3 ms·

> statements about probability can be factual Depends. In natural science or in medicine you can estimate that probability (because control groups, multiple e

> statements about probability can be factual Depends. In natural science or in medicine you can estimate that probability (because control groups, multiple experiments, statistical methods, etc). In such context, a statement about probability can indeed be factual. In general conversation or in legal context they can’t. If you have facts, there’s no “probably” because you know for sure. And if you don’t, it can be you belief, or your personal opinion, but not a fact. > do they? What makes you so sure? Over my career, I’ve worked in several US software companies. Lately, I’m working with various US companies as a contractor. Multiple times a company put a lot of efforts and money to comply with the law: we redesigned our products, moved across states, trained employees to comply with various regulations, and so on. Having friends in the industry with similar observations, I conclude such things happen all the time.

emodendroket 10y ago
Bit strange to go from a hyper-rational scientific stance on one point to using anecdotal evidence for another.
- Const-me 10y ago
  Well, what I’ve seen with my own eyes during 17 years in the industry is much more believable than the BS about evil corporations that (mostly liberal) media wants me to believe. That’s no evidence. That’s what makes me so sure. Speaking of which, what makes you so sure plenty of US companies are breaking the law?
  - emodendroket 10y ago
    Do you ever read the newspaper? Do you remember Enron? Robosigning? Wells Fargo helping Mexican cartels launder money (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/apr/03/us-bank-mexico-drug-gangs https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/apr/03/us-bank-mexico...)? Conflict minerals? Nestle and slave labor (https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2016/feb/01/nestle-slavery-thailand-fighting-child-labour-lawsuit-ivory-coast https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2016/feb/01...)? There seems to be plenty of evidence that corporate malfeasance is a serious problem. And, yes, there are certainly lots of compliance programs out there, but I'd argue those have more to do with avoiding enforcement action than necessarily adhering to the law. I'd guess Wells Fargo (Wachovia at the time) had a compliance department while they were laundering money for drug cartels and yet it still happened. I find it eminently believable that many or even most US companies would comply with an illegal request from US intelligence agencies.
    - Const-me 10y ago
      Just as I expected, your beliefs are by 100% caused by media. The image of the world as it’s shown in the media is extremely biased. Watch this: https://www.ted.com/talks/hans_and_ola_rosling_how_not_to_be_ignorant_about_the_world https://www.ted.com/talks/hans_and_ola_rosling_how_not_to_be... The video is about inequality and education, but the topic of corporate crime is skewed just as much. There are 6 million companies operating in US, employing 115 million people. If the majority of them were breaking the law, you’d knew about that not just from the media but also from some of those 115 million people who happen to be your friends and family. > I find it eminently believable that many or even most US companies would comply with an illegal request I don’t find it believable because I don’t see motivation for such compliance. In an authoritarian state, a government can abruptly take away your business (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euroset https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euroset) and optionally throw you in jail for 10 years (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yukos https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yukos) if you don’t comply, and you can’t do anything against it. That’s a strong motivation to comply. I don’t see such motivation for western companies.
      - emodendroket 10y ago
        If your argument is "anecdotal evidence is much better than reported, sourced news" then I have to disagree, regardless of what the TED talk says. The examples are some of the biggest and most prestigious companies in the country and I'm gonna guess most of the low-level schmucks like me and my friends and family aren't in on the huge, illegal operations.
        Const-me 10y ago
        My argument is, you should distinguish two majorities, the majority of media-reported incidents, and the majority of some real-life things. Those two are very different. If you don’t distinguish between them, you’ll come to absurd conclusions like “the majority of US drivers are drunk”, “vast majority of US citizens voted for Hillary”, or “the majority of US companies are breaking the law”. > of the biggest and most prestigious companies in the country Prestigious means nothing ‘coz it’s hard to measure that. But for biggest ones, here’s the list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_companies_by_revenue https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_companies_by_r... Good luck finding Enron or Wells Fargo there.

emodendroket 10y ago

Bit strange to go from a hyper-rational scientific stance on one point to using anecdotal evidence for another.

Const-me 10y ago
Well, what I’ve seen with my own eyes during 17 years in the industry is much more believable than the BS about evil corporations that (mostly liberal) media wants me to believe. That’s no evidence. That’s what makes me so sure. Speaking of which, what makes you so sure plenty of US companies are breaking the law?
- emodendroket 10y ago
  Do you ever read the newspaper? Do you remember Enron? Robosigning? Wells Fargo helping Mexican cartels launder money (https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/apr/03/us-bank-mexico-drug-gangs https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/apr/03/us-bank-mexico...)? Conflict minerals? Nestle and slave labor (https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2016/feb/01/nestle-slavery-thailand-fighting-child-labour-lawsuit-ivory-coast https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2016/feb/01...)? There seems to be plenty of evidence that corporate malfeasance is a serious problem. And, yes, there are certainly lots of compliance programs out there, but I'd argue those have more to do with avoiding enforcement action than necessarily adhering to the law. I'd guess Wells Fargo (Wachovia at the time) had a compliance department while they were laundering money for drug cartels and yet it still happened. I find it eminently believable that many or even most US companies would comply with an illegal request from US intelligence agencies.
  - Const-me 10y ago
    Just as I expected, your beliefs are by 100% caused by media. The image of the world as it’s shown in the media is extremely biased. Watch this: https://www.ted.com/talks/hans_and_ola_rosling_how_not_to_be_ignorant_about_the_world https://www.ted.com/talks/hans_and_ola_rosling_how_not_to_be... The video is about inequality and education, but the topic of corporate crime is skewed just as much. There are 6 million companies operating in US, employing 115 million people. If the majority of them were breaking the law, you’d knew about that not just from the media but also from some of those 115 million people who happen to be your friends and family. > I find it eminently believable that many or even most US companies would comply with an illegal request I don’t find it believable because I don’t see motivation for such compliance. In an authoritarian state, a government can abruptly take away your business (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euroset https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euroset) and optionally throw you in jail for 10 years (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yukos https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yukos) if you don’t comply, and you can’t do anything against it. That’s a strong motivation to comply. I don’t see such motivation for western companies.
    - emodendroket 10y ago
      If your argument is "anecdotal evidence is much better than reported, sourced news" then I have to disagree, regardless of what the TED talk says. The examples are some of the biggest and most prestigious companies in the country and I'm gonna guess most of the low-level schmucks like me and my friends and family aren't in on the huge, illegal operations.
      - Const-me 10y ago
        My argument is, you should distinguish two majorities, the majority of media-reported incidents, and the majority of some real-life things. Those two are very different. If you don’t distinguish between them, you’ll come to absurd conclusions like “the majority of US drivers are drunk”, “vast majority of US citizens voted for Hillary”, or “the majority of US companies are breaking the law”. > of the biggest and most prestigious companies in the country Prestigious means nothing ‘coz it’s hard to measure that. But for biggest ones, here’s the list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_companies_by_revenue https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_companies_by_r... Good luck finding Enron or Wells Fargo there.