Live data from Hacker News

Asked to do something illegal at work? Here's what these software engineers did

blog.pragmaticengineer.com

61–70 of 369 posts

Re: Asked to do something illegal at work? Here's what these software engineers did

#62
post #46
post #32

> Frank was a student loan startup founded by Charlie Javice in 2016. In 2019, Javice was featured on the Forbes “30 under 30” There was a joke going around Twitter about "30 under 30 doing 30 to life", because the startups involved were getting more and more outlandish to the extent that bystanders suspected that fraud was going on. Became a Guardian article: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/apr/06/forbes-3…

Do any other countries have an equivalent to the UK's "super injunction"? This is where a court order says you're not allowed to talk about the court order itself nevermind the topic covered by the order.

I imagine so. Bear in mind that the concept isn't particularly a bad idea, however they are very easy to abuse and the laws need to restrict them to where they're strictly necessary (and force the court to prove they're still needed).

The Afghan data leak scandal is a great example of where it made sense to use a super-injunction at first but also where its application continued long past when it should have done for (frankly) political reasons. Lewis Goodall's reporting on this is pretty excellent and fairly balanced, in my opinion.

Re: Asked to do something illegal at work? Here's what these software engineers did

#63
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And crucially there is never some black and white issue. The three example given are quite black and white ...

The article makes it sound clear sure. But then the article has been edited. I would not have been surprised if the 5 million user thing was couched as some sort of "we need to generate some realistic test data to load test our systems - please create 5 million accounts very similar to these paying ones, remember this is testing so they need to be as realistic and believable as possible ". If I got that request (perh…

Even if somebody gave no pretext, I don't think that, in and of itself, is illegal. Though it could be used for illegal things. For instance early on Reddit actively created fake accounts, fake votes, fake comments, and all other sorts of stuff in the process of trying to reach critical mass. I really doubt that was illegal.

OTOH if somebody sent a message saying, 'Hey we need to increase our apparent paying users in order to defraud some potential investors.' then obviously you've become part of a criminal conspiracy, but I think nobody would ever* overtly say that.

Re: Asked to do something illegal at work? Here's what these software engineers did

#64
post #48
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do any other countries have an equivalent to the UK's "super injunction"? This is where a court order says you're not allowed to talk about the court order itself nevermind the topic covered by the order.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warrant_canary That's probably a good starting point for a dive into that question.

I remember a lot of fuss being made about these but, as time goes on, I'm very sceptical they can work. Looking at the Afghan data leak reported earlier this year: courts can make it practically difficult for most of the organisation to even know they're subject to court orders!

The person updating the website asks "have we received a court order?" and the person under injunction must answer "not me." The website author isn't lying, but the website contains incorrect information (as the result of a legally-enforced lie).

You could ask your lawyer but, once again, they'd also answer "no we haven't" because answering anything else is contempt of court at best.

Re: Asked to do something illegal at work? Here's what these software engineers did

#65
post #54
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> UK libel law routinely covers up all sorts of things which the public would benefit from having revealed, simply by the threat of an expensive lawsuit. It makes investigative journalism really uneconomic. No. The deference people have to the law as some sort of all knowing all powerful magic spell that can be cast to force silence at any time is to blame. Libel is publishing something you know to be untrue. The tru…

https://www.msrs.co.uk/the-libel-labyrinth-navigating-the-tw... > The costs in this case were significant, with Vardy being ordered to pay a substantial proportion of Rooney’s legal fees. Initially, the court ordered Vardy to pay £1.5 million in costs, earlier this month, it was revealed that Vardy had been ordered to pay an additional £100,000, bringing the total to £1.6 million. https://www.matrixlaw.co.uk/news/noe…

Yes, I once made a bug report based to a client's supplier (overly permissive API endpoint was leading user data) and became the subject of the a spurious defamation letter. It was obviously unwinnable on the supplier's part, never went past solicitor's letters, and still cost high four figures to defend.

Nothing like some of the real horror stories, but still a significant chilling effect.

Re: Asked to do something illegal at work? Here's what these software engineers did

#66
post #54
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> UK libel law routinely covers up all sorts of things which the public would benefit from having revealed, simply by the threat of an expensive lawsuit. It makes investigative journalism really uneconomic. No. The deference people have to the law as some sort of all knowing all powerful magic spell that can be cast to force silence at any time is to blame. Libel is publishing something you know to be untrue. The tru…

https://www.msrs.co.uk/the-libel-labyrinth-navigating-the-tw... > The costs in this case were significant, with Vardy being ordered to pay a substantial proportion of Rooney’s legal fees. Initially, the court ordered Vardy to pay £1.5 million in costs, earlier this month, it was revealed that Vardy had been ordered to pay an additional £100,000, bringing the total to £1.6 million. https://www.matrixlaw.co.uk/news/noe…

> Lots of people are celebrating but I’m not. It's a sad, lonely sort of anticlimax. It’s really crap and I feel really bad it’s all ended up like this. I thought she'd just say sorry

Wow.

> In May 2018, Hopkins won an IPSO case against the Daily Mirror for claiming that she had been detained in South Africa in February 2018 for taking ketamine. The Mirror updated the headline to say that she had been detained for spreading racial hatred, and included a correction in the article.

Pick your battles, eh

Re: Asked to do something illegal at work? Here's what these software engineers did

#67
post #50
post #32

> Frank was a student loan startup founded by Charlie Javice in 2016. In 2019, Javice was featured on the Forbes “30 under 30” There was a joke going around Twitter about "30 under 30 doing 30 to life", because the startups involved were getting more and more outlandish to the extent that bystanders suspected that fraud was going on. Became a Guardian article: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/apr/06/forbes-3…

> UK libel law routinely covers up all sorts of things which the public would benefit from having revealed, simply by the threat of an expensive lawsuit. It makes investigative journalism really uneconomic. No. The deference people have to the law as some sort of all knowing all powerful magic spell that can be cast to force silence at any time is to blame. Libel is publishing something you know to be untrue. The tru…

The irony is that libel doesn't just suppress individuals, but corporations that might be bankrupted by libel suits, such as reporting agencies.

Nice ideals. I mean that. But pure altruism at great cost is a lot harder than you imagine.

Re: Asked to do something illegal at work? Here's what these software engineers did

#68
post #24

It's easy to armchair quarterback these things, and in retrospect, the actions that innocent people should take are probably obvious. At the time I don't think it would be so easy. There is lots of pressure not to take action, because of the feeling you're overreacting, because you've had things explained to you in a way that minimizes or removes the criminality, and because your job is at stake. And crucially there…

I can only imagine someone with a family to feed who is tied to corporate health insurance, or an H1 visa, being coerced into some gray activities being unwilling to lose their job to remain ethical or legal.

One of many reasons employers have a quiverful of ways to exploit and control workers.

Re: Asked to do something illegal at work? Here's what these software engineers did

#69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would argue that you have a moral and ethical responsibility to say no when your manager asks you to do something illegal, even if it does cost you your job. When your access to food, housing, heating and healthcare for your family are dependent on your income, you may find yourself facing very difficult decisions. Most parents will risk whatever legal ramifications to care for their kids and that's inherent mora…

At least in the case of engineers, we're talking about highly compensated people. You should have a solid emergency fund put together within a few months of starting your career. From there, it's on you to not put yourself into an economically precarious position. People who are making multiples of the median household don't have food/shelter as an excuse. Not that it's much of an excuse for everyone else either, but…

Globally, most software developers are not highly paid and certainly not enough to be above financial pressure.

Becoming a whistleblower or refusing unethical demands can also lead to being blacklisted, as in most industries, loyalty is valued more highly than ethics.

Re: Asked to do something illegal at work? Here's what these software engineers did

#70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The code of ethics would need to be absolute, enforceable, unambiguous (without lawyers to interpret), and universal to really eliminate these activities.

Software engineering could become a real profession with licensing like mechanical, electrical, chemical, civil, and other engineering professions. If you do something unethical, you could be sued for malpractice and lose your license to practice. The code of ethics for Professional Engineers works even though it isn’t any of the things you say are necessary.

Professional Engineers signed off on on broken dams (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brumadinho_dam_disaster ), leaking chemical plants (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhopal_disaster ), exploding reactors and how (not) to operate them (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster ) and "high enough" sea walls (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_nuclear_accident ). There are a ton more examples. All highly unethical, most of the responsible engineers got away scot-free.

Licensed professions only serve to increase the scarcity of licensed professionals, drive up the price and thereby form an economic cartel. Neither does it prevent any of the aforementioned disasters, nor are the responsible professionals held liable.

"Licensed professionals" is one of those myths in software engineering cycles that won't die. A license won't make anyone competent. It will, however, provide them with an excuse to charge more, do less and ascribe any fuckups to "must be something else wrong, I did everything to board standards"...

Post reply on HN