HN user

headbansown

37 karma
Posts0
Comments29
View on HN
No posts found.
GoodRx S-1 6 years ago

From your doctor, sure - but from databases of who bought what that the pt consented to be in as a condition of getting a discount? Is GoodRx a HIPAA covered entity? (Not being rhetorical; don't actually know.)

GoodRx S-1 6 years ago

Life insurance companies (speculation - but they won't have the visibility into Barry Boomer's cholesterol meds that his health insurer will)

Shrinkflation 7 years ago

First, it's pretty simple. Require that if net weight changes that either the size of the container decreases proportionately or that a standardized label (a la "Nutrition Facts") on the front of the container contains the old size and new size prominently.

And oh, the horror that taxpayer money might be spent protecting the public. I'm down for that.

Shrinkflation 7 years ago

That is the case in the U.S. as well. Although I've seen unit pricing of products in different sizes use different units (e.g. one product using ounces and the other quarts) that if not done deliberately to make comparison difficult still has that effect.

Shrinkflation 7 years ago

The CPI has been gamed into uselessness because governments and corporations have indexed things like pension increases to it. The "hedonic substitution" concept is particularly disingenuous. Seniors can't afford steak any more and buy hot dogs instead? Inflation's gone down, yay!

Shrinkflation 7 years ago

Might as well outlaw marketing then.

Yes, because reasonable regulation requiring clear communication to consumers about product changes == outlawing marketing.

Shrinkflation 7 years ago

Using the same container volume with less net weight, for example. Those of us who have the luxury of not being particularly busy can certainly keep logs of unit pricing, but it's not practicable for most.

Shrinkflation 7 years ago

I believe Consumer Reports used to show instances of this and call it the "grocery shrink ray." Corporate greed and willingness to deceive: news at 11.

I'm with your assessment. I was expecting to see more than the minor differences that were reported, which would have made it more interesting and damning to the processing firms. But a headline like "I took nine DNA tests and got approximately the same results" wouldn't have generated so many clicks.

The endgame is requiring a non-extensible browser with TPM and remote attestation so that the ads can't be removed client side with a bonus layer of DRM preventing scraping the screen (at least on the same endpoint) and hiding the ads that way. But a critical mass of "content" would have to require this before it could be universally enforced. Would probably be happening with online banking already had it not been for the rise of mobile.

Bottom line, though: it only takes one person to copy the "content" and repost it to make all that for naught.