7 ms·

You've earned all that money, it's nothing to be ashamed of so I don't really see how that's making you more uncomfortable than everyone being able to look up y

by pimmen 9y ago

You've earned all that money, it's nothing to be ashamed of so I don't really see how that's making you more uncomfortable than everyone being able to look up your expensive sports car at the DMV. However, if you're running for office, I would be very interested in knowing how you made all that money (even if none of it was made illegally) since you'll be regulating businesses and what not.

logicallee 9y ago
shame isn't the only thing. If everyone knows you deal with trading rare comic books between America and Japan, with no listed prices but a comission between private transactions which you intermediate, have no employees and do it all via a couple of low-key websites, then it is no big deal. They might assume you do a few per year or per month, but that it is hardly some huge market. If, however, the world learns that you made $37.2 million last year doing this, then this signal might be enough for your income to drop to $0 and for you never to make another penny again. (For example because it invites a transparent competitor who does list prices and who you can't or don't want to deal with; or invited eBay, who actually loses money entering this market with a huge splash. Or invited Christie's, the auctiom house, who had not been tracking this part of the market. etc etc.) In capitalist countries salaries can be clear signals for turnover, which could otherwise be private.
- pimmen 9y ago
  Then, I don't know, don't give it to yourself in that way but rather re-invest in your company if it really is your turnover? Those poor business owners who are making so much money that they're attracting competition can't afford accountants?
  - logicallee 9y ago
    that's not a general solution. firms with employees can also have trouble hiding the size of their divisions if everyone's salary is pubic. this really is pretty key competitive information.
    - pimmen 9y ago
      Then make the search for each individual a separate query and put a processing fee on it. That would make such a lookup scale very poorly.
      - logicallee 9y ago
        why is it in the public interest to make the search possible at all?
      - deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
- lordnacho 9y ago
  > If, however, the world learns that you made $37.2 million last year doing this, then this signal might be enough for your income to drop to $0 and for you never to make another penny again. Which would be a win for the consumer. Information is supposed to do this to markets.
patrickaljord 9y ago
> it's nothing to be ashamed What? Am I reading this on HN? The place where people like talking how privacy matter all day and how annoying the fallacy of "if you have nothing to hide you shouldn't worry about the government/corporations spying on you" is? I'm puzzled.
- foo101 9y ago
  What makes you think salary is a matter of privacy? In a lot of countries, many government jobs come with publicly disclosed salaries. Why do you think a job in a private sector should maintain secrecy for salaries? Privacy applies to private data. Whether salary should be considered private data is the point of argument here. Nobody is arguing about doing away with privacy altogether. So what is your point?
  - patrickaljord 9y ago
    My point is that what two consenting adults contracts is part of their privacy unless you're an authoritarian State.
    - foo101 9y ago
      Except most contracts in the private sector (IT, finance, etc.) are not between two consenting adults. They are usually between one consulting adult and a huge corporation, a corporation that can choose to pay a certain class of people unfairly and still survive in business. It is in the interest of such corporations to maintain this asymmetry of information where they can know your salary and all your colleagues' salary but would discourage you from knowing your colleague salary. If you think salary being private data is the obvious assumption, then think again, maybe you have been conditioned by years of employment in the private sector to believe that salary is private data. In many cultures and in many type of jobs, it is not considered private data.
      - patrickaljord 9y ago
        I see that you hold the belief that consenting adults willingly working are being forced to do so, I do not share this belief that corporation are forcing anyone to work for them. Maybe you have been conditioned by years of State education to believe that employment does not imply consent between two parties but is a forced procedure. Many philosophers do not agree with that and consider work contracting to be consented between willing adults.

by pimmen 9y ago

logicallee 9y ago

shame isn't the only thing. If everyone knows you deal with trading rare comic books between America and Japan, with no listed prices but a comission between private transactions which you intermediate, have no employees and do it all via a couple of low-key websites, then it is no big deal. They might assume you do a few per year or per month, but that it is hardly some huge market. If, however, the world learns that you made $37.2 million last year doing this, then this signal might be enough for your income to drop to $0 and for you never to make another penny again. (For example because it invites a transparent competitor who does list prices and who you can't or don't want to deal with; or invited eBay, who actually loses money entering this market with a huge splash. Or invited Christie's, the auctiom house, who had not been tracking this part of the market. etc etc.) In capitalist countries salaries can be clear signals for turnover, which could otherwise be private.

pimmen 9y ago
Then, I don't know, don't give it to yourself in that way but rather re-invest in your company if it really is your turnover? Those poor business owners who are making so much money that they're attracting competition can't afford accountants?
- logicallee 9y ago
  that's not a general solution. firms with employees can also have trouble hiding the size of their divisions if everyone's salary is pubic. this really is pretty key competitive information.
  - pimmen 9y ago
    Then make the search for each individual a separate query and put a processing fee on it. That would make such a lookup scale very poorly.
    - logicallee 9y ago
      why is it in the public interest to make the search possible at all?
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
lordnacho 9y ago
> If, however, the world learns that you made $37.2 million last year doing this, then this signal might be enough for your income to drop to $0 and for you never to make another penny again. Which would be a win for the consumer. Information is supposed to do this to markets.

patrickaljord 9y ago

> it's nothing to be ashamed What? Am I reading this on HN? The place where people like talking how privacy matter all day and how annoying the fallacy of "if you have nothing to hide you shouldn't worry about the government/corporations spying on you" is? I'm puzzled.

foo101 9y ago
What makes you think salary is a matter of privacy? In a lot of countries, many government jobs come with publicly disclosed salaries. Why do you think a job in a private sector should maintain secrecy for salaries? Privacy applies to private data. Whether salary should be considered private data is the point of argument here. Nobody is arguing about doing away with privacy altogether. So what is your point?
- patrickaljord 9y ago
  My point is that what two consenting adults contracts is part of their privacy unless you're an authoritarian State.
  - foo101 9y ago
    Except most contracts in the private sector (IT, finance, etc.) are not between two consenting adults. They are usually between one consulting adult and a huge corporation, a corporation that can choose to pay a certain class of people unfairly and still survive in business. It is in the interest of such corporations to maintain this asymmetry of information where they can know your salary and all your colleagues' salary but would discourage you from knowing your colleague salary. If you think salary being private data is the obvious assumption, then think again, maybe you have been conditioned by years of employment in the private sector to believe that salary is private data. In many cultures and in many type of jobs, it is not considered private data.
    - patrickaljord 9y ago
      I see that you hold the belief that consenting adults willingly working are being forced to do so, I do not share this belief that corporation are forcing anyone to work for them. Maybe you have been conditioned by years of State education to believe that employment does not imply consent between two parties but is a forced procedure. Many philosophers do not agree with that and consider work contracting to be consented between willing adults.