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

Accountability Sinks

250bpm.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 407 posts

Re: Accountability Sinks

#191

Post by watwut »

EasyMark wrote: post #180
xg15 wrote: post #49

One example that's missing from the list is the TV series 24. A recurring plot point was that, yes, of course torture is bad and it's against the rules and we don't do it, etc etc, but it just so happens that here is such an exceptional, unprecedented, deeply urgent emergency situation where we need to have the information now or horrible things will happen, we need the hero who breaks the rules and goes on torturing…

There is no connection between Ab Ghraib and 24, a fictional TV series. If you think this stuff didn't happen before 24 then I'd like some proof. TV reflects reality (or a very stretched version of it), not the other way around, and 24 also wasn't the first version of such a thing. It's just that Abu G they used people who were young and not professionals so it leaked. It has probably been happening as long as the US…

In real world, that stuff happens to innocent people, to people guilty of completely different or lesser crimes and cops get out a lot of false claiks they use against whoever they dislike.In real world, it happens as a power trip with no saving factor.

In real world, it happens to cover up crimes cop did themselves or to facilitate them.

That is where the lie is.

Re: Accountability Sinks

#192

Post by toast0 »

dendodge wrote: post #97
cheschire wrote: post #36

I always remind myself when I have to go to the DMV[0] that I should plan on leaving with nothing more than another action or set of actions to take. I never enter the DMV expecting to complete a process, and the workers behind the counter always have this visible, visceral response when I DONT lose my fucking mind at their response to something. When I continue to be pleasant and understanding it’s like they suddenl…

Off-topic, but since you mention it, I've always been confused about what Americans always seem to be doing at the DMV. It seems to be a staple of pop culture that people are always there and the queue is always very long, but I've never known what anyone is actually trying to achieve. The DVLA in the UK doesn't have a high-street presence. I took my driving test once, then received my driving licence in the post. Wh…

In my experience, the DMV (or whatever its called) likes to see you in person for license renewals every so often. Get a new photo, make sure you can see the eye chart.

I've always gone into the DMV when I purchased a vehicle from a private party. In California, it has taken me a couple visits; the first visit with the title and sale documentation, the second with the emissions test documentation that the seller was legally suppossed to provide at the time of the sale but practically, the buyer must provide to register the vehicle. Maybe you can do this by mail, but if you do it in person, you walk out with documents so you can legally drive the car. If you buy a car from a dealer, they take care of this paperwork for you, which used to mean having someone stand in line at the DMV and process a bunch of transactions, but now they can typically do it electronically.

If you move to another state, you need to get a new license and retitle and reregister your car; this usually happens in person, and most states have a requirement to do it in under a month. If your car has a loan, expect multiple trips to get it registered... the first trip will let you know what you need from the finance company; the second will bring that back and get registration; then when you eventually pay off the loan and get the title, you'll need to bring that in so you can get the title issued in your current state.

Re: Accountability Sinks

#193

Post by the_af »

scotty79 wrote: post #134
Thorrez wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meat costs a lot to produce. We eat it because it tastes good, not because it's convenient.

No. Dogs also taste good but they are way less convenient to raise per kilogram of meat then cows. That's one of the main reasons we rather eat cows, pigs and poultry than dogs, dolphins, squirrels or guinea pigs. People do a lot of expensive and wasteful things just because they are convenient in many domains of life. Meat isn't tasty. If it was you wouldn't always eat it fried almost to a char with salt and spices.…

> If it was you wouldn't always eat it fried almost to a char with salt and spices.

I agree with the rest of your comment, except this.

You eat your meat "always fried to a char"? What? Also, I barely add some salt to it. Many people add way too much salt though.

Re: Accountability Sinks

#194

Post by UncleMeat »

EasyMark wrote: post #180
xg15 wrote: post #49

One example that's missing from the list is the TV series 24. A recurring plot point was that, yes, of course torture is bad and it's against the rules and we don't do it, etc etc, but it just so happens that here is such an exceptional, unprecedented, deeply urgent emergency situation where we need to have the information now or horrible things will happen, we need the hero who breaks the rules and goes on torturing…

There is no connection between Ab Ghraib and 24, a fictional TV series. If you think this stuff didn't happen before 24 then I'd like some proof. TV reflects reality (or a very stretched version of it), not the other way around, and 24 also wasn't the first version of such a thing. It's just that Abu G they used people who were young and not professionals so it leaked. It has probably been happening as long as the US…

There is a direct connection.

Antonin Scalia was one of the architects of substantial limitations on the 8th amendment and was a key figure in a number of cases specifically about extraordinary rendition and "enhanced interrogation."

Scalia has multiple times in public referenced Jack Bauer as an argument for why prohibitions on torture are unworkable. At a panel on the very topic, Scalia responded to "Thankfully, security agencies in all our countries do not subscribe to the mantra 'What would Jack Bauer do?'" with "Jack Bauer saved Los Angeles" and "are you going to convict Jack Bauer?"

Re: Accountability Sinks

#195

Post by macNchz »

t_luke wrote: post #153

The conclusion of Davies' second extract — about e.g. being bumped off a flight — is recognisable but the conclusions are actually wrong. The situation in these cases is actually more subtle. The person you're speaking to does normally have some capacity to escalate in exceptional cases. But they can't do it as a matter of course, and have to maintain publicly that it's actually impossible. The people who get what th…

Having been on both sides of this—working behind a counter and answering phones at various jobs long ago, and being someone who often surprises family and friends with my ability to extract good outcomes from customer service—I think it’s somewhat of a misconception that being as unpleasant as possible is actually effective at getting results.

I fully understand that the godawful CS mazes many companies set up wind up pushing people in that direction, and that it feels like the only option, but I believe quite strongly that being patient and polite but persistent winds up being much more effective than being unpleasant.

As a small case in point: I worked summers in a tiny ice cream shop, most of the time solo. The shop had a small bathroom for employees only—it was through a food prep area where customers were not allowed by health code. I had some leeway to let people back there as it was pretty low-risk, and I would in the evenings when no other businesses were open, or if a little kid was having an emergency. People who were unpleasant from the get-go when placing their order, however, were simply told we had no bathroom at all. People who started shouting when I told them I wasn’t supposed to let people back there (not uncommon!) and suggested a nearby business were never granted exceptions.

Re: Accountability Sinks

#196

Post by oleggromov »

freehorse wrote: post #147
Pamar wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just an oversimplification though. If you had any experience about travel industry (or logistics) you would understand things much better. Here is an example for you (from logistics): Sending a truck from Berlin to - say - Györ may cost 3 times less than sending the same truck from Györ to Berlin - even on the same exact date. Is this because shipping companies try to make money out of nothing, for you?

And what is the actual explanation that actually makes sense (apart from profit increase)? I have booked flights A->B->C and got down at B because that was cheaper than booking A->B only. Not sure where this all makes sense at all.

It seems to me that since airlines can't force you on a plane except for taking your luggage hostage, you're free to drop as long of a 'tail' as you wish. I'm wondering whether they'd put you on a black list or something for doing this consistently.

Re: Accountability Sinks

#197

Post by the_af »

Thorrez wrote: post #85

> And it turns out that the German soldiers faced surprisingly mild consequences for disobeying unlawful orders. Huh. Franz Jägerstätter was executed for refusing to fight in the war.

There are many documented and studied cases where orders to carry out massacres which were disobeyed carried no harm to the German who refused.

Mostly demotion or transfer to a different area, but no execution or jail time. Sometimes not even that.

I'm talking about not taking part in massacres (e.g. shooting unarmed women and children, locking people in a barn and setting it on fire, etc), not about refusing to fight, cowardice, aiding the enemy or actual treason.

Re: Accountability Sinks

#198

Post by werrett »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #66

My go-to example of a whole mesh of "accountability sinks" is... cybersecurity. In the real world, this field is really not about the tech and math and crypto - almost all of it is about distributing and dispersing liability through contractual means. That's why you install endpoint security tools. That's why you're forced to fulfill all kinds of requirements, some of them nonsensical or counterproductive, but necess…

This is the ultimate nihilistic take on security.

Yes, 'cyber' security has devolved to box checking and cargo culting in many orgs. But what's your counter on trying to fix the problems that every tech stack or new SaaS product comes without of the box?

For most people when their Netflix (or HN) password gets leaked that means every email they've sent since 2004 is also exposed. It might also mean their 401k is siphoned off. So welcome the annoying and checkbox-y MFA requirements.

If you're an engineer cutting code for a YC startup -- Who owns the dependancy you just pulled in? Are you or your team going to track changes (and security bugs) for it in 6 months? What about in 2 or 3 years?

Yes, 'cyber' security brings a lot of annoying checkboxes. But almost all of them are due to externalities that you'd happily blow past otherwise. So -- how do we get rid annoying checkboxes and ensure people do the right thing as a matter of course?

Re: Accountability Sinks

#199

Post by dghlsakjg »

euroderf wrote: post #59
xg15 wrote: post #49

One example that's missing from the list is the TV series 24. A recurring plot point was that, yes, of course torture is bad and it's against the rules and we don't do it, etc etc, but it just so happens that here is such an exceptional, unprecedented, deeply urgent emergency situation where we need to have the information now or horrible things will happen, we need the hero who breaks the rules and goes on torturing…

Wasn't 24 cited by Cheney when he was defending USA-as-torturer ?

Antonio Scalia name dropped Jack Bauer.

Re: Accountability Sinks

#200

Post by FabHK »

hliyan wrote: post #133

A few things came to mind as I read this. 1) About 8 years ago I was gifted a copy of Ray Dalio's Principles . Being a process aficionado who thought the way to prevent bureaucracy was to ground process in principles, I was very excited. But halfway through I gave up. All the experience, the observations, the case studies that had led Dalio to each insight, had been lost in the distillation process. The reader was on…

2) The US is considered a common law jurisdiction.
Post reply on HN