3 ms·

You're going to have to spell this one out for me. To my (admittedly poor) judgment, the above comment does not violate the guidelines. I provide relevant examp

You're going to have to spell this one out for me. To my (admittedly poor) judgment, the above comment does not violate the guidelines. I provide relevant examples of behavior that reasonable people would consider far worse than hacking some rich dude's iPhone.

pc86 6y ago
Sure. To the first point, I think it's pretty evident the comment is snarky (even if it has a good point in there). I'm guilty of that too, more often than I'd like and I do get called out on it occasionally. And I don't think that alone is an excuse to just flippantly toss the guidelines at someone, which admittedly is basically what I did. To the second point, however, I do think you took the worst possible interpretation of swyx's comment, which was basically "nobody cares that the person in question is a murderous tyrant, but he hacked Bezos's phone and so is a bad person now." I don't think that's what he was saying at all, especially given the end about "more than he already is." Whether we like it or not, one of the primary reasons that Saudi Arabia is tolerated in the West is their economic importance, and their connections to the elite, almost entirely because of their wealth. That starts to crack if they go after the elites directly. So I took the comment as basically saying that it didn't seem to serve MBS at all to hack Bezos directly, as it would only (further) delegitimize him interntionally.
- jessaustin 6y ago
  I'm glad that some light snarking is still somewhat tolerated. It's one of the things that makes life bearable for me. To more seriously address the various possible interpretations of the comment in question... yours is a reasonable interpretation, but I don't think I was unresponsive to that interpretation. Of course ethical people object to MbS's previous evil deeds. Still, those are his deeds. If global opprobrium didn't sway him before, there's no reason to believe it did so more recently. If there is evidence that some electronic communication that appeared to come from MbS contained malware, that evidence should be analyzed in itself. It shouldn't be dismissed by vague unsupported perceptions of MbS's interests and motivations. It's not as though Bezos is universally adored, even among other satanically wealthy reptiles.

pc86 6y ago

Sure. To the first point, I think it's pretty evident the comment is snarky (even if it has a good point in there). I'm guilty of that too, more often than I'd like and I do get called out on it occasionally. And I don't think that alone is an excuse to just flippantly toss the guidelines at someone, which admittedly is basically what I did. To the second point, however, I do think you took the worst possible interpretation of swyx's comment, which was basically "nobody cares that the person in question is a murderous tyrant, but he hacked Bezos's phone and so is a bad person now." I don't think that's what he was saying at all, especially given the end about "more than he already is." Whether we like it or not, one of the primary reasons that Saudi Arabia is tolerated in the West is their economic importance, and their connections to the elite, almost entirely because of their wealth. That starts to crack if they go after the elites directly. So I took the comment as basically saying that it didn't seem to serve MBS at all to hack Bezos directly, as it would only (further) delegitimize him interntionally.

jessaustin 6y ago
I'm glad that some light snarking is still somewhat tolerated. It's one of the things that makes life bearable for me. To more seriously address the various possible interpretations of the comment in question... yours is a reasonable interpretation, but I don't think I was unresponsive to that interpretation. Of course ethical people object to MbS's previous evil deeds. Still, those are his deeds. If global opprobrium didn't sway him before, there's no reason to believe it did so more recently. If there is evidence that some electronic communication that appeared to come from MbS contained malware, that evidence should be analyzed in itself. It shouldn't be dismissed by vague unsupported perceptions of MbS's interests and motivations. It's not as though Bezos is universally adored, even among other satanically wealthy reptiles.