Suing for $43 would absolutely be frivolous and would be thrown out by all but the most bored small claims courts.
The best you could do is send your client to collections, though if you try and mess with their credit report, that incurs liability on your part. Funny enough, German companies do send SaaS/IaaS clients with small bills owing to collections, even for amounts as small as 15-20 EUR.
UK perspective here: I've not claimed for $43, but I've used the small claims process to recover £65. They replied to the paperwork sent out by the court indicating they intended to defend it, so I paid the hearing fee to take it to court, where the judge was polite, helpful, very switched-on, and didn't seem remotely annoyed by the size of the claim.
The total costs of making the claim were more than the amount I'd claimed, but I'd been careful to provide all the proper notice and offer to settle for the amount of the claim, so they were awarded against the defaulting client.
It was great fun and I think it would have been fun and educational even if I'd lost. Would definitely do it again.
The problem is that chargebacks are like the perk of using a CC for transactions. So if companies start doing this to an any degree that makes CC customers hesitant to use the CC's customer protection feature they will find a way to make it the merchant's problem again.
The best you can really do is be large enough that cutting ties with your business entirely isn't feasible for the customer.
> round people who were good with their hands, but in my mind buying a used car isn't a scary matter - you visit the private seller, you look at the vehicle, you check for the things one needs to check for, and you know if it has problems or not.
This has nothing to do with America. The rest of the world has this problem too. Not everyone is a mechanic outside of America.
Come to eastern Europe, nobody here buys a new car (people can't afford it unfortunately). For that exact reason most people have retained the knowledge of how to buy a used car, and choose one that is not awful, or at least the least bad one.
I live in Amsterdam, and we can absolutely afford to buy new (especially if we were to choose not to live in Amsterdam), but there are reliable car dealers where you can buy a good second hand car for a decent price. I really don't see the point in buying new.
In Eastern Europe I regularly hear that car disintegrated into three pieces or engine fell off after a collision. These do not happen to a car having minor crash in its history, these happen to a car which had been totaled in the past. Eastern Europe is the scrapyard of Western Europe and yet its inhabitants found a way to fell superior about their 15 years old BMWs with engine mounted on three screws.
Some modern cars are specifically designed with frangible engine mounts to eject it downwards in a frontal crash. This is a safety measure to dissipate energy and prevent the engine from being pushed back into the passenger cabin.
I am originally from EE and there are reports every month on how cars cause accidents because breaks didn't work, or an entire wheel flies out of its place. Not to mention the gazillion cases of accidents caused by improper headlights.
The only reason the second-hand market works there is because most of the used cars come from Germany, and they have strict laws for checking the cars periodically. Once they roll on the EE roads for a few years, then the cracks start popping up which cause horrible accidents.
Just implying that EE is this amazing place where second-hand cars have no issues and Americans should follow the same model shows that you have no idea what you're talking about.
It depends on the country but some eastern European countries require an annual car inspection as part of registration. They check for basic stuff to ensure it's not falling apart. Thoroughness varies, and some inspectors can be bribed.
Most new cars in Eastern Europe are leases owned by banks. People buy brand new cars for themselves with cash every 15-20 years. The rest is importing totaled cars from Germany, Netherlands, and US of A.
That's how new car purchases work in the US too. Unless you pay cash, which few people do, the car belongs to whichever entity granted the loan to purchase it.
things that you think sound good, might not sound good to the authority in charge of determining what is good.
For example using your LLM to criticise, ask questions or perform civil work that is deemed undesirable becomes evil.
You can use google to find how the UK government for example has been using "law" and "terrorism" charges against people for simply tweeting or holding a placard they deem critical of Israel.
Anthropic is showing off these capabilities in order to secure defence contracts. "We have the ability to surveil and engage threats, hire us please".
Anthropic is not a tiny start up exploring AI, it's a behemoth bank rolled by the likes of Google and Amazon. It's a big bet. While money is drying up for AI, there is always one last bastion for endless cash, defence contracts.
Same, I thought the free accounts were always trained on. Which in my opinion is reasonable since you could delete the data you didn’t want to keep on the service.
But including paid accounts and doing 5 year retention however is confounding.
I’m proposing this, the ability to mark certain chats as non trainable. Like an incognito mode. If a chat is not marked as that after 5 days it can be retained for training.
And this is only for free users, paid users should never have to think about this.
Banks operate on risk, make chargebacks risky.
Some of these chargebacks sound like straight up fraud. Three months of usage and using their bank to reverse a payment.
Make Fraud Spicy Again