6 ms·

Jail might be a bit much, but giving them the maximum fine allowed under the GDPR seems quite reasonable to me. I'd even go so far as to try and transfer the de

Jail might be a bit much, but giving them the maximum fine allowed under the GDPR seems quite reasonable to me. I'd even go so far as to try and transfer the debt to the individuals responsible if this causes the company to go bankrupt, as this is clearly malpractice.

oarsinsync 6y ago
> I'd even go so far as to try and transfer the debt to the individuals responsible if this causes the company to go bankrupt So who's liable in this scenario? Someone in the C suite? The coder monkey who implemented it? Someone in between? All of the above? Unless I'm mis-remembering, the maximum fine under GDPR is a % of the total revenue of the company, so depending on the size of the company, this could result in bankruptcy of any individuals deemed responsible too.
- ginko 6y ago
  I'd say the stock owners.
  - oarsinsync 6y ago
    If the risk of investing is goes from (Value of your investment can drop to zero) and is now (Your entire personal fortune is at risk), what do you think is the outcome? Thinking 1 month, 6 months, 12 months, 5 years. Or to put it another way, is causing another massive economic shock the correct response to a dark patterns on websites?
    - dddeeerrr9999 6y ago
      The stock market is not the economy. All you are ultimately advocating for is keeping the exiting corrupt corporate leadership in charge and preventing market forces from replacing them with ethical leaders.
    - munk-a 6y ago
      When you give someone money to do a thing you have responsibility about that thing. If someone is running a clearly illegal business (trafficing illegal drugs, humans) and you are aware of this and invest in their business then you become an accessory you are not immune to liability for crimes you were aware of before investing - you are immune to liability for actions taken without your knowledge (which is what we assume the great deal of actions taken by investees are). Causing another massive shock to the stock market is the correct response here because nearly everyone is engaged in behavior that harms society and should be stopped. Also, the market will recover and really isn't that important. If a small proportion of actors were engaged in this activity then getting an industry compact or other token gesture might be good enough to correct it.
  - vorpalhex 6y ago
    So pension funds and teacher's unions? Grandpa's nest egg?
    - vertex-four 6y ago
      If people were affected by the things they give companies money to do, perhaps they'd be a lot more careful about what they give companies money to do.
      - freeone3000 6y ago
        To the point where it's not worth giving companies money at all. Stockholders aren't involved in day-to-day ops, anyway, so you're placing the blame at the wrong place. It should be placed on the C-suite.
        iso1631 6y ago
        The problem with modern capitalism is that people can get all the benefits but avoid the bulk of the risk
        vorpalhex 6y ago
        The alternative seems like a strange land where we imprison waste management workers for their pension funds being invested in companies they have literally have no control over and no ability to discover the behavior of. Or should we restrict the stock market only to the rich and powerful?
  - Swizec 6y ago
    So pension funds? That smells dangerous

oarsinsync 6y ago

> I'd even go so far as to try and transfer the debt to the individuals responsible if this causes the company to go bankrupt So who's liable in this scenario? Someone in the C suite? The coder monkey who implemented it? Someone in between? All of the above? Unless I'm mis-remembering, the maximum fine under GDPR is a % of the total revenue of the company, so depending on the size of the company, this could result in bankruptcy of any individuals deemed responsible too.

ginko 6y ago
I'd say the stock owners.
- oarsinsync 6y ago
  If the risk of investing is goes from (Value of your investment can drop to zero) and is now (Your entire personal fortune is at risk), what do you think is the outcome? Thinking 1 month, 6 months, 12 months, 5 years. Or to put it another way, is causing another massive economic shock the correct response to a dark patterns on websites?
  - dddeeerrr9999 6y ago
    The stock market is not the economy. All you are ultimately advocating for is keeping the exiting corrupt corporate leadership in charge and preventing market forces from replacing them with ethical leaders.
  - munk-a 6y ago
    When you give someone money to do a thing you have responsibility about that thing. If someone is running a clearly illegal business (trafficing illegal drugs, humans) and you are aware of this and invest in their business then you become an accessory you are not immune to liability for crimes you were aware of before investing - you are immune to liability for actions taken without your knowledge (which is what we assume the great deal of actions taken by investees are). Causing another massive shock to the stock market is the correct response here because nearly everyone is engaged in behavior that harms society and should be stopped. Also, the market will recover and really isn't that important. If a small proportion of actors were engaged in this activity then getting an industry compact or other token gesture might be good enough to correct it.
- vorpalhex 6y ago
  So pension funds and teacher's unions? Grandpa's nest egg?
  - vertex-four 6y ago
    If people were affected by the things they give companies money to do, perhaps they'd be a lot more careful about what they give companies money to do.
    - freeone3000 6y ago
      To the point where it's not worth giving companies money at all. Stockholders aren't involved in day-to-day ops, anyway, so you're placing the blame at the wrong place. It should be placed on the C-suite.
      - iso1631 6y ago
        The problem with modern capitalism is that people can get all the benefits but avoid the bulk of the risk
        vorpalhex 6y ago
        The alternative seems like a strange land where we imprison waste management workers for their pension funds being invested in companies they have literally have no control over and no ability to discover the behavior of. Or should we restrict the stock market only to the rich and powerful?
- Swizec 6y ago
  So pension funds? That smells dangerous