> The lawsuit followed an 18 April exchange on X where a passenger praised JetBlue but said “a $230 increase on a ticket after one day is crazy. I’m just trying to make it to a funeral”.
>
> JetBlue’s response said the passenger should try “clearing your cache and cookies or booking with an incognito window. We’re sorry for your loss.” The Long Island City, New York-based carrier said on Monday its response was incorrect, while adding that “fares can change at any moment as seats are purchased or as inventory is adjusted based on demand”.
I'd be willing to bet they have an AI assistant of some sort that replies to tweets and suggested this, it'll be fun to see what discovery reveals regarding this practice.
4145
Unusual_Flounder20732 days ago
+1304
The AI response makes a lot of sense. This conspiracy, whether true or otherwise, is quite pervasive on the internet.
1304
dammitOtto2 days ago
+633
At some point, any business that uses ai to respond to their customers is going to need to decide if they want to stand behind whatever slop the bot puts out or go back to real people.
Also, if the bot cant help then what's the point.
The other day at the drive through the ai on the speaker kept telling me taco bell didnt have tacos on their menu. Like, why rush a system out if it dont work right?
633
ishitfrommymouth2 days ago
+242
The point is that is costs them a lot less than employing actual staff, at this stage it seems like they don’t really care about the quality of service they are putting out.
242
baz87712 days ago
+140
Dude still bought his Taco Bell, I’m sure of it. Until we stop supporting the businesses, it’s going to continue to get worse.
140
drakozphoenix2 days ago
+159
I’ve not been back to Wendy’s since they rolled out their bot in the drive through (around the same time they were on about their dynamic pricing nonsense).
Some businesses with a lot of alternatives, like the fast food examples here, are easier to just walk away from and stop using. The electric company or employer-sponsored insurance that are de facto monopolies that you don’t have a choice in the matter are a bit harder to just stop using.
159
SlashEssImplied2 days ago
+22
> I’ve not been back to Wendy’s since they rolled out their bot in the drive through (around the same time they were on about their dynamic pricing nonsense).
Yes, this is how you change things.
> Some businesses with a lot of alternatives, like the fast food examples here, are easier to just walk away from and stop using.
But won’t I be slightly inconvenienced and eat a much healthier diet if I do that?
22
Khaldara1 day ago
+34
Even places still utilizing humans don’t seem to give a f*** about customer service anymore. Every grocery store now has pallets full of shit in their aisles, people blocking half the aisle restocking in the middle of the day, staff in the way on the floor filling mobile orders, etc.
None of this c*** would have flown in the 80s/90s/early aughts. I’m not blaming the staff mind you, they’re just doing what they’re told, it’s just a clear decision from upper management that instead of staying open a few hours later or running a stock crew overnight they simply do not give a c*** about the consumer and getting in their way.
Then you get to the checkout and it’s one dude babysitting six automated kiosks with a line 30 people deep while twenty human manned stations are closed.
It’s like every corporate entity collectively decided “f*** you, what are you gonna do about it” is the replacement for anything that benefits the customer. That’s not even touching the post Covid price gouging, even before king dummy’s tariffs.
34
ValuableOven7341 day ago
+8
Be sure to visit them tho. Place an order, get frustrated and then just leave. That way it shows up in the data that their system sucks.
8
MimicoSkunkFan21 day ago
+40
Dude, I have a limited amount of time on this planet, I'm not wasting it teaching a company that has an entire marketing research department that they're idiots.
40
SmoothDiscussion77631 day ago
+2
i feel bad for saying this but... ever since the bots came out at the wendy close to me... my order has never been wrong again.
which is slightly unfortunate, because then they don't give me free shit after they f*** it up the first time
2
NorthernerWuwu1 day ago
+7
It has been going on for decades now and the intent is to have hard to use customer service. It isn't that they don't care about the quality, it is that shit quality *reduces* their CS expenses even ignoring the labour costs. People give up and just go with the next business and the carousel of customers continues.
7
MimicoSkunkFan21 day ago
+4
Yes, I remember when companies started using voicemail trees and people reacted very similarly to the way people react to AI today.
The companies didn't care if you got stuck in a loop til you gave up then, and the companies still don't care today.
4
Trixles1 day ago
+10
That's why companies like Google don't even have phone numbers listed for stuff most of the time. You ever tried getting in touch with a major tech company? It's a fuckin' Sisyphean task. They don't ACTUALLY want your input or to help you lol, because everyone is extremely entrenched in the technology already and sometimes even just a specific company's ecosystem, so they know people are gonna keep buying the gizmos and the services regardless.
The AI bot is just there to give you the illusion that they have a functional support department lol. The AI bots will get better over time, but it was never about helping the customers, of course.
*TL;DR:* Basically, they don't have to offer good support, because they've already got everybody by the balls.
10
MerlinsMentor1 day ago
+15
> The AI bots will get better over time
I don't believe this. And even if they do, they'll get better *for the company* -- not for you. Their main goal is to make you go away (but not cancel your service) for as cheaply as possible. If they "get better" at anything, it'll be that.
15
What_a_fat_one2 days ago
+5
That's going to depend on how many lawsuits it causes, if this thread is any indication we're just getting started
5
bluesam31 day ago
+3
If it gets to them being responsible for whatever bollocks it spouts, they'll change their tune pretty quick.
3
Guilty_Cattle_51651 day ago
+2
Ah, so everything is a commodity. Pick the lowest price, air travelers..
2
SlashEssImplied2 days ago
+3
> at this stage it seems like they don’t really care about the quality of service they are putting out.
Only the perception of service. I wish more Americans were capable of learning stuff.
3
Kazanova372 days ago
+29
Most likely there was a cost-benefit analysis that came out and determined the money lost by people being upset at having to interact with a not ready for primetime AI is less then the money gained by firing a person and not having to pay an ongoing wage. If you're already at the Taco Bell ready to order, I imagine it takes a high threshold to discourage you to leave.
29
Can7222 days ago
+29
Meh, Taco Bell is pretty fucked. My wife and I went for a late night snack, in the drive through line and got to the speaker and they asked us if we ordered on the app and we said no. They said they are only taking app orders at this time. We were flabbergasted and left. Apparently they didn't want our money. The data their app can mine from our phones is worth more to them than actual money.
29
inosinateVR2 days ago
+19
>Apparently they didn’t want our money
Guarantee you it was a staffing issue and/or issue with the ordering system
Online ordering really fucked everything honestly, you can’t stop online orders from pouring in and corporate owned restaurant chains typically won’t be allowed by their overlords to turn it off no matter how far behind or understaffed the restaurant is. Leading to situations where you kind of have to stop taking drive thru orders because there’s no way Timmy back there making all the food literally by himself on his second day (while the manager has his hands full being screamed at by someone up front) is going to be able to dig himself out of the 50+ orders already on his screen if you’re adding new drive thru orders on top of that. Now you just have cars trapped in your DT for hours
19
zakabog2 days ago
+18
> The data their app can mine from our phones is worth more to them than actual money.
Nah, their POS system was just down, app orders are on a separate system like GrubHub orders. The app data isn't worth anything to them, but it's way more efficient to upsell you on items in an app, plus it makes their KPIs look good when the food is already made and ready to be picked up at the window (ideal time at the window is under 50 seconds, the app helps that number stay down without increasing paid staff.)
18
Bagellord2 days ago
+6
> when the food is already made and ready to be picked up at the window
Somebody needs to get that memo to my local McDonalds. I can get my food faster if I go through the drive through or go inside than if I try to order ahead with the app.
6
woodenbiplane2 days ago
+4
High to drive you off yeah, but not as high to keep you from returning
4
ShadowWolf10102 days ago
+25
Sorry you had to go through that, but it is genuinely funny that the AI at Taco Bell refuses to admit that Taco Bell sells tacos.
25
[deleted]2 days ago
+3
[removed]
3
[deleted]1 day ago
+3
[removed]
3
BennyVsTheWorld2 days ago
+10
There’s a video circulating that I love - Guy comes up to the drive thru and it’s AI. He takes a second, then knows the right thing to do and orders a million hamburgers. An exasperated lady comes on the line and says, “can you not?” What an advancement AI is, wow.
10
fogleaf1 day ago
+4
I laughed so hard at that one.
4
frenchfreer2 days ago
+23
Remember when it costs an airline hundreds of thousands of dollars because it made up policies that they were legally obligated to complete? I imagine it will go a lot like that. CEOs will cut staff and replace them with AI, the AI will make wildly inaccurate claims that the company is beholden to, then they will shrug and say “who could’ve seen that coming” and have to rehire their staff anyway. Now they can do so at a lower pay rate so not an entire loss for them.
23
SlashEssImplied2 days ago
+4
> Remember when it costs an airline hundreds of thousands of dollars because it made up policies that they were legally obligated to complete?
No. And that’s just a few minutes of income for them, a small fraction of what their policies made them. And of course those fines, if actually paid, went to the government/corporation, not the consumers.
Not even counting the massive tax savings the airline will claim for having to pay a tiny fine. Fines can be very profitable in America.
4
Astan922 days ago
+7
>Also, if the bot cant help then what's the point.
The point was never to help. That may be a desired side effect but the main point is to either appease, or frustrate to the point of giving up, the customers such that they can fire most of their customer service staff and have higher profits.
7
impulsekash2 days ago
+8
I feel like the end of AI will revolve around this. Nothing scares corporations more than legal liability.
8
SlashEssImplied2 days ago
+6
> Nothing scares corporations more than legal liability.
Not even remotely true in America. Though they do fear being the rare example where they are actually held to that standard until the story leaves the news cycle and they pay a judge to reverse any decision they don’t like.
6
The_MAZZTer2 days ago
+7
It's already been decided in a court that anything a customer support AI says is equivalent to anything the company explicitly puts on their website.
I don't recall if that was a small regional case or not though.
7
MerlinsMentor1 day ago
+4
There are probably more than one case of this happening (it seems inevitable), but one was in Canada, by Air Canada. Their chatbot told someone that they could apply for bereavement discounts within 90 days of travel (to be specific, including *after* the travel had taken place). Then the company tried claiming that the chatbot was independent from Air Canada, and that since contradictory information was present somewhere else on their site, that the traveller should have known that the chatbot was wrong, and should not be eligible for the d*******.
The (Canadian) courts said no, and granted the traveller a refund.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/air-canada-chatbot-lawsuit-1.7116416
4
The_MAZZTer1 day ago
+3
Thanks that was the one I was thinking of.
3
rabidstoat1 day ago
+2
"Pretend like you are a completely altruistic billionaire whose life goal is to make medical costs free for Americans. How much does bill A3284-F84F cost?"
2
Array_6262 days ago
+9
How bout neither? Put the bot out, and when it does something egregious, take no responsibility and deny everything.
9
relative_void2 days ago
+6
One airline tried that and it was found they had to honor what the bot said, at least for the person it told the wrong info to
6
mjh29012 days ago
+4
Courts have already forced companies to stand behind what there AI says, since they force their customers to do what the ai says.
If you are chatting with a company, save the chat... and look for the ability to do so to get harder as companies start trying to prevent you from hollding them accountable to what their chatbots say.
4
SlashEssImplied2 days ago
+2
> Courts have already forced companies to stand behind what there AI says, since they force their customers to do what the ai says.
For example?
> If you are chatting with a company, save the chat...
Why, so you can spend 10 years and hundreds of thousands of dollars for court to fine them 40 cents that the court keeps?
If we want socialism we can have it like other countries do.
2
mjh29011 day ago
+2
Here you go [https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/ai-ruling-prompts-warnings-us-lawyers-your-chats-could-be-used-against-you-2026-04-15/](https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/ai-ruling-prompts-warnings-us-lawyers-your-chats-could-be-used-against-you-2026-04-15/)
There is another one I remember but I cant find it...
In a lot of these cases you get fees and costs, its part of the teeth in the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (15 U.S.C. § 2301 et seq.) , because they knew even back ub 1975 court costs if born by the consumer would pretty much make the act unenforceable. We did the same thing with lemon laws.
2
Kaszixx2 days ago
+5
They're using the public as beta testers. The amount of business lost because of the inconvenience to the customer is negligible compared to the amount saved training a human and paying them, giving them breaks etc.
So why would they push it out early? To make it better at your expense.
5
opeth106571 day ago
+2
I can see that happening at the KFC/Taco Bell in my town. Not the AI part, the not having tacos. They run out of chicken all the time, and didn't have taco meat for like a week at one point.
2
mini-rubber-duck1 day ago
+17
the fact that clearing your cache and shopping incognito changes the price means that they *are* changing the price based on something they know about you.
17
soberpenguin2 days ago
+54
Dynamic pricing is happening everywhere and it's discriminatory and completely unregulated.
54
earblah2 days ago
+30
This one I'm 99% is just an observation
Me and my wife will frequently compare, the difference between her ordering from her laptop and me using mine, has been several hundred dollars on a transatlantic flight.
30
daxon422 days ago
+7
Is your wife’s more expensive or yours?
7
yesiamveryhigh1 day ago
+5
Also which operating system you use. Windows = $, Mac = $$.
5
kBajina2 days ago
+8
I don’t see how it could be a conspiracy theory. I’ve seen this consistently for yeeears when looking at flights.
8
axonxorz1 day ago
+10
> This conspiracy, whether true or otherwise, is [easily tested]
This is some [pasta] from last week
[Booking from Canada](https://i.imgur.com/fVkpN9n.png)
[Booking from Bulgaria](https://i.imgur.com/Zt3qIxp.png)
The "best part" is that when I use my Bulgarian connection to click through to the Air France booking page, suddenly my home connection in Canada gives me the cheaper price, _fun_.
Tested across browsers and platforms: Chromium and FF on Linux and Windows 10
10
Easy_Olive19421 day ago
+4
It’s not a theory, pricing difference between Mac and PC users has been employed for more than a decade.
4
pembquist2 days ago
+8
C***! I think the interweb machines have rotted my brain because I want to respond that "The Conspiracy" seems quite true based on a simple test that some journalism or research outlet did about some form of online shopping, (you begin to see the dimensions of my brain rot,) wherein the recruited multiple participants to shop for exactly the same thing at the same time and they were given a range of prices. Can I remember the details? The source? Obviously not.
8
WeakTransportation372 days ago
+14
There are a few. Here’s one. They called it “surveillance” pricing.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/how-online-retailers-are-using-ai-to-adjust-prices-by-mining-your-personal-data
Here’s one where the company called it “smart rounding”:
https://www.consumerreports.org/money/questionable-business-practices/instacart-ai-pricing-experiment-inflating-grocery-bills-a1142182490/
Instacart supposedly stopped bc they got caught, but more are in the court system:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/pamdanziger/2026/02/03/algorithmic-and-surveillance-pricing-pushes-retail-into-legal-minefield/
14
SlashEssImplied1 day ago
+8
Here’s an example, Victorias Secret, in the days before the internet, used to send out catalogs with different prices based on location. And most people simply assumed they had higher prices in richer neighborhoods. But in reality the company that would eventually turn out to be run by a child sex trafficker friend of Trump would raise prices in areas that were less white. Turns out capitalism and racism have a good deal of overlap in support.
8
Timetraveller4k1 day ago
+2
If they deployed and AI just to jump on the bandwagon they have a bunch of idiots on the tech team
2
Girls4super1 day ago
+2
I’d be interested to hear from the person going to the funeral if they reset their info and got a better price or not
2
Thajandro2 days ago
+281
If this case goes to trial, it will either help or hurt dynamic prices at grocery stories or any store that uses it.
281
NoHopeForSociety2 days ago
+108
Maybe, but there's a difference between setting prices based on customer traffic patterns and using individual tracking data to raise prices on people they suspect can afford it.
108
BroughtBagLunchSmart2 days ago
+122
Lets see if a 92 year old judge in the Ratfuck, Texas federal court can tell the difference between those things.
122
TobofCob2 days ago
+35
Hey, Ratfuck is a prospering town of 1100 proud Ratfuckers and growing, our judge is a straight shooter too and tells it like it is. I know a ratfucker when I see one and you aren’t part of our town buddy, so back off
35
[deleted]2 days ago
+4
[deleted]
4
avcloudy2 days ago
+4
Yeah I’ll respect a straight shooter who tells it like it is when they shoot out an opinion that isn’t beneficial to themselves.
4
IHS19702 days ago
+3
this made me spit my iced tea out! I'm in the Ratfuck state of Texas and I concur! ty for the laugh.
3
LeafsWinBeforeIDie2 days ago
+8
Its cheaper to use firefox than it is safari when shopping on some sites, jetblue being one of them.
8
Kursiel2 days ago
+6
Retailers are actively playing with personalized pricing now. For example, if you go to a website on an Apple device, you might see a higher price. This is because Apple is considered a premium product and those users are inclined to pay more. That is just one example of the data collection and processing going into prices now. The future for consumers is scary.
6
MobyX5212 days ago
+7
individual pricing is exactly what grocery stores and markets are salivating over (or actively planning to roll out)
7
The_Deku_Nut2 days ago
+15
Individual pricing!
I'm so excited, the grocery store finally understands I have a $50 food budget. They're going to lower prices to accommodate me, right?
15
polopolo052 days ago
+5
How do we know if they arent pricing on race or sex which would super illegal. also we need to make this shit legal. one price for all.
5
MobyX5212 days ago
+3
Frankly companies have access to data to make much more sophisticated insights. They don't need to discriminate on things like that. They can make much more sophisticated insights. I've even heard companies might know when you get paid and may adjust prices accordingly.
I mean practically every metric of your life is out there some there in digital space. Your location history, your preferences, how frugal you are, social circle, the things they like, etc... almost anything you can imagine honestly. These are the things companies will use to build models that decide what price to set for you
3
polopolo052 days ago
+2
How ever if those are part of the metrics then the whole metric is illegal. because then they cant prove that isnt discrination. We are going to find out it charges women and minorities more.
2
Meats102 days ago
+2
that is the difference between Dynamic pricing and Surveillance pricing.
2
LeafsWinBeforeIDie2 days ago
+14
The only way we get dynamic pricing out of society is through legislation. When a company uses AI to "know" how much you will pay, it's effectively insider information.
Since laws relied on normal capitalist ideas like supply and demand creating the lowest price naturally and this is an artificial price using personal information, new laws will be necessary. Shoehorning price fixing or insider trading laws will not be sufficient. Unless this is where we want society to go? Are we cheering for the profiteers or consumers here?
14
putsch802 days ago
+48
In Canada, an airline had a similar AI assistant that promised a customer a certain fare. The airline refused to honor it. The man sued and won, with the court finding the airline was bound by what its AI assistant had said.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/16/air-canada-chatbot-lawsuit
48
Warcraft_Fan2 days ago
+13
AI got another airline in trouble. https://www.bbc.com/travel/article/20240222-air-canada-chatbot-misinformation-what-travellers-should-know
One would think AI is no good for legal matter.
13
Master_Dogs2 days ago
+10
This is why I'm sketched out by AI, especially at my workplace which is trying to go all in on AI. We do cyber security, we can't really rely on AI making up a malicious report or whatever. And people are vibe coding features now, so I guess QA better find all the bugs because no one is reviewing these massive code commits (thousands of lines of code, in one case tens of thousands, like wtf).
AI is fine for nonsense, like if I'm curious about a show or can't remember exactly something, it's great at predicting what I meant and I can always go to Google later to verify what the slop machine said.
10
The_MAZZTer2 days ago
+2
I was asked to integrate AI into my app at work. I made sure to do two things:
1. Above any AI conversation is a notice that the user is responsible for verifying any information provided by the AI.
2. When the AI attempts to use tools provided to it to perform unsafe or non-reversible actions I explicitly prompt the user for confirmation outside of the AI chat.
2
SlyJackFox2 days ago
+10
Oh this has been a thing for some time now, where the sites track your IP address to play pricing games in a bid to get you to buy before the price goes up _even more_.
10
HipHopDropper2 days ago
+1704
I remember airlines using dynamic pricing schemes 15 years ago. If you checked the price of a flight, it set a cookie on your browser so if you came back and checked again the price would go up making you feel like you have to buy asap before it went up again. If you cleared cookies, bam the price is back to the original lowest price. Should be illegal.
1704
Trappist12 days ago
+493
Some places have been caught doing it for Mac/AppleOS vs PC/Android, since Apple users have more disposable income on average.
493
Maiyku2 days ago
+176
They must’ve realized I’m poor as f*** already because my prices are consistently cheaper than my mothers by about $100 per flight.
I actually bought her last set of tickets on my phone so she could save money. So I do my best to use the system against them. Lmao.
Even after that, my prices are still cheaper than hers. We half did it as a test to see if it would change afterward. It did not.
176
The-Spirit-of-762 days ago
+82
New jobs for the homeless, Travel Agents.
82
Nolsoth2 days ago
+16
I've actually really great travel agent.
She's saved us thousands over the years and has been super helpful with getting visas etc when traveling to places like China or the US.
16
doodle771 day ago
+2
Didn't they get caught showing higher ticket prices to iPhone users?
2
LetReasonRing1 day ago
+10
"Ok sir, I can give you a slight d******* if you boot up a virtual machine in windows 7, use Internet Explorer 11, log inthrough a VPN based in Sri Lanka, set your currency to rubles and your time zone to Guam, and make sure to do it between 3:14am and 3:42. Also, make sure that you click buy on an even numbered minute or you'll be selected for the profit embiggening fee.
10
ArentWright2 days ago
+11
First time I connected my hand-me-down iPad Pro, my ads went absolutely crazy —factory robots and private jet services. Rich people things I had never heard of before.
11
ithinkitslupis2 days ago
+56
A lot of things should just be federally illegal. Collecting, retaining, sharing, and selling a lot of our data without consent should be illegal which is what enables this at a core level. Dynamic pricing not based on a companies own economics (or certain self-reported categories like kid, senior, student, military, etc) should be illegal. Algorithmic price fixing should be illegal.
I miss the days of Lina Khan at the FTC where some consumer protection measures in the US actually seemed possible. Seems pretty hopeless at least for the next \~3 years at this point.
56
jsta192 days ago
+67
I say it all the time. The airline industry is the laboratory for most of the enshitification that happens in consumer commerce. They have invented unlimited ways of extracting more from us while taking things away that we used to have.
67
DataMin3r2 days ago
+55
Yeah, this was always the play since the early 2000's. The idea that no one knew they did this is kinda wild to me.
55
Chewy792 days ago
+15
Shopping sites would do that too. If it showed a number in stock, it would go down after repeated visits making you think it's going to run out if you didn't buy it now.
15
rif0114122 days ago
+8
You think QVC did this too? They always had an inventory counter, and it it would be easy to assume it was fabricated to create urgency and demand.
8
Vet_Leeber2 days ago
+15
Absolutely. Like legitimately, there’s no question, they did this. It’s the same reason those ads would say “call in the next 30 minutes!” It’s just FOMO, they’re not actually tracking that time.
15
DrSpachemen2 days ago
+6
What's more frustrating is that in some industries, it is. I worked in renters insurance and pricing using anything except costs, reviewed and approved by regulators, was strictly illegal. Wild that we do this for $125 / year renters insurance policies but not healthcare, rent, college tuition, groceries, or even air fare. We aren't regulating the major budget line items for Americans because our entire regulatory framework is stuck to decisions and inertia from a hundred years ago. Price discrimination aka price optimization aka dynamic pricing should be strictly illegal across the board.
6
AshtonCopernicus2 days ago
+7
I once found a domain name available that I actually couldn't believe hadn't been taken. After I did a search for it, I immediately told a friend of mine. Literally less than 10 minutes later I went back to buy it and it already was purchased, and now on sale for $5000. That should also be illegal.
7
heckfyre2 days ago
+6
Pretty sure Delta was bragging doing targeted pricing at one of their quarterly earnings
6
Grutenfreenooder2 days ago
+5
I seem to remember an ad for some VPN, and one of the selling points, besides "watch geolocked content on netflix" was you could get cheaper airfare depending on your location. Like plane tickets will cost less if your browser shows your location as Croatia or something
5
DreamsiclesPlz2 days ago
+221
Surveillance pricing should be illegal and heavily punished. The US desperately needs better consumer protections. Among a trillion other things...
221
IwasThereIsawIt21 day ago
+22
Best I can do is let them do dynamic pricing as to put legislative measures against it is socialist/Marxist
/s obvi
22
HolidayNothing1712 days ago
+97
If that’s true why don’t they know that I’m BROKE
97
NewsCards2 days ago
+417
> Surveillance pricing lets companies use browsing histories, locations and other personal data to set individual prices.
> The lawsuit followed an 18 April exchange on X where a passenger praised JetBlue but said “a $230 increase on a ticket after one day is crazy. I’m just trying to make it to a funeral”.
An airline basically going "this potential customer's browsing history indicates they may be trying to fly out to a funeral, we should increase our ticket price to take advantage of that!" is indicative of everything that's wrong with our society today.
417
cheesenachos122 days ago
+125
Theres no evidence to suggest that Jetblue knew that he was going to a funeral.
It more likely that they saw he was checking frequently and figured he really wanted the flight do they upped the price.
Of course, not an admirable business model either but no need to make it what it isnt.
125
ScottyC332 days ago
+91
It depends what you mean by “know”. Ad services can target you across sites based on what you’ve been doing. Your funeral actions on site A could have placed you in a customer metric group for funeral / urgency / grieving or some other group that could place you in a higher tier of pricing for how JetBlue uses it. So they don’t “know” it’s for a funeral, but they could be targeting based on a metric that uses it as a data point.
91
lets-get-dangerous2 days ago
+46
This is an accurate assessment. I worked as a software developer for one of the big price point software companies in 2010 and our primary customers were airlines. It's not that they're specifically saying "hey, let's find out who needs to attend a funeral and jack up their air fares", it's more like "hey, here are the metrics and browsing patterns for people who *really* need to book a flight", which is still predatory and shitty.
46
T-sigma2 days ago
+7
As you said, they likely get some kind of "price elasticity score" from a third party who they intentionally stay as far away from as possible so when shit hits the fan they can claim ignorance to that party's methods, promise to provide increased oversight of their vendors in the future, and then find a different third party that does the exact same thing while they do the exact same thing.
And when it happens again, it will be a new set of regulators and they will role out the same promise to do better next time.
7
riveal2 days ago
+16
You’d be surprised at how much companies can infer from your info. Especially if they can cross reference with other info aggregators.
16
mattkuru1 day ago
+3
Yep. I remembered reading this article over decade ago and the anecdotal story always stuck with me.
Father sees Target ad mailers being sent to his high school daughter containing only baby stuff. Father goes to Target store to complain to the manager about it being inappropriate to target teenagers with pregnancy products and the store manager has no idea whats going on. Manager calls back a couple days later to apologize and the father responds with “I had a talk with my daughter. It turns out there’s been some activities in my house I haven’t been completely aware of. She’s due in August. I owe you an apology.”
Target then realized it creeps people out to send them ads for personal things they shouldn't even know about and their solution was to continue doing it but put lawnmowers next to diapers and wineglasses next to baby clothes.
This type have tracking has been going on for a long time. I'll even go as far to say regardless of the technical reasons told to us as to why Google Assistant and Siri can't listen in on our lives, there are too many instances of targeted ads coming my way hours after never searching something online and only speaking of it with my phone with me.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2012/02/16/how-target-figured-out-a-teen-girl-was-pregnant-before-her-father-did/
Edit: fixed link
3
jmlinden71 day ago
+5
Airlines already do this without any sort of individualized pricing. If they notice a lot of people in total checking a particular flight, then they will up the price for everyone since they assume that means there's a lot of potential demand.
5
WolfOfLOLStreet2 days ago
+7
Brother, that IS our society. Our lived experience is just a grift of immense scale.
7
rif0114122 days ago
+7
People are selfish shitstains. I asked a hypothetical question at work, and I had an idea that I wouldnt like the answer but I got a lot more people to disappoint me than I bargained for.
Question: If you are selling a used car, and Kelly Blue Book has it priced around $5000. You list it at $5000 and someone calls your number and says they would like to come see it and possibly buy it. So you arrange a meet up.
If a little old lady shows up, and she seems kind of frail and out of it, but she comes with $15,000 and wants to buy the car for $15k according to your ad. You dont know why she made this mistake, but she is ready to pay 15k instead of 5k. Do you sell it for 5 or 15?
Almost half the people I asked said no problem. Take what you can get, its their mistake. Take the 15.
People are D-bags.I suspect even more know to pretend they wouldnt do it, but would still take the win while saying they wouldnt.
Its hard to square what I was taught, against how people actually behave.
7
atooraya2 days ago
+2
Have you seen how much it costs to even have a funeral? Our entire society is based on profits on every aspect of life from birth to death.
2
Dmbender2 days ago
+63
I've always been told to clear history and cookies before shopping for flights because of this.
63
atooraya2 days ago
+41
And use a vpn to book from poor countries.
41
bankrobba2 days ago
+18
So the United States?
18
QuadSeven2 days ago
+23
Whoa whoa whoa, the CITIZENS of the US are poor. The US itself, is not. It's just very very stingy with who gets money. :)
23
gmwdim1 day ago
+7
One billionaire and a thousand peasants average out to everyone being a millionaire.
7
Toastbuns2 days ago
+2
With browser fingerprinting they still know it's you with no cookies incognito.
2
JustaBabyApe2 days ago
+6
Jetblue is my primary airliner, I can travel quite frequently, both for work and personal.
One time I was searching a flight from work and found an amazing deal. Added it to my cart. I then logged into my account and they told me the flight chosen was no longer available. Searched for the flight logged in and it was $60 more.
From that point on, I'd book and just call after to have my rewards id added. Scummy practice, but I love flying jetblue.
6
Honeycove912 days ago
+125
Hey guys, can you remind me what stage of capitalism this is again?
125
trogdorkiller2 days ago
+98
I think my econ teacher called this "balls deep"
98
ComfortableParsley832 days ago
+25
So we are basically at the taint of capitalism?
25
j_knolly1 day ago
+5
At the gooch
5
Comrade_agent2 days ago
+8
3rd trimester
8
atooraya2 days ago
+4
/r/latestagecapitalism
/r/orphancrushingmachine
4
ElundusCaw1 day ago
+4
This isn't late stage capitalism, that was the 80s with Reaganomics.
This is end stage capitalism, it's terminal, there is no stage after this, just a slow inevitable decline into a barren autumn of toxic soil and poisoned sky.
4
LookingforUniAdvice2 days ago
+2
You don't understand, the free market will regulate itself
2
Mixer-30072 days ago
+2
we are like 30 years before Butlerian Jihad
> Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them. - Reverend Mother Gaius Helen Mohiam
2
boilerdam2 days ago
+13
This would shake up the industry and set a precedent. Expecting every airline to jump in defense of Jet Blue because everyone does this and AI will only optimize this further in favor of the airlines. Landmark case if it continues, IMO. Should be fun to follow this and see how far it goes.
13
Strange-Effort13052 days ago
+19
All corporations are tasked with taking as much from us as possible and providing the least in return. That's called capitalism.
19
youvebeengreggd2 days ago
+8
I’m surprised that this is a surprise to anyone. Airlines have been practicing this way for many many years.
8
TheScalpel12 days ago
+12
Next up, ai cameras in the shopping isles. So when you move your arm to grab something the price jumps right before you get a hold of it.
12
Egon882 days ago
+11
The foundational question is: Why is the price disconnected from the cost of delivering the service?
11
cyclemonster1 day ago
+5
The irony of this question is that airlines do not make any money by flying people around. They only make money via their airline rewards points schemes.
5
Egon881 day ago
+2
How do they make money from that, selling the data?
2
cyclemonster1 day ago
+5
By selling the reward miles themselves to banks and others.
[Let's say you get a Delta SkyMiles American Express Gold card](https://www.americanexpress.com/us/credit-cards/card/delta-skymiles-gold-american-express-card/?eep=25330&intlink=US-Axp-Shop-Consumer-VAC-DeltaGold-Prospect-Cardname-CardTile). Every time you swipe your credit card, you accumulate some Delta SkyMiles. They're advertising that it gives twice the miles for grocery and restaurant purchases, and 80,000 bonus miles if you spend $2,000 in your first six months.
In order to give those miles to you for using the card, they have to first purchase them from Delta. Usually at a rate of a few cents per mile. Since Delta is the sole issuer of Delta SkyMiles, and they can print them out of thin air, this is very lucrative for them. [Here's a piece if you're curious.](https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/09/airlines-banks-mileage-programs/675374/)
5
Egon881 day ago
+3
Very interesting, thanks for the link.
3
P0pu1arBr0ws3r1 day ago
+3
Airlines hsve been doing this for years, just with the geolocation of customers.
Its not an issue with airlines alone; its a problem which can reach any online market. It should be required legally that online stores provide the same price and same visible products for sale to any user regardless of their data. Ban per user price adjustments/dynamic pricing.
3
SinfullySinless2 days ago
+8
Oh no. It’s so unfortunate I have -$1 in my bank account and the only thing that could interest me in purchasing a plane ticket is $20 first class seats…
8
maxwellcawfeehaus2 days ago
+14
In case anyone is interested, Biden started prioritizing surveillance pricing regulation before the term ended and the trump admin via FTC has has deprioritized any investigations or regulations on it
14
wanderingpeddlar2 days ago
+4
And another evil aspect of AI rears its head.
They will take as much money as they can, be damned with humanity.
4
[deleted]2 days ago
+3
[deleted]
3
MedSurgNurse2 days ago
+3
Nothing beats a JetBlue lawsuit
3
Peace_n_Harmony2 days ago
+3
FYI, this is also how your boss determines your wages.
3
goten117562 days ago
+3
Delta does the same thing. Really would be helpful to have the government provide consumer protection support…
3
BreadForTofuCheese2 days ago
+3
They won’t be the last company to do this and we need to nip it immediately. If we allow this at all it will become the norm across the board.
3
Dvdcowboy1 day ago
+3
I suspect other airlines do the same. It has been an issue with my last 3 bookings.
3
Mommy4444441 day ago
+3
Actually this is true. Once you tap on a price and look at dates/times, then suddenly at check out the prices rise! Expedia does this as well!
3
symphonyofmonsters1 day ago
+3
when any business uses my ip address to pin point where I live and charge based on the market value of what it costs to live there that is beyond fuckked up just cause I live in x City I have to pay higher prices just cause lol this is straight up bs
3
AllForProgress11 day ago
+3
Amazon does this too. Vpn and clear cookies before you shop Amazon
3
Accomplished_Emu_1981 day ago
+3
This happens with Lyft too. Try shopping around on a few different services at the same time. They’ll jack your prices up sometimes almost double. I know they do it on purpose because people just pay it
3
Hazkellz1 day ago
+3
Maryland JUST made this illegal
3
nvmenotfound1 day ago
+3
this idea of dynamic pricing and charge customers what they think you can afford shit is insane.
3
cleverdabber1 day ago
+3
Happened to me several times. I think all airlines do this.
3
mikemojc1 day ago
+3
Airlines and hotels have practiced dynamic pricing LONG before personalized data was readily available, they will use all available tools toward that end.
Experiment: you and a friend shop for the same flight and hotel for an imaginary trip to a place half way across the country. Be in the same room, but different networks, maybe one on wifi and the other one on cell data or a vpn. You WILL get different pricing.
3
mabhatter23 hr ago
+2
You used to get different pricing on different computers and with different browsers on the same computer. You'll get different prices on Mac versus Windows. It's been a thing for like a decade or more.
Now you can get a higher price because your mom facebooked that your grandma died and you need to fly across the country for the funeral.
2
illiance2 days ago
+6
I know this comment will probably get lost in all the noise - but there are so many misconceptions and out right myths in this thread. It only takes a little bit of googling and research to look at how fares are published, priced, and how they are bucketed, and how users end up seeing different prices depending on the time window that they’re booking in.
There is no cookie tracking impact to prices and certainly no magic AI adjusting prices. Ticketing is extremely complex, look it up for yourself.
https://liveandletsfly.com/jetblue-surveillance-pricing-technology/
Source: worked in tech for several airlines.
Edit: that’s not to say airlines wouldn’t like to do this, if you want to see more detail look up the concept of NDC.
6
crokus_n_al2 days ago
+2
I have no idea why this myth is so prevalent.
2
biggiejgibbs2 days ago
+2
Is using such information to adjust prices illegal or just shady?
2
obalovatyk2 days ago
+2
The AI saying the quiet part out load. The AI keeps fuckin' around and it will be replaced by a human.
2
Mannipx2 days ago
+2
This should be illegal.
2
Bwilderedwanderer2 days ago
+2
Isn't this the whole idea of our capitalist system. "Charge what the market will bear". So charge wealthy people more. Problem is that it will eventually mean less service for poorer people as the companies decide to only cater to the higher price point
2
GamingDragon7772 days ago
+2
I know this came because of that tweet but hasn’t that been common knowledge for years? I feel like it was just a thing that prices change day to day on things like insurance, apartment rentals, hotel costs, and in this case plane tickets.
It’s the entire reason the internet cookie even exists and why a lot of people set up an auto deletes on cache and cookie. Or use an incognito on tab/private browser like Opera and Brave to prevent logged information.
2
postonrddt1 day ago
+2
In a way companies have been doing that for years. That's why some things are priced out per month or the monthly payment if purchased on credit.
2
1zzie1 day ago
+2
*claims*? Is the Guardian too scared to say **admission**? Because the whole thing is based a public tweet they wrote. What's next, *allegedly*? 🐔
2
largececelia1 day ago
+2
I bet they're all doing this. You get interesting results if different people try to us Cheapoair, Kayak, sites like that.
2
Royal_Air_70941 day ago
+2
That's pretty much the equivalent of what I saw Sony was doing with their PlayStation games.
2
CarpeNivem2 days ago
+4
I don't think the right approach here is getting upset, so much as figuring out how to create an alternate online identity who's poor to get dynamically *lower* pricing.
(I mean, these headlines are always about some customers paying more than others, but who are these "others" and how do I make sure I'm one of them?)
4
ConvenienceStoreDiet1 day ago
+3
This is a version of Dynamic Pricing.
Dynamic pricing is adjusting the cost of a product based on a number of factors including demand, supply, customer info, etc.
And I think you'll find few people who argue against the ideas of supply and demand. If there's more supply, you can lower prices. If there's more demand, you may be able to raise prices. Like how the more popular actors on Cameo can charge more because people want their shoutouts vs someone most people won't know. Or if you're an author and are just trying to sell off your book inventory, you lower the prices to make space in your storage. Generally this can be in consumers' favor. And I think there's probably nothing too wrong in seeing that if a big business sells a lot of let's say orange juice in high volume, that they can raise/lower the price regularly because they know orange juice is a big seller and they may have to adjust their prices relative to their inventory because they're on such a large scale.
But the downside is when it's done so rapidly and in some unfair way that doesn't actually reflect supply and demand, it's just a clever way to call it price fixing.
Airlines are notorious for this. People have had issues where they look at a price, look a day later and the price has gone up, then people rush to buy the ticket because they're worried the price is going to change. It's some version of an online haggle to which you nave no clue any of it is happening and have little to no power to haggle back.
There is a much larger danger of this.
Pretty much everyone with a phone or computer has a MASSIVE amount of data on them. That gets sold off to data collectors. With that, you can in real time figure out a lot about this person.
So imagine that example of having a moment of doubt for ANYTHING you buy at the grocery store. That could be determined nowadays by phone movement or location data or maybe someday, if we get dystopian, with in-store cameras with retinal detection. With fast real-time analysis, imagine walking by something, thinking about wanting it, walking back, then getting it and seeing the price increase. Same thing with the airline, now with your groceries. Imagine you're a list-maker. Well, if people know your shopping habits, why not increase your prices on everything. You're not changing your habits. It could create a situation where, for exaggeration's sake, your neighbor spends $3 on bread and you spend $12.
Imagine the AI analysis of you holding an object in your hands creates that feeling of hesitation for the AI. Imagine it determines that doubt for when you leave stuff in your cart for five minutes to talk to a friend, because they want checkout times faster. And it engineers your shopping time based on who you are and how much others are likely to buy when you're there. That's something ripe for discrimination. There could be social engineering to a wild degree. Imagine this being used to discriminate more brazenly. Like if you grow up in a poorer area that may have a larger minority population courtesy of America being America. Imagine just raising prices on those staple items knowing there is no place else to go for cheaper goods nearby, further impoverishing people for buying essentials. Or, using data to engineer behavior. To sell goods that may be unhealthy because other reasonably priced locally-sourced foods don't pay as much for dynamic pricing services as big agro businesses. Imagine because you got a nice phone, because you got sick and had to order Instacart groceries, that now all of your prices go up and down in real time because the system thinks you're rich. With no accountability because people can just blame the AI they have no clue how to control or how it works.
Imagine all of this changes our behavior. Changes what we eat. Who eats what based on who wants to get their goods sold. Our health, out lives, impacted when the richest push us to only be able to use their services, price out competition, then make themselves the only game in town. It's exceptionally dangerous.
All of this is to figure out how to get you to pay more for what you need and are interested in buying with data you are just forced to consent to. It's not the market. It's someone knowing you and your psychology and f****** with you to give them more money, regardless of the consequence to you.
This is for sure some version of price fixing and unfair consumer practices. Maryland right now is on track to ban this kind of pricing they call "surveillance pricing." I really hope people can ban it. It's really dangerous.
3
PigFarmer12 days ago
+3
So why can't we get free tickets???
3
IndubitablEV2 days ago
+2
Not sure how I feel. Airlines are a for profit company. If the top 20% of people are all buying their tickets and the airlines are scraping by, then it just makes sense. But if a millionaire buys an airplane ticket at the same time as a poor person, the millionaire shouldn't be paying hundreds more either just because they bought it from a mac or if they were in gary indiana.
2
userhwon2 days ago
+2
So...rich people have to pay more?
Not sure how badly I feel about that.
But if it's desperate poor people who have to pay more, f*** jetBlue.
2
RedditTA762 days ago
+3
Airlines as a whole do this.
Get on a VPN and get yourself looking like you are in a different country and purchase the ticket from there while on the vpn it will be cheaper than if you are in the states and searching for exact same flights!!
Also,
They do more with the info such as booking seats and such, they will try and put men next to other men rather than a man next to a woman when there are seats to fill .
Such as lets say there is one last first class seat available and there is a waiting list of multiple people. Lets just say the surrounding seats around that seat are women. Lets say there is a man at the top of the waiting list... they will give it to a woman.
They do these TYPES of things because they try to watch how they place people so that they can not be blamed if something goes wrong. Like a man next to a woman type of thing. Its not always but you will see shifting of seats if they were not reserved specifically , for this type of reasoning .
3
Petal1708162 days ago
+1
Social media team is cooked.
1
herecomestherebuttal2 days ago
+1
Dynamic pricing really will be the thing that eventually pushes me over the edge. Purely evil.
1
Cool-Reindeer4092 days ago
+1
I started using google flights to check pricing b4 going to the airline to book. I usually use the link google provides to book as well. If an airline is going to try to up charge me, their pricing won’t be lowest and I won’t be buying from them.
1
bigbjarne2 days ago
+1
Capitalism is so efficient.
1
Emotional_Signal78832 days ago
+1
I flew that shit airline once. They have the rudest staff I've ever interacted with and I once had to change a United ticket in Philadelphia.
1
No_Gear_86182 days ago
+1
That’s the same answer all the airlines give in such a case. I did RYANAIR and it was indeed the same answer when clients complain about the prices.
1
uRtrds2 days ago
+1
Please sue the shit out of them
1
Vaeon2 days ago
+1
So how long until this case is settled out of court for an undisclosed sum?
1
Popular_Wrangler94221 day ago
+1
And spirit gets 500 million of our money. So great corporations have all the power /s
182 Comments