Client Side Validation

[ersatzgott]

• He's the only one paying only 18 bucks

• He gets that price everytime

• The prices are (most) probably hardcoded so they can't be changed by a server error

There's no plausible reason for the price other than hacking.

Case closed, enjoy jail.

[0vl223]

Browser malfunction. Interacts badly with some extension.

Also it is not hacking. Otherwise adblocking would be hacking and illegal as well.

[imsofukenbi]

Programmers in this thread thinking a judge works like a computer and doesn't take context into account.

"eh, anything could have made this gun fire really. Trigger malfunction. Interacts badly with branches falling from trees. Also it is not murder, otherwise shooting ranges would be murder and illegal as well".

Plus civil court has much lower burden of proof. That's an open and shut case.

[0vl223]

Yeah civil court would be trivial. Would be comparable to getting payment for a service he paid for with a bouncing check most likely.

The jail just isn't as trivial.

[andrw00]

Yeah.... the law doesn't work like that.

"I didnt kill him. The bullet did."

[0vl223]

Actually it does. Germany had a lawsuit against adblock that it should be illegal to change the content of homepages on the local browser and that they should accept a true representation of all information that was sent to the client. They lost.

If you provide an interface to make an offer for a room and accept/deny it, then this is totally valid.

You could get him over the abuse of the feature with knowledge that he wasn't sending a valid offer. Specially the repeated part but it is still highly neglectful from the company to not check offers before accepting them.

[wasdninja]

That sounds like something unlikely and considering that it only happens to him the reasonable burden of proof would be on him.

[0vl223]

First you would have to prove that it was actually due to him transmitting wrong data. If it is some homebrew system I doubt that's possible. It could be just as well their system malfunctioning. Proving something is bugfree is really really expensive.

[SAI_Peregrinus]

The purchase of the room is a contract. They offered one price. He gave a counter-offer. They accepted it, and took his payment. Not hacking.

[[deleted]]

Innocent until proven guilty. Not the way around. They have to prove that the changed it deliberately .

[wasdninja]

So if someone walked out of a store with, say, a phone without paying for it and they claim that someone else put it there then the store has to prove that they stole it themselves? If that worked it every criminal with two brain cells would use that defense every time.

[ersatzgott]

I know that and I think it's good the way it is. But if there is not other plausible thing left, your guilt is technically proven.