Live data from Hacker News

Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

morganhilltimes.com

741–750 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#741
post #550

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to work for one of the oil giants. They had codified standards for bribery, a la: "While we do not approve of bribery, we recognize that in some places we do business, they are an unfortunate necessity. To that end, we have standardized our practices to keep everyone involved as safe as possible".

I hope there standard was to not do it, because it is a US crime for any US national, citizen or resident as employee, officer or agent of a US corporation to bribe or otherwise corrupt a foreign official. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Corrupt_Practices_Ac...

I have worked for a non-US company that was owned by a US company. I had to go through training and one of the courses was about bribery.

It was an absurd experience. The training material kept repeating that I absolutely could not bribe a non-US official. However, in my country ALL officials are non-US and bribery is also illegal so what were they trying to tell me with this "non-US" criterion?

The message I got from training course is that bribery is bad (I knew that), bribery is illegal (I knew that) but it's okay if I bribe a US official (really?).

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#742

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've gone through various "International Training" sessions at my company and one of the things they teach is that if a foreign official says something like, "hmmm... your papers are invalid, but I can help you out for $100" or similar, you should pay and immediately report (and expense) it on return. I know one coworker who went through this traveling through a small country.

That is illegal according to US law. At my company, we are explicitly taught the opposite: paying "facilitation fees" is prohibited and illegal and that the employer will fire you and throw you under the bus if they find out you did so. They explicitly mention that this is not allowed even if it is the norm in the country in which you are doing business.

This is incorrect. It's classified as a "grease payment", not a bribe. It's explicitly allowed under the FCPA.

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#743
post #739

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, what chaos are you referring to? I'm simply stating that the right to bear arms is enshrined in the US Constitution and it's wrong that the Sheriff is acting as some kind of gatekeeper on who should be allowed to exercise their rights, beyond what is codified in law. That's all I'm really pointing out here, in line with the article posted here. Frankly, we could definitely go into comparing other countries and…

I was referring to your 'well-armed society is a polite society'. All this energy put into trying to say that "increasing gun ownership will somehow decrease crime" is frustrating because it clearly is missing the forest for the trees. None of the explanations seem to apply when looking at other countries in the world. And.... like.... nobody's wallet is worth another person's life.

As a quick note, I appreciate the candor of your responses. And, I understand the sentiment you point out about a wallet not being worth another person's life. But sadly, not everyone necessarily will take your cash and dash. I'm really mostly focused on someone who is determined to leave you dead for one reason or another.

And of course, use of a gun, even defensively, should only be a last resort. I'm not advocating that everyone become Rambo and shoot their way through problems. Every action has a consequence, and whether you were justified in your shooting or not, the jury will decide that in their deliberation of the evidence.

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#744

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A private citizen of limited means paying a bribe is somehow reasonable because there's a huge power imbalance. Refusing to pay a bribe is also a refusal to participate in a racket. Local police can be extremely petty and extremely violent [1]. If a police officer told me he'd let me off for a bribe, I would probably pay it. I wouldn't be paying to get what I want. Rather, I would be paying to avoid the appearance th…

> A high-level exec at one of the world's most powerful companies paying off a local LEO for a permit instead of, IDK, contacting the State or the Feds, is beyond inexplicable. The problem is that, at least in many jurisdictions, gun permits basically only exist as a means for police to solicit bribes. There's literally an entire industry of people whose job is bribing police departments to get gun permits. C.f.: htt…

Your link specifically calls out New York City. I could not find anything related to concealed carry permits and bribery for Texas. This indicates a poor implementation of law/regulation.

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#745
post #134

Why should Apple security have CCW permits? Why do they deserve them any more than a random person? They should not be able to defend Apple property with lethal force.

Why shouldn't people be able to defend themselves and their property w/ lethal force? Should we just let them die for the police to arrive 10 min late?

I would let anyone defend themselves with lethal force, but not extend that right to their property, whether yours or Apple’s.

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#746
post #480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A CEO I know (billion dollar revenues, multinational corporation ) tells me that: 1.The tricky bit is knowing the right amount of the bribe to pay. Pay a Senator or a member of the House too little and you have made a powerful enemy. Pay too much and they figure that they have a sucker that they can keep milking. And of course, you have also wasted a couple of extra million that could have been directed to another Se…

Without naming names this comment isn't really worth anything

I disagree. It's useful for triangulation.

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#747

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Everyone has the right to bear arms but what do we do when that infringes on other peoples right to life? I think it's a cogent question. Clearly the state has laws against murder. And California even has laws that "enhance" sentencing criteria for anyone guilty of using a firearm in the commission of a felony.[1] Also, "mass shootings" are also illegal and are incredibly rare. Also, I have a right to "property"/"p…

I wonder, why is the auto-contents-theft thing so bad in the bay area? I’ve stopped even renting a car when I visit after two friends had separate break-ins on prior trips. Maybe I just got unlucky and these are anecdotes, but geish.

When California Proposition 47 passed in 2014 it reclassified many auto burglaries from felonies to misdemeanors. So DAs in many counties stopped prosecuting those.

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#748
post #414

I spoke on a panel with Rick Sung, the Undersheriff who allegedly withheld permits until Apple coughed up the iPads. At the end of the event, each panelist was offered a Starbucks gift card by the event organizers. Rick gave his Starbucks gift card to me, saying, "since I'm here as a public official I can't accept this. Otherwise it would be counted as a bribe." Wild.

What’s funny is he still accepted it, but he gave it to you. Seems like he was either not up on his ethics, or he just wanted to appear ethical. He could have refused the gift. But not sure what California’s rule is, but I expect that accepting nominal gifts under a low dollar threshold is allowed.

Yes, you can’t accept and donate.

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#749
post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think people in the overall thread are getting confused about different kinds of bribes. A bribe needed to get a lucrative contract for your company: not ok. Paying off a local cop so he won't throw you in jail for no reason: totally ok. The US is concerned with preventing the former, not the latter. I would be surprised if any US company is advocating people pay the first kind of bribe, at least publicly, as that'…

This thread reminds me of John McAfee's bribery guide http://www.whoismcafee.com/the-travel-guide/

That was an interesting and mind-numbingingly depressing read at the same time

Re: Apple’s head of security indicted in Santa Clara County CCW case

#750
post #542
post #98

Can't believe all the Apple apologists here. Bribing public officials is a crime, period. It isn't an "unfortunate situation" or anything else that people are calling it. It also doesn't matter who initiated the bribe. The employee, and potentially the company itself, absolutely need to be charged and prosecuted for it.

After going through the process of building a house in CA, I believe we should decriminalize offering of bribes, but not solicitation of bribes. $100K’s of dollars (>> 10% of the total project cost) have been extracted from us by various bureaucratic processes that are outside what is explicitly specified by the law. I am confident that this would not have happened if we were well politically connected, and had frien…

I live in a developing country with a ton of bribery that is way, way down the Transparency International rankings.

Your ideas come across as pretty naive and out of touch with how bribery works in the real world. Which is okay, not everyone is an expert on everything. But your comment would come across a lot better if you had used some tentative language instead of definitive language on a topic it is clear you don't know much about in the real world.

Bribes are rarely solicited in the real world, so that's the first place you theory falls down. I've only rarely had someone say something that could even vaguely be construed as soliciting a bribe. They aren't dumb, after all. Instead what usually happens is you get a run-around for unspecified reasons until you offer the bribe. You submit the paperwork and they tell you it is filled in incorrectly but don't tell you what part is wrong or how to fill it in correctly. The nurse only checks on you once a day until you give her an envelope of cash. The accountants auditing your books ask for receipts of every single everything until take them to dinner and offer them a present for all the hard work they've done so far. The fire department finds all kinds of ways to not certify your new office for occupancy until you give them some "coffee money".

The second problem with you theory of bribery is the offering bribes changes the structure of compensation dramatically. The expectation of receiving bribes becomes part of the expected total compensation for a position. But this gray money -- the delta between official compensation and bribes -- becomes a revenue stream that everyone above you on the hierarchy can and will tap into.

In practice this means you have to pay a huge bribe to get any job. Where I live, to get a job as a police officer, or a nurse, or a flight attendant, you have to pay a bribe to whoever is hiring. Not a small bribe. Like a year of salary. Which means either you come from a family rich enough to have that kind of money laying around or borrow money from a money-lender.

How do you get the money to pay back the money-lender? By taking bribes, of course.

Your boss knows approximately how much you're making in bribes each month and will expect you to pass it along every month. After all, he borrowed a ton of money to pay a bribe to get his promotion and needs to pay off that debt.

And if you're complaining about >10% of the total project cost going to bureaucratic processes, your idea would result in 30% or more of the total project cost going to bribery. Since that's exactly what happens here.

Post reply on HN