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

It's not a crime if we do it with an app

pluralistic.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 640 posts

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#271

Post by scarface_74 »

ryandrake wrote: post #236
scarface_74 wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So should every one who owns stock in a company - including mutual funds go to jail?

Maybe? It should at least be debatable, not taboo, to consider. One's investment into a criminal enterprise could arguably be contributing to or encouraging that crime. Having this nearly-impenetrable corporate veil that shields decision-makers, footsoldiers, and funders (both institutional and retail investors) from consequences of their actions seems like the extreme end of a spectrum that should be explored. But w…

So you propose putting 40% of the population of the US who have money invested in the S&P 500 in jail?

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#272

Post by gruez »

bongodongobob wrote: post #220
gruez wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Contrast that to how individuals get the hammer put down on them by the justice system if they so much as fart in the wrong room. The lesson from the last 50 years should be: If you want to commit a crime and get away with it, do it as a corporation. That's because most crimes "individuals" do are straightforwardly illegal and easy to prosecute, whereas the "crime if a corporation does it" are not. It's not any diff…

That's like saying "you can tell this is an Aspen by the way it is". The idea is that we should have control over those laws dude. We didn't just spawn in a video game and are forced to deal with it. "Cause that's what Dad says" isn't how it's supposed to be.

>The idea is that we should have control over those laws dude

Okay, what should we do to tackle long firm fraud?

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#273

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

dartos wrote: post #175
gruez wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Contrast that to how individuals get the hammer put down on them by the justice system if they so much as fart in the wrong room. The lesson from the last 50 years should be: If you want to commit a crime and get away with it, do it as a corporation. That's because most crimes "individuals" do are straightforwardly illegal and easy to prosecute, whereas the "crime if a corporation does it" are not. It's not any diff…

> That's because most crimes "individuals" do are straightforwardly illegal and easy to prosecute, whereas the "crime if a corporation does it" are not Maybe that’s something that should be adjusted by a legislative body. Crimes are only “easy” or “difficult” to prosecute because of the laws as they’re written.

DoJ Put hundreds of J6 fools behind bars because they aren't monied and influential enough to drag out the process. Meanwhile, Georgia has a mountain of criminal evidence from four years ago and they haven't gotten anywhere but for a few guilty pleas from the low level stooges.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#274

Post by Glyptodon »

Eextra953 wrote: post #23

Does anybody know whats stopping ethical and slightly less greedy companies from outcompeting these conglomerates? Its a question I keep coming back to because if the market were efficient then competitors should be able to use that same data to undercut big potato (or big whatever). This never seems to happen.

From what I can tell, market theory assumes it's easy to enter a market or that people with money to spend somehow want to use it to compete knowing that they're doomed to drive the industry back to "normal profit." Nobody investing money actually wants to throw money at something that will obviously drive a return to normal profit by competing, and do so within a few years after significant capital expense. They want to invest in something that will drive margin growth. Instead, the only reason people do it is to get a buyout offer from established businesses in the same market. Unless you're Mark Cuban.

Though the above is only true to a point - obviously if the margins get high enough or product deviates sufficiently existing businesses with related interests will step in: witness Costco's chicken business.

So maybe the question is less why isn't there more competition and more so why haven't restaurants vertically integrated their potato supply? The main theory I'd have is that price increases haven't negatively impacted their margins or revenues sufficiently yet.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#275

Post by adrr »

__MatrixMan__ wrote: post #77
ryandrake wrote: post #17

More like "It's not a crime if a corporation does it." The US treats corporations with kid gloves. They get away with so much, and in those rare cases where a regulatory body does anything , it's often just a strongly worded letter, a warning, a threat to one day send a strongly worded letter, or, in really rare, extreme cases, a company official gets called in to say a few words in front of Congress. Nobody goes to…

We need to start seizing IP into the public domain and sending shareholders to jail when their companies misbehave. I'm on the hook if my dog bites somebody, it should be no different if the role of my dog is played by a company. Monetary risk is not a real enough risk.

That would be like you sending the whole family to jail if one of them commits a crime. They are separate legal entities.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#276

Post by margalabargala »

ryandrake wrote: post #236
scarface_74 wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So should every one who owns stock in a company - including mutual funds go to jail?

Maybe? It should at least be debatable, not taboo, to consider. One's investment into a criminal enterprise could arguably be contributing to or encouraging that crime. Having this nearly-impenetrable corporate veil that shields decision-makers, footsoldiers, and funders (both institutional and retail investors) from consequences of their actions seems like the extreme end of a spectrum that should be explored. But w…

The thing you are suggesting is jailing every adult American with a 401k when a corporation misbehaves.

You say that shouldn't be taboo, it should be debatable. Alright, I'm listening, tell me how that wouldbsolve more problems than it would create.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#277

Post by maiar »

gruez wrote: post #268
ryandrake wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The corporate veil should provide enough protection from random and unforeseeable failures to encourage entrepreneurship, but not enough that it shields wrongdoers from consequences. Currently it shields nearly everyone from everything in nearly all cases from run-of-the-mill business failure all the way up to straight-up fraud.

>Currently it shields nearly everyone from everything in nearly all cases from run-of-the-mill business failure all the way up to straight-up fraud. Tell that to Bill Hwang or Sam Bankman-Fried.

The problem is that only 0.01% of the people who need to be held accountable are. The number isn’t zero, clearly, but how many of the people who caused the 2008 disaster ended up in prison? My point exactly.

I also think it’s clear that SBF was jailed for his effects on the rich rather than on average people. Worse than fleecing billionaires, he made them look bad. Clearly he’s a scumbag who deserves prison time, but people worse than him are free.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#278

Post by mminer237 »

wat10000 wrote: post #132
hermannj314 wrote: post #32

This is the way our world works. If you steal a potato, you will be arrested immediately and the case will be resolved in a few weeks or months. If you illegally fix the price of potatoes and steal billions from the market, you will be allowed to operate for years in the open while a lengthy civil procedure eventually may ask you to give 1 or 2% of what you stole back in fines. Don't blame the potato theives or potat…

A real world example: wage theft in the US is bigger than all other forms of theft combined. How often do you hear about it? We hear endlessly about shoplifting rings and lax enforcement by lefty prosecutors. When was the last time you saw coverage of workers not being paid what they’re owed? When was the last time somebody went to jail for not paying their workers what they’re owed?

That's not actually true. Wage theft is maybe third: https://truthnotoutrage.com/2023/12/05/retail-theft-dwarfs-w...

By all indicia, shoplifting is a much bigger problem. I know this myth and wage theft in general are really popular on social media. I think its lacking of representation in traditional media and prosecution is a mix of how much more clear-cut shoplifting is and just the victims report it more.

Re: It's not a crime if we do it with an app

#280

Post by chipotle_coyote »

pseudalopex wrote: post #52
hermannj314 wrote: post #32

This is the way our world works. If you steal a potato, you will be arrested immediately and the case will be resolved in a few weeks or months. If you illegally fix the price of potatoes and steal billions from the market, you will be allowed to operate for years in the open while a lengthy civil procedure eventually may ask you to give 1 or 2% of what you stole back in fines. Don't blame the potato theives or potat…

> Don't blame the potato theives or potato cartels, blame the politicians that built the system to work this way. Blame both.

Yes. I see this kind of "if your lock is easy to pick and your house is robbed, it's not the burglar's fault" argument a lot -- it's the lock-maker's fault! It's your fault for not doing enough research on locks! Or more commonly on HN, it's the fault of too much regulation somehow? -- and, it's like, okay, all of those factors may be worth considering, but the burglar still made a conscious decision to rob you. The burglary is not some inevitable consequence of systemic failure. If somebody leaves their laptop on a bar top for a few minutes to go to the bathroom and you steal it, "hey, they left it there" is not some kind of magic get out of jail free card for you. You chose to steal it.

And, yep: if four companies that control 97% of their market conspire to fix prices together, they are making a conscious decision to do so. There may be systemic failures which make it easier for them to do that than there should be, but they're still choosing to do it knowing that it's wrong. I'd go so far as to say that they're actually counting on people pointing the finger anywhere but at them. It's not us, it's just inflation! It's not us, it's the Biden administration! It's not us, it's something something something Covid! Yeah, okay, but at the end of the day, you're consciously choosing to price gouge.

Doctorow's point is, I think, that companies are deflecting from this by saying "it's not us, it's the apps, man! They're telling us what the optimal prices are, and we're just following their command!" But that's still, at the end of the day, price-fixing. It's _outsourced_ price-fixing, but it's still price-fixing.

Post reply on HN