3 ms·
I don't know for certain whether the concept of a bounty was considered, and if so why it was rejected. But I can think of a few possibly good reasons to not do
by obstinate 9y ago
I don't know for certain whether the concept of a bounty was considered, and if so why it was rejected. But I can think of a few possibly good reasons to not do this. For one thing, it could be thought of as rewarding the engineers who wrote the evil code, maybe even creating an incentive for engineers to add such code in the future. There are precedents for enforcement actions having the unintended consequence of causing more incidents. Another thing is that you may actually wish to prosecute the people who wrote the code, to serve as a disincentive to future engineers considering following management orders on a similar defeat device.
- avar 9y agoYou may wish to prosecute them either way, and you might offer them immunity either way. Doing this would just guarantee that if they were eligible for lenient handling or immunity that they'd get a handsome cash payout by ratting on their management or giving investigators details relevant to the case, but which they didn't think to look for.
- zardo 9y ago>For one thing, it could be thought of as rewarding the engineers who wrote the evil code, maybe even creating an incentive for engineers to add such code in the future. In the development model used here, it not like engineers just indepently decide to add a feature. An autogenerated two line procedure is going to have two pages of documentation.
- d0mine 9y agoWhy do think the notion of whistleblowers or witness protection exists?
- obstinate 9y agoI'm pretty sure whistleblower protections are not a get out of jail free card. If you blow the whistle on actions that you took part in, you can still be prosecuted.