Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Personal Toll of Whistle-Blowing

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 121 posts

Re: The Personal Toll of Whistle-Blowing

#41

Post by ramblerouser »

chrisbennet wrote: post #39
ramblerouser wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is totally incorrect. The high conviction rate is a result of extremely high maximum sentences. People who are 100% innocent often plead guilty after being threatened with a 30-year prison sentence that would be only 1 or 2 years under local law. Many federal crimes are unconstitutional and deliberately vague, like "lying (not volunteering incriminating evidence) to an investigator" and "mail fraud" which is jus…

I assume whomever downvoted You has forgotten what happened to Aaron Schwartz.

Or maybe puts on tin foil hat they know exactly what happened to him.

Re: The Personal Toll of Whistle-Blowing

#42

Post by magduf »

Gibbon1 wrote: post #31
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two points: of course you can put a price on being away from your family. It's called a job, a millions of people do it all the time, often for long, extended periods (e.g. the military, expeditions, etc.) Being in prison is obviously extreme, but if getting out with several lifetimes of wealth means you never have to work again, could easily be a fair trade off. Second, he went to jail because he committed crimes fr…

> Two points: of course you can put a price on being away from your family. It's called a job In all due respect this is an opinion born of a sheltered life.

No, it sounds like your opinion is born of a sheltered life. You're probably thinking something along the lines of a job being enriching, fulfilling, etc. Sorry, but that's a minority of workers; for most people, a job is just daily drudgery they do to pay the rent, nothing more. It really is just a transaction where you trade your time for money.

Re: The Personal Toll of Whistle-Blowing

#43

Post by Retra »

magduf wrote: post #40
Retra wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>look at Snowden. The guy ruined his own life and nobody still gives a damn. Was it worth it? i dont think so. If it wasn't worth it, you wouldn't know his name, and you wouldn't be talking about it today. Does that count for nothing to you?

Whether it's "worth it" is completely subjective, and differs from person to person based on their values. You seem to value having your name remembered; i.e., you value fame, and you're projecting that onto Snowden. I don't know what Snowden values, but assuming he values fame as you do (or that the person you're responding to does) makes no sense. If the person you responded to values only financial security and a…

>You seem to value having your name remembered; i.e., you value fame, and you're projecting that onto Snowden.

Total bullshit. Nothing I said implies any of this.

What I value is that we can have a discussion premised on facts. Snowden is a real person who exists, and we can discuss what he did and what the consequences are. The alternative is that we discuss a hypothetical whistleblower and have all our reasoning dismissed as fear-mongering or paranoia. That is what I value.

>Whether it's "worth it" is completely subjective, and differs from person to person based on their values.

To be clear, it is worth it to me to have Snowden be a whistleblower because I had to pay nothing for the privilege. There are not many people who would say it is not worth it for someone else to be a whistleblower unless they think whistleblowing is inherently objectionable.

Re: The Personal Toll of Whistle-Blowing

#44

Post by daveFNbuck »

Retra wrote: post #24
readhn wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

pretty typical. look at Snowden. The guy ruined his own life and nobody still gives a damn. Was it worth it? i dont think so. He definitely should have kept quiet even if it was against his own personal beliefs. It sucks but it is what it is. HSBC got slapped on the wrist for laundering cartel money. "If you’re suspected of drug involvement, America takes your house; HSBC admits to laundering cartel billions, loses f…

>look at Snowden. The guy ruined his own life and nobody still gives a damn. Was it worth it? i dont think so. If it wasn't worth it, you wouldn't know his name, and you wouldn't be talking about it today. Does that count for nothing to you?

Would you ruin your life if it guaranteed I'd know your name and mention you 6 years later as an example of someone who ruined their life without achieving anything?

Re: The Personal Toll of Whistle-Blowing

#45

Post by whatshisface »

Aeolun wrote: post #36
whatshisface wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He definitely should have kept quiet even if it was against his own personal beliefs. That argument for moral complacency is largely self-fulfilling, because if nobody thinks that one person defecting will change anything, you'll never get more than one defector at once, and nothing will ever change. In that way everyone will march in lockstep to hell and deserve every bit of the torture that's waiting for them. Th…

You can stop littering without being fucked over by it very easily.

If you stop littering you'll have to carry trash around for longer, which is a personal cost. Littering is a miniature analogy, with and smaller table stakes. The hedonistic difference between making a good salary selling out your countrymen and hiding from your government in Russia is pretty big, a lot bigger than carrying a chip bag around, but the moral difference scales in proportion.

A common fallacy is thinking that you only have to be a good person for matters less than $100. I can't explain it or present an argument in its favor but it is a very common sentiment.

Re: The Personal Toll of Whistle-Blowing

#46

Post by snarf21 »

e40 wrote: post #33
snarf21 wrote: post #29

I keep thinking that in cases of any real size that these people should be put into witness relocation programs. Additionally, continue to pay them their current salary but not require them to work. We need people who know to speak out and therefore need to protect them.

Additionally, continue to pay them their current salary but not require them to work. An unintended consequence of this might be that people make false allegations. It's tough to find the right balance. Maybe they get a stipend to live on, and the money is put into escrow for when the case is resolved.

Yeah, the presumption is that entry in the program is based on them sharing documents and other data with authorities that pass some level of scrutiny.

Re: The Personal Toll of Whistle-Blowing

#47

Post by Buttons840 »

snarf21 wrote: post #29

I keep thinking that in cases of any real size that these people should be put into witness relocation programs. Additionally, continue to pay them their current salary but not require them to work. We need people who know to speak out and therefore need to protect them.

Or give them a small percentage of what they save tax payers. A whistle-blower who saves tax payers billions should be set for life.

Guess not all whistle-blowing is about stealing money, but I best most of it is.

Re: The Personal Toll of Whistle-Blowing

#49

Post by Buttons840 »

krageon wrote: post #30
SuperGent wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When asked about the Freedom fine, [Patel] responded, "I decided to take it as a cost of doing business." This is the problem, why should you not take dubiously legal or moral action, if there isn't a significant deterrent?

Because you shouldn't be an asshole. People aren't animals unless they have some sword of Damocles hanging over them keeping them in line, it is a conscious choice to do the wrong thing.

Sure, many good people follow the law because they're not assholes, but they were out advertised and out grown by one asshole who broke the law and was never punished.

On a micro scale, not wanting to be an asshole will cause people to follow the laws. On a macro scale, the only way to make people follow the law is to make breaking the law costly.

Re: The Personal Toll of Whistle-Blowing

#50

Post by macintux »

Buttons840 wrote: post #47
snarf21 wrote: post #29

I keep thinking that in cases of any real size that these people should be put into witness relocation programs. Additionally, continue to pay them their current salary but not require them to work. We need people who know to speak out and therefore need to protect them.

Or give them a small percentage of what they save tax payers. A whistle-blower who saves tax payers billions should be set for life. Guess not all whistle-blowing is about stealing money, but I best most of it is.

> Or give them a small percentage of what they save tax payers

That's exactly what the law encourages.

Post reply on HN