article I linked said crime is a by-product of desparation and reducing desparation will reduce crime, being poor is a cause of desparation so a-b-c. I don’t wamna type that all out because the middle piece didn’t matter for the sake of the message “reducing poverty reduces the crime rate”.
Additionally, just because something has a traceable cause doesn’t mean its excused or OK, don’t draw that line on your own. I also didn’t mention police once, so I don’t wanna hear that either. That’s a different conversation entirely that I feel we both also have a very similar opinion on. It seems you really just don’t like the word poor being associated because you want to draw a line to me saying poor people are bad, but I’m not. I’m saying desperate people are more likely to take desperate measures. Doesn’t matter what class you’re in for that, but poor people are, hopefully unsurprisingly, a lot more likely to be in a desperate situation, and in there did I never say that this makes anyone a bad person nor did I excuse any behavior.
I literally just woke up, sorry for the extra sass.
Lyft driver caught blatantly using Gemini AI (with watermark) to fake damage to his car and charge riders extra for cleaning fees
I wonder if this would have happened if he was paid a decent wage in the first place.
What a silly thing to say and think.
Is there some weird correlation between better morality and more money in your head?
Why aren’t the billionaires paragons of virtue then?
It’s not weird. Desperate people do desperate things, so too little money can lead to compromised morals as can too much. Do you really not see that?
And that’s where I came in saying it’s a self-destructive argument.
I don’t see why we can’t all agree that some guy using AI to scam people (and thereby placing demerits on their accounts) is a bad thing, regardless of his income level.
Yes, corporations should pay people more. I’m not arguing against that. But this article isn’t about the rates Lyft pays their drivers, it’s about a Lyft driver scamming passengers.
https://www.northwestcareercollege.edu/blog/the-relationship-between-poverty-and-crime/
Tl;dr: Poor people commit more crime
It’s the natural order of things, but that doesn’t mean its acceptable or should be the norm. I think its a very grounded argument to say that reducing poverty by improving social safety nets and ensuring that the lowest paying jobs can actually support someone would then decrease crime.
People in impoverished areas have also successfully reduced crime rates by using community-based initiatives. See Baltimore, for instance.
“Committing crimes” isn’t some inherent quality of being poor, so writing people a pass for screwing others over just because that person was poor is an asinine take.
Especially if you’re gonna try to argue that disproportionally policing poorer areas is an injustice with no evident/rational basis.
I ain’t write a pass for shit, the article I linked said crime is a by-product of desparation and reducing desparation will reduce crime, being poor is a cause of desparation so a-b-c. I don’t wamna type that all out because the middle piece didn’t matter for the sake of the message “reducing poverty reduces the crime rate”. Additionally, just because something has a traceable cause doesn’t mean its excused or OK, don’t draw that line on your own. I also didn’t mention police once, so I don’t wanna hear that either. That’s a different conversation entirely that I feel we both also have a very similar opinion on. It seems you really just don’t like the word poor being associated because you want to draw a line to me saying poor people are bad, but I’m not. I’m saying desperate people are more likely to take desperate measures. Doesn’t matter what class you’re in for that, but poor people are, hopefully unsurprisingly, a lot more likely to be in a desperate situation, and in there did I never say that this makes anyone a bad person nor did I excuse any behavior.
I literally just woke up, sorry for the extra sass.
Let’s back up a bit.
And that’s where I came in saying it’s a self-destructive argument.
I don’t see why we can’t all agree that some guy using AI to scam people (and thereby placing demerits on their accounts) is a bad thing, regardless of his income level.
Yes, corporations should pay people more. I’m not arguing against that. But this article isn’t about the rates Lyft pays their drivers, it’s about a Lyft driver scamming passengers.