Former WSJ reporter says law firm used Indian hackers to sabotage his career • Hacker News Board

Re: Former WSJ reporter says law firm used Indian hackers to sabotage his career

#41

Post by dmix » Sat, Oct 15, 2022, 10:43 PM UTC

seibelj wrote: post #27

swayvil wrote: post #20

This is an angle of the uneven distribution of wealth that you seldom hear about. As long as there are rich and poor people, a rich person can hire a poor person to do basically anything. Overriding legality, decency, safety. Because the poor person just needs the money that bad. So you get people renting out their backyard as a toxic waste dump. Or murdering people. Or breathing smog. Or selling children. Crazy horr…

An underappreciated negative aspect of equality is total lack of enthusiasm and incentive. As inequality is a guarantee - no two people are alike in any aspect and neither are their abilities as an employee - mandating (either by gun or union contract) lockstep equality in payments and job security, the highest performers are demoralized and put in the bare minimum or quit (if they can). The result is the ever-increa…

I find that most people arguing for top-down redistribution don't seem to care about if it makes everyone poorer as long as "equality for everyone" is the modus operandi. They see it as a moral imperative, the measurable outcomes and realities of the economic systems always get second rate treatment.

It's always much, much easier to argue for 'fairness' and to rail against the rich... than it is to be realistic and accept that there will be very visible downsides but that alternatives are much worse in practice.

Ditto with free speech, censorship is almost always a greater evil, with small exceptions, but when you try to defend it they try to pretend you only care about nazis/far-right. Sometimes doing the right thing is not easy and yes - it requires plenty of effort to weed out the assholes and wrong-doers (which the courts are doing now by punishing the law firms), but it's worth it in the end.

And you don't have to tolerate the bad guys just because you didn't compromise societies freedoms and wealth to prevent them from existing in the first place. There's more ways to stop it than throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Re: Former WSJ reporter says law firm used Indian hackers to sabotage his career

#42

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Oct 15, 2022, 10:45 PM UTC

seibelj wrote: post #27

swayvil wrote: post #20

This is an angle of the uneven distribution of wealth that you seldom hear about. As long as there are rich and poor people, a rich person can hire a poor person to do basically anything. Overriding legality, decency, safety. Because the poor person just needs the money that bad. So you get people renting out their backyard as a toxic waste dump. Or murdering people. Or breathing smog. Or selling children. Crazy horr…

An underappreciated negative aspect of equality is total lack of enthusiasm and incentive. As inequality is a guarantee - no two people are alike in any aspect and neither are their abilities as an employee - mandating (either by gun or union contract) lockstep equality in payments and job security, the highest performers are demoralized and put in the bare minimum or quit (if they can). The result is the ever-increa…

[deleted]

Re: Former WSJ reporter says law firm used Indian hackers to sabotage his career

#43

Post by another_story » Sat, Oct 15, 2022, 10:48 PM UTC

seibelj wrote: post #27

swayvil wrote: post #20

This is an angle of the uneven distribution of wealth that you seldom hear about. As long as there are rich and poor people, a rich person can hire a poor person to do basically anything. Overriding legality, decency, safety. Because the poor person just needs the money that bad. So you get people renting out their backyard as a toxic waste dump. Or murdering people. Or breathing smog. Or selling children. Crazy horr…

An underappreciated negative aspect of equality is total lack of enthusiasm and incentive. As inequality is a guarantee - no two people are alike in any aspect and neither are their abilities as an employee - mandating (either by gun or union contract) lockstep equality in payments and job security, the highest performers are demoralized and put in the bare minimum or quit (if they can). The result is the ever-increa…

This is mostly a strawman, since I don't see almost anyone arguing for complete equality of pay, status or position, merely that a handful of people shouldn't be able to accumulate the wealth of small nations on the back of others.

In countries in Europe, and places in Asia, there are plenty of examples where there is less inequality and the students perform better.

Re: Former WSJ reporter says law firm used Indian hackers to sabotage his career

#44

Post by ok_dad » Sat, Oct 15, 2022, 10:49 PM UTC

seibelj wrote: post #27

swayvil wrote: post #20

This is an angle of the uneven distribution of wealth that you seldom hear about. As long as there are rich and poor people, a rich person can hire a poor person to do basically anything. Overriding legality, decency, safety. Because the poor person just needs the money that bad. So you get people renting out their backyard as a toxic waste dump. Or murdering people. Or breathing smog. Or selling children. Crazy horr…

An underappreciated negative aspect of equality is total lack of enthusiasm and incentive. As inequality is a guarantee - no two people are alike in any aspect and neither are their abilities as an employee - mandating (either by gun or union contract) lockstep equality in payments and job security, the highest performers are demoralized and put in the bare minimum or quit (if they can). The result is the ever-increa…

Sounds to me like we should eliminate the idea that high performance and achievement should be rewarded with wealth or being raised above others. Perhaps it would be better if people learned from a young age that achievement is its own reward? Are we such animals that we need special treats in order to do the right thing? I think it’s a childish attitude that if you don’t get more cookies than someone else that you’ll throw down your work and have a tantrum.

Re: Former WSJ reporter says law firm used Indian hackers to sabotage his career

#45

Post by lupire » Sat, Oct 15, 2022, 10:55 PM UTC

seibelj wrote: post #27

swayvil wrote: post #20

This is an angle of the uneven distribution of wealth that you seldom hear about. As long as there are rich and poor people, a rich person can hire a poor person to do basically anything. Overriding legality, decency, safety. Because the poor person just needs the money that bad. So you get people renting out their backyard as a toxic waste dump. Or murdering people. Or breathing smog. Or selling children. Crazy horr…

An underappreciated negative aspect of equality is total lack of enthusiasm and incentive. As inequality is a guarantee - no two people are alike in any aspect and neither are their abilities as an employee - mandating (either by gun or union contract) lockstep equality in payments and job security, the highest performers are demoralized and put in the bare minimum or quit (if they can). The result is the ever-increa…

You are overlooking the "extreme" part of "extreme inequality"

Bezos and Musk would work just as hard if they only had 10% of the financial equity share in their companies that they have today.

Re: Former WSJ reporter says law firm used Indian hackers to sabotage his career

#46

Post by lupire » Sat, Oct 15, 2022, 11:00 PM UTC

harles wrote: post #33

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #28

One thing that I should point out, is that he is not going after the WSJ, for any impropriety in his firing. They are really the ones that damaged his career. So I suspect that there is more to this story than is apparent.

From what I can tell, there’s not necessarily more. It’s a clear conflict of interest to do business with a source for a story. Doesn’t sound illegal, but certainly gives the appearance of bias.

Reuters didn't say he did any business with the source, just accepting a gift ride on a yacht.

Re: Former WSJ reporter says law firm used Indian hackers to sabotage his career

#47

Post by grafly » Sat, Oct 15, 2022, 11:03 PM UTC

permo-w wrote: post #37

redanddead wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah and the problem is getting worse. sometimes it seems that even institutions are trying to maximize human pain. I thought of writing an economics book about this phenomenon. I have no idea how we can fix this problem and hope someone else can chime in

the solutions are there, we implemented them in the post-war era, and they worked, massively reducing inequality until about the early to mid-1970s, where due to a number of reasons, lots of Western economies slowed down, especially the UK and the US, and the free-market Milton-Friedman-inspired right got into power and more or less has been since then. their policies creating overall growth, yes, but at the expense…

No post body was provided.

Re: Former WSJ reporter says law firm used Indian hackers to sabotage his career

#48

Post by koolba » Sat, Oct 15, 2022, 11:12 PM UTC

PuppyTailWags wrote: post #29

epicureanideal wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume this has more to do with absolute poverty than relative poverty. If a person is starving they’ll do almost anything to eat. If they’re merely relatively poor, having an old car instead of a new one, a small house instead of a large house, it’s unlikely they’d go to extremes.

Relative poverty is also involved imo. Many people would go to extremes to ensure their children and their loved ones are guaranteed brighter economic futures. Life insurance companies wouldn't both explicitly exclude suicide and also do investigation to ensure a death wasn't suicide if it people weren't willing to literally die to ensure a brighter economic future for their dependents. Hell, I live very comfortably,…

> Life insurance companies wouldn't both explicitly exclude suicide and also do investigation to ensure a death wasn't suicide if it people weren't willing to literally die to ensure a brighter economic future for their dependents.

Most life insurance does cover suicides. Just not in the first year or two.

> But there is a lot I would do for money that guarantees the best start in life for my children, the best end of life (medical care, treatments, etc) for my parents.

For children specifically, the most valuable thing that money can buy is time.

Re: Former WSJ reporter says law firm used Indian hackers to sabotage his career

#49

Post by seibelj » Sat, Oct 15, 2022, 11:15 PM UTC

ok_dad wrote: post #44

seibelj wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An underappreciated negative aspect of equality is total lack of enthusiasm and incentive. As inequality is a guarantee - no two people are alike in any aspect and neither are their abilities as an employee - mandating (either by gun or union contract) lockstep equality in payments and job security, the highest performers are demoralized and put in the bare minimum or quit (if they can). The result is the ever-increa…

Sounds to me like we should eliminate the idea that high performance and achievement should be rewarded with wealth or being raised above others. Perhaps it would be better if people learned from a young age that achievement is its own reward? Are we such animals that we need special treats in order to do the right thing? I think it’s a childish attitude that if you don’t get more cookies than someone else that you’l…

I work 70 hours a week and there is 0% chance I would do that without having significant upside in my firm. I get more money and I deserve it, this is a free country and I don’t want anyone’s potential capped (and certainly not my own!).

Re: Former WSJ reporter says law firm used Indian hackers to sabotage his career

#50

Post by MichaelZuo » Sat, Oct 15, 2022, 11:34 PM UTC

PuppyTailWags wrote: post #29

epicureanideal wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume this has more to do with absolute poverty than relative poverty. If a person is starving they’ll do almost anything to eat. If they’re merely relatively poor, having an old car instead of a new one, a small house instead of a large house, it’s unlikely they’d go to extremes.

Relative poverty is also involved imo. Many people would go to extremes to ensure their children and their loved ones are guaranteed brighter economic futures. Life insurance companies wouldn't both explicitly exclude suicide and also do investigation to ensure a death wasn't suicide if it people weren't willing to literally die to ensure a brighter economic future for their dependents. Hell, I live very comfortably,…

It doesn't seem credible that ordinary people, who happen to see a giant megayacht one day, can suddenly turn into a maniac for hire just because they live in 'relative poverty'.

The vast majority of people value safe neighbourhoods, friendships, family get-togethers, etc., far more than they do in procuring mega yachts, or being wealthy enough to do so. Especially when old enough to have children.