161–170 of 337 posts
That would sting about as much as me getting a parking ticket. So somehow hacking a competitor is on the same level as parking on a wrong side of the street.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Restitution is one of the comparably less important facets of our legal system (IMO), the important strength of a good legal system is deterrence. Restitution should (again IMO) in fact be severed from judgement, harmed parties should be reimbursed by the government and the government can excise penalties on the offending parties. There are a lot of cases where defendants should be hit with serious fines due to the p…
Aren't people constantly arguing that deterrence is ineffective against individuals, and that rehabilitation is best? I don't take a personal view on these things, but I would imagine that the people arguing for more severe 'punishment' of corporations and white-collar criminals are the ones arguing for lenience in violent and other individual crime.
For example, If a crime is punished with incarceration, it seems unlikely that a person would make a calculated decision that 5 years in prison is an acceptable risk but 10 is not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Restitution is one of the comparably less important facets of our legal system (IMO), the important strength of a good legal system is deterrence. Restitution should (again IMO) in fact be severed from judgement, harmed parties should be reimbursed by the government and the government can excise penalties on the offending parties. There are a lot of cases where defendants should be hit with serious fines due to the p…
Aren't people constantly arguing that deterrence is ineffective against individuals, and that rehabilitation is best? I don't take a personal view on these things, but I would imagine that the people arguing for more severe 'punishment' of corporations and white-collar criminals are the ones arguing for lenience in violent and other individual crime.
Most people learn over time when they are young that it is a losing proposition.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nothing in my comment implied this will happen soon. I don't think a safe, fully automated system will arrive anytime soon. What I was discussing was the supposed ethics of fully automated driving vs human driving when crashes happen. I'm tired of seeing these contrived, hypothetical examples about what an automated car may or may not do in a very specific scenario, that completely ignore the fact that crashes & deat…
But the other commenter’s “corporations will kill people without consequences” isn’t a contrived example. It is just an extrapolation of what happened already when Uber’s self driving car killed a woman because the management and executives decided to manually disable the automatic braking on the car. Maybe crashes and deaths will go down by an order of magnitude one day. But my point is that that’s hardly an argumen…
My view is that even if self-driving car corporations kill people with zero consequences (due to poor laws and poor oversight), as long as they're doing so at lower rates than human drivers are, that's still a net win. It's still not an ideal scenario, because those deaths could be further reduced under the threat of real consequences. But by and large, it'd still be better than what we have today.
If they're killing people during testing of experimental tech that hasn't been approved for general use (like the Uber case you mentioned), they need to be smacked down hard. If they're killing people at a higher rate than human drivers, they should not be approved for general use in the first place. If they're approved, but release an update that ends up killing more people, they again need to be smacked down hard, with the update immediately reverted.
Compare this slap on the wrist to Aaron Swartz: Federal prosecutors later charged him with two counts of wire fraud and eleven violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act,[15] carrying a cumulative maximum penalty of $1 million in fines, 35 years in prison, asset forfeiture, restitution, and supervised release. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Swartz
> Ticketmaster has agreed to pay a $10 million criminal fine Live Nation is worth $16 Billion. This is like a person with a $100k net worth having to pay a $62 fine, basically an expensive parking ticket. They might as well tell them to write "I will not hack my competitors" on the blackboard 100 times.
Worth noting that TicketMaster also paid $110MM to "acquire" SongKick in order to settle the original (civil) lawsuit.
Compare this slap on the wrist to Aaron Swartz: Federal prosecutors later charged him with two counts of wire fraud and eleven violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act,[15] carrying a cumulative maximum penalty of $1 million in fines, 35 years in prison, asset forfeiture, restitution, and supervised release. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Swartz
So Anthony Levandowski got 18 months in prison for stealing self driving car secrets from Waymo (Alphabet) and passing them to Uber. Live Nation did $10B in revenue in 2017 and they're fined 0.1% of annual revenue for a CFAA violation which has sentences up to 20 years for individuals.
The individual who did the hacking was criminally prosecuted and pled guilty to a CFAA violation https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nyed.439451...
Compare this slap on the wrist to Aaron Swartz: Federal prosecutors later charged him with two counts of wire fraud and eleven violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act,[15] carrying a cumulative maximum penalty of $1 million in fines, 35 years in prison, asset forfeiture, restitution, and supervised release. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Swartz
It is one of the great imbalances in the justice system where technically corporations are people, but criminally don't face anywhere near the same levels of punishment.
Senators make millions on insider relief package info? Who cares. You challenge the powerful by revealing embarrassing secrets? Enemy of the state, you're gonna lose everything or at the very least many years of your life in legal limbo.
The power balance in many cases could be the real issue, everyday people just need to (somehow) get way more empowered.
Compare this slap on the wrist to Aaron Swartz: Federal prosecutors later charged him with two counts of wire fraud and eleven violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act,[15] carrying a cumulative maximum penalty of $1 million in fines, 35 years in prison, asset forfeiture, restitution, and supervised release. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Swartz
It is one of the great imbalances in the justice system where technically corporations are people, but criminally don't face anywhere near the same levels of punishment.
Perhaps some exceptions for people who could not be expected to understand the law, for example an untrained retail staff being tricked in to violating laws usually only understood by management or legal teams.