Live data from Hacker News

Want to code for the devil?

linkedin.com

1–8 of 8 posts

Re: Want to code for the devil?

#4
Taking advantage of a broken system to make a profit isn't demonic, it's capitalism. People and companies respond to incentives, so if we want these types of companies to cease to exist we must destroy the incentives that caused them to exist in the first place.

Re: Want to code for the devil?

#5

Taking advantage of a broken system to make a profit isn't demonic, it's capitalism. People and companies respond to incentives, so if we want these types of companies to cease to exist we must destroy the incentives that caused them to exist in the first place.

That would be true only if no one was harmed by your profiteering.

Re: Want to code for the devil?

#6

Taking advantage of a broken system to make a profit isn't demonic, it's capitalism. People and companies respond to incentives, so if we want these types of companies to cease to exist we must destroy the incentives that caused them to exist in the first place.

> Taking advantage of a broken system to make a profit isn't demonic, it's capitalism.

It sure sounds like you're trying to claim that legal === moral.

Re: Want to code for the devil?

#7

Taking advantage of a broken system to make a profit isn't demonic, it's capitalism. People and companies respond to incentives, so if we want these types of companies to cease to exist we must destroy the incentives that caused them to exist in the first place.

> Taking advantage of a broken system to make a profit isn't demonic, it's capitalism. It sure sounds like you're trying to claim that legal === moral.

Of course not, but if we accept as axiomatic that corrupt people will exploit anything they can, then whose fault is it when the exploitation occurs?

Re: Want to code for the devil?

#8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Taking advantage of a broken system to make a profit isn't demonic, it's capitalism. It sure sounds like you're trying to claim that legal === moral.

Of course not, but if we accept as axiomatic that corrupt people will exploit anything they can, then whose fault is it when the exploitation occurs?

If we accept it as axiomatic that murderers will murder, then whose fault is it when murderers murder?

Hint: It's the murderer's fault.