71–80 of 121 posts
There is an insidious aspect with respect to Tech Workers. You don't need to be a whistle-blower to have a toll on your life/career. Talk too much shit about a company in Silicon Valley and you're fucked, regardless of the merits of your claims against them. #TeflonUnicorn
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I assume whomever downvoted You has forgotten what happened to Aaron Schwartz.
He's probably being down-voted for saying erroneous things like > The high conviction rate is a result of extremely high maximum sentences. People who are 100% innocent often plead guilty after being threatened with a 30-year prison sentence that would be only 1 or 2 years under local law. That's erroneous because very few federal defendants actually face such long sentences, so those that do so pleading guilty is no…
Do you know this for a fact?
Because the way I understand it is, he was facing multiple decades in prison IF all charges stuck. And once you got to trial, all charges can stick. It has happened. So he was facing 35 years. So saying he wasn't is just wrong.
Your 6-7 years is 'probably'.
I think what your saying is: The federal government doesn't threaten you with 35 years, they threaten you with 10x3.5 years, and since it is possible that not all 10 will stick... it's not really a 35 year threat?
I mean, if I threaten to punch you 10 times but I might stop at 1,2,3 or any number and I probably won't get to 10, but we can negotiate before I start, is it not a 10 punch threat?
To me it seems like you are splitting hairs in order to defend the indefensible. The practice of tacking on as many charges to get people to plea bargain is unethical and fascist.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is totally incorrect. The high conviction rate is a result of extremely high maximum sentences. People who are 100% innocent often plead guilty after being threatened with a 30-year prison sentence that would be only 1 or 2 years under local law. Many federal crimes are unconstitutional and deliberately vague, like "lying (not volunteering incriminating evidence) to an investigator" and "mail fraud" which is jus…
I assume whomever downvoted You has forgotten what happened to Aaron Schwartz.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ive noticed this too alot lately and I've actually started to question if our ideals are really moral. I think we have a very serious conversation ahead of us as a culture. Are we the bad guys?
We've avoided that conversation for two hundred years, why is it ahead of us now? If anything, blind patriotism makes it easier to ignore.
It is so confusing to me. Not saying I love the US but if someone did... shouldn't they want to improve it?
Should whistleblowers be entitled to some portion of the fine levied against the offender to offset their losses (and encourage whistleblowing)?
For me there is a related issue that is just as problematic or worse. There are certain things that are critical of the US government that are simply not allowed to be spoken in most US centric places. The public effectively censors itself. I could mention some specific things but that would trigger it and then no one would see my comment. In general you can get away with mentioning things from the distant past but n…
Ive noticed this too alot lately and I've actually started to question if our ideals are really moral. I think we have a very serious conversation ahead of us as a culture. Are we the bad guys?
>One interviewee, in response to a question about what advice he would give a potential whistle-blower, wrote, “[Can they] afford 5 years of their life in turmoil?” Another said, “Part of your ability to do anything about this is keeping yourself together,” and suggested that whistle-blowers find someone “like a minister or a shrink who’s confidentiality-protected,” because “this could go on for a while.” A high prop…
But I wonder: if there was a way to reduce the duration of the cases, would that reduce the impact on whistleblowers? I remember reading somewhere recently about the standard M.O for federal cases. They take a long time in order to build an extremely solid case. That's why federal conviction rates are so high. Intuitively it makes sense. If you're gonna go after some naughty people for doing naughty things, you reall…
> But I wonder: if there was a way to reduce the duration of the cases, would that reduce the impact on whistleblowers?
This reads like an advertisement for the FBI. A bigger story is how Obama removed protections and actively attacked whistle blowers after promising the most transparent government ever. That had true toll.