5 ms·
Presumably that one might opportunistically look for and find dirt that might not actually be there due to financial motivations to do so. I think this could be
by _asummers 10y ago
Presumably that one might opportunistically look for and find dirt that might not actually be there due to financial motivations to do so. I think this could be mitigated by being really careful with what you find and how you craft that narrative, but that concern is there. If the story is really there, though, I don't see much of an ethical dilemma.
- cylinder 10y agoWhere's the line drawn -- what if press releases don't get any attention? "Let's let the vulnerability continue until someone dies, then we'll explain why they died and get more attention." Or even worse, intentionally kill someone with the vulnerability to gain attention. What we need is some sort of qui tam lawsuit capability where a third party can sue device manufacturers when they have not suffered direct damages from the flawed device, and perhaps the government joins in, and then the third party receives a portion of the damages awarded. This already happens with Medicare fraud.
- maxerickson 10y agoMurdering corporate officers would be a good short strategy for people comfortable with murder. How often do we think that happens?
- tomp 10y agoThat's highly illegal though ("stock market manipulation"), so I don't see a problem at all.