this post was submitted on 13 Mar 2024
318 points (98.2% liked)

News

21860 readers
3483 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

A Nebraska woman allegedly found a lucrative quirk at a gas station pump — double-swipe the rewards card and get free gas!

Unfortunately for her, you can’t do that, prosecutors said. The 45-year-old woman was arrested March 6 and faces felony theft charges accusing her of a crime that cost the gas station nearly $28,000.

Prosecutors say the woman exploited the system over a period of several months. Police learned of the problem in October when the loss-prevention manager at Bosselman Enterprises reported that the company’s Pump & Pantry in Lincoln had been scammed.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 3volver@lemmy.world 102 points 4 months ago (4 children)

If you're poor and you exploit a loophole you receive a felony theft charge. If you're rich enough you receive no repercussions and possibly a bonus.

[–] BreakDecks@lemmy.ml 40 points 4 months ago (4 children)

No, this isn't a loophole. She found a way to put the pump into maintence mode and set the price to zero. "The computer let me do it" isn't much of an excuse. The self checkout at the grocery store lets me tare a steak like it's bananas, but I'd definitely expect shopplifting charges if I got caught tricking the machine to charge me $0.40/lb for steak so I could fill my bag with steaks. There would be plenty of evidence that what I did was intentional and dishonest.

She exploited this glitch for $28k worth of gas in just 7 months, presumably for profit. That's way more gas than a single vehicle would consume in that time.

This wasn't a case of just paying what the screen said she owed. This was a case of gaining unauthorized access to the computer and adjusting the price to zero so she could steal at scale.

[–] 3volver@lemmy.world 26 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Yet when 2008 happened they got a bail out and a pat on the back. Trick a machine? Felony theft charge. Trick the American people? Bail out.

[–] BreakDecks@lemmy.ml 9 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Two things can be true, and you can agree with one and disagree with the other.

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 7 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Very well. Please clear up the misunderstanding and say the words "the bailouts should never have happened and everyone involved in that disaster should have faced felony charges"

[–] MedicPigBabySaver@lemmy.world 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Oooo, I wanna read them type that. LOL.

[–] waz@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I'm not them, I just want to type that anyway.

The bailouts should never have happened and everyone involved in that disaster should have faced felony charges.

It felt good to say, thanks.

[–] SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca 3 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The bailouts should never have happened and everyone involved in that disaster should have faced felony charges.

Now, can you say the words "anyone that steals things of more than $10,000 in value should face felony charges"?

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world -1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

anyone that steals things of more than $10,000 in value should face felony charges.

She didn't.

[–] BreakDecks@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)
[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world -1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Nope. She broke the law in the sense that all those Wall Street types broke the law with mortgage backed securities.

Why are you defending the two tier justice system?

[–] BreakDecks@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I'm not, it sounds like we are in agreement that she committed a serious crime. It's a shame that the Wall Street types get away with it, but you seem fine with that?

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world -1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I don't she committed a serious crime. Sorry the million people who died in the pointless Iraq war is what I consider a serious crime.

[–] BreakDecks@lemmy.ml 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

afraid_of_zombies don't change the topic challenge (impossible).

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago

I will if I want

[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 16 points 4 months ago

Did the computer let those mortgage backed securities get sold to pension funds? Yes? Guess it isn't an excuse

[–] whoisearth@lemmy.ca 8 points 4 months ago (1 children)

She got greedy. Back when a buddy and I administered our SWIFT platform there were a couple of well publicized exploits of the system for millions. We discussed how easy it would be to write a script to randomly skim a fraction of a cent off of transactions over a long period of time, just don't get greedy. No one cares about rounding errors.

If this lady stuck to random fillups for free once every couple of months she probably could have flew under the radar for years and more importantly had a better claim to ignorance if caught.

[–] reflectedodds@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

This is just the plot of office space

[–] whoisearth@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)
[–] BreakDecks@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

You should watch it because this truly is the plot.

[–] whoisearth@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I'll put it on my list. British or American or both?

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Office Space, not The Office.

[–] whoisearth@lemmy.ca 2 points 4 months ago

Oh shit that I have seen why have I not drawn the parallel before?! Lol

[–] Crozekiel@lemmy.zip 8 points 4 months ago

Not "presumably for profit", definitely for profit. The article mentions one person that paid her $500 for about $700 worth of fuel in that 6 months because she was told it was a discount card. She was literally charging other people for the gas directly. And 7400 gallons of gas in 6 months, that's well over 100k miles with a low ball estimate for fuel economy. She probably pocketed nearly 20k cash in that time.

[–] lagomorphlecture@lemm.ee 23 points 4 months ago (2 children)

At first I was with you but I was curious how she used $28,000 worth of gas and I'm kinda not with you anymore. I mean, has is expensive but let's be realistic, no poor person is buying a year's wages on gas over 6 months lol

"All told, the card was used 510 times, and more than 7,400 gallons of gas were pumped for free, the probable cause statement said." The article also says she was letting other people pay her to use her card to get gas - so the gas pumped out free and they paid her a portion of what the gas would have been if they had paid the actual pump. That's actually not the kind of thing I can really defend as just putting the poor people down.

[–] Gabu@lemmy.world 20 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Maybe they should fix their shitty ass software instead of arresting her?

[–] Atomic@sh.itjust.works -2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Surely you don't actually believe that the police officers that does the arresting are working a secondary job as software developers?

[–] Gabu@lemmy.world 13 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Surely you don't believe I give a shit - the police work for the capital, and the capital wants to punish her.

[–] Atomic@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 months ago

The police works for the government. The government operates by laws. The woman clearly, knowingly, and with intent, set out to commit fraud.

No. There's no doubt in my mind that you give shit about what's actually factual. That much is obvious.

[–] EatATaco@lemm.ee -2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

They didn't arrest her. The cops did. If she didn't want to be arrested, she probably shouldn't have stolen tens of thousands of dollars worth of gas. She's a thief, plain and simple. We can rail against a justice system that allows the rich to get away with crimes, while also recognizing that this woman is just a thief and there is no need to defend her.

[–] GeneralVincent@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago

You say thief, I say opportunist

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

While you're right, also still sounds like schemes rich business leaders get a wag of a finger over. So it's not so much about it being too harsh on her, but instead how malicious rich person schemes earn too much leniency.

[–] reflectedodds@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago

This is what I thought at first too. But after thinking about it more, it kind of falls into cybercrime. I can imagine hearing something like this on darknet diaries.