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

So thieves broke into your storage unit again

oldvcr.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 317 posts

Re: So thieves broke into your storage unit again

#111

Post by [deleted] »

tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #54
Magi604 wrote: post #5

Good old insurance companies, always looking for ways to get out of having to pay out for claims. I mean, I guess it is their job, so can't really fault them for that.

No, their job is to accurately calculate the expected value of the losses, then collect a premium slightly higher than the expected value, turning an unpredictable, potentially high loss into a predictable small one. Reverse gambling, basically. 1. Know your insurance contract, know what's actually covered and what not (sometimes describing the same facts in two different yet truthful ways will result in your claim b…

[deleted]

Re: So thieves broke into your storage unit again

#112

Post by crazygringo »

smeeger wrote: post #108
crazygringo wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don't have space in your apartment or home for items you want to keep, then where else are you supposed to store things? Obviously it's up to you to figure out if it makes financial sense. But for people in urban areas with small apartments, it can be a heckuva lot cheaper than upgrading to an apartment with another bedroom.

its almost as if people really shouldnt live inside glorified cubicles… as if they should in something larger. and maybe have a space with grass and also a little accessory structure with a door large enough to fit a vehicle. such a thing doesnt exist unfortunately

My nearby park has tons of space with grass.

And why would I want space for a vehicle when I have public transportation that is much faster?

Re: So thieves broke into your storage unit again

#113

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

bombcar wrote: post #107
lifeisstillgood wrote: post #62

I’m stunned by the idea of making the pawn shop whole. As I understand UK law, if you buy stolen goods, the original owner can just claim it back and you take the loss - simply to discourage buying with knowledge it was stolen. I guess the pawn shop would go out of business but it does seem if you let them act as a fence you are solving for the wrong problem

They're likely trying to prevent the situation where the pawn shops become entirely uncooperative, but there's still a tragedy of the commons situation occurring.

This is a periodic public service announcement that there is not, and never has been "a tragedy of the commons situation". Even the author of the concept, Garret Hardin, has acknowledged that he made mistakes in his understanding and research.

Resources held in common have historically been subject to significant control via social, civic and legalistic processes. What is typically referred to as "a tragedy of the commons situation" never turns out to be what Hardin originally suggested - individuals taking advantage of the lack of controls. Instead it is invariably individuals who first dismantle the control systems in place in order to pursue their own selfish ends.

This matters because the "tragedy of the commons" concept has been used to suggest (successfully) that communities cannot manage commonly held resources, which is false. What is true is that communities frequently cannot manage a sustained attack by selfishness and greed against their own systems of management, and that's a very, very different problem.

Re: So thieves broke into your storage unit again

#114

Post by darkwizard42 »

smeeger wrote: post #106

he gives a list of things to do or consider. supporting laws and politicians that catch and punish criminals effectively is somehow not on that list…

The items he listed have extremely direct impact on YOUR ability to reduce theft. You just suggested something very broad. I might make the point that punishing criminals effectively will potentially reduce overall crime, but has no direct reduction on the crime in the article. It would be very hard to show any law which specifically targets the type of crime OP posted about, but I'm open if you have seen legislation proposed or enacted which targets this crime in a major city.

Re: So thieves broke into your storage unit again

#115

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

bko wrote: post #104

The indifference of this by everyone involved is infuriating. This criminal activity is treated as natural as rain, just something us 98% of people have to endure. It's important to remember that accepting crime, especially low level crime like this is a policy choice. It's the same people doing the same crimes over and over. They have run ins with the law and they just get let go to continue terrorizing the rest of…

The US already incarcerates vastly more people than most comparable nations. And yet this level of incarceration does not seem to have had the effect you want.

It seems that you imagine that the crime is somehow intrinsic to the current group of people committing it, and that by removing them from society, their behavior would not recur.

While there are arguments for this sort of thing, it is also based on a wilfull misreading (or no-reading) of what we know about the reasons why people commit crime at all.

Re: So thieves broke into your storage unit again

#116

Post by samatman »

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #109
smeeger wrote: post #106

he gives a list of things to do or consider. supporting laws and politicians that catch and punish criminals effectively is somehow not on that list…

What laws do you believe would be more effective a catching and punishing criminals? AFAIK, there is reasonably clear evidence that deterrence has a very low impact on this sort of crime, so laws based on deterring through fear-of-sentence would not seem to be likely to have much effect. What is it that you're proposing/desiring?

Theft is an organized crime.

That tweaker/junkie who steals your bike, breaks into your storage unit, whatever? He's not an organization man. The dude with a standing offer to pay twenty bucks for the bike, or ten if it's shitty? He's with an organization.

What I propose is that we start enforcing the law and treat theft as a crime, not a nuisance or fact of life. Roll up the organizations, toss them in prison, and repeat over and over until the message gets out.

This isn't a problem which can be solved at the tweaker level. What we can do, and simply choose not to, is get every single dude with twenty bucks or a baggie to trade for your bike. All that's lacking is the political will.

Re: So thieves broke into your storage unit again

#117

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

samatman wrote: post #116
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What laws do you believe would be more effective a catching and punishing criminals? AFAIK, there is reasonably clear evidence that deterrence has a very low impact on this sort of crime, so laws based on deterring through fear-of-sentence would not seem to be likely to have much effect. What is it that you're proposing/desiring?

Theft is an organized crime. That tweaker/junkie who steals your bike, breaks into your storage unit, whatever? He's not an organization man. The dude with a standing offer to pay twenty bucks for the bike, or ten if it's shitty? He's with an organization. What I propose is that we start enforcing the law and treat theft as a crime, not a nuisance or fact of life. Roll up the organizations, toss them in prison, and r…

What's also lacking is any evidence of any kind that this would have the effect you desire.

Re: So thieves broke into your storage unit again

#118

Post by smeeger »

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #109
smeeger wrote: post #106

he gives a list of things to do or consider. supporting laws and politicians that catch and punish criminals effectively is somehow not on that list…

What laws do you believe would be more effective a catching and punishing criminals? AFAIK, there is reasonably clear evidence that deterrence has a very low impact on this sort of crime, so laws based on deterring through fear-of-sentence would not seem to be likely to have much effect. What is it that you're proposing/desiring?

[flagged]

Re: So thieves broke into your storage unit again

#119

Post by bko »

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #115
bko wrote: post #104

The indifference of this by everyone involved is infuriating. This criminal activity is treated as natural as rain, just something us 98% of people have to endure. It's important to remember that accepting crime, especially low level crime like this is a policy choice. It's the same people doing the same crimes over and over. They have run ins with the law and they just get let go to continue terrorizing the rest of…

The US already incarcerates vastly more people than most comparable nations. And yet this level of incarceration does not seem to have had the effect you want. It seems that you imagine that the crime is somehow intrinsic to the current group of people committing it, and that by removing them from society, their behavior would not recur. While there are arguments for this sort of thing, it is also based on a wilfull…

Explain to me why someone that's been arrested 15 times should be let go to terrorize others.

That person that has been arrest 15 times before cannot continue to commit crime if he's behind bars. You don't need to "read" the data to come to this conclusion.

People commit crime in large part because they can get away with it.

It's not complicated.

Re: So thieves broke into your storage unit again

#120

Post by pkteison »

hansvm wrote: post #87
gruez wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's still basically the same thing if you take into account the opportunity cost of the premiums rather than the raw dollar value.

Off-topic, I find people have a similar misunderstanding of FAANG compensation. Functionally, the salary + RSU + bonus + refresh structure is equivalent to a larger salary (enough to cover fees for the following procedure) where you take out 4-yr loans every year to invest in the company stock. With that in mind, listing the realized stock growth when describing total compensation always felt a bit disingenuous.

Nobody will give you an unsecured loan for 100 percent of your salary, but tech companies will happily grant you rsus for that much.
Post reply on HN