4 ms·
Your comment is not being downvoted despite talking only about one side of the problem. I like HN. Part of the solution to the problem you described is to make
by dandare 8y ago
Your comment is not being downvoted despite talking only about one side of the problem. I like HN.
Part of the solution to the problem you described is to make such company behavior more costly. If the outcry from today's story was significant, the company would have to calculate such cost into their decision. "Look Andy, we know you know lot of our secrets, but if we pay you millions and call you a hero it could cost us much more."
This would in turn have effect on companies calculating whether to try to hide dirty laundry or come clean, knowing they have little leverage on disgraced VPs.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- thadjo 8y agoThe actual framing of issues like this as a cost-benefit is much closer to the root problem. Make these decisions more expensive? Sure. But the deeper problem is doing this kind of financial calculus in the face of monstrous moral behavior.