3 ms·
So the solution here would be a fine that is also affecting the developer. No, the solution is jail time for the founders and board members of these companies.
by vanusa 5y ago
So the solution here would be a fine that is also affecting the developer.
No, the solution is jail time for the founders and board members of these companies. Along with extremely harsh and vindictive confiscation of their assets.
And generous incentives for developers (such as the GP commenter) to snitch on these people for asking them to be knowingly complicit in their immoral activities.
- cool_dude85 5y agoWeird that the people who actually produce these things get let off the hook though, right? So you build it and don't get in trouble, just that mean ol' CEO.
- feanaro 5y agoThe mean ol' CEO has several orders of magnitude more resources in his control than the person that builds it, hence must be considered responsible to a greater degree.
- cool_dude85 5y agoI can agree that he needs to be punished to a greater extent due to his broad responsibility. But nothing at all for the ones who actually performed the work to build these illegal sites?
- vanusa 5y agoNo one said there should be no punishment at all for leaf-node employees. Just that about 99 percent of our resources should be focused on those with the most leverage over the situation.
- vanusa 5y agoNothing to do with "mean". There's no need to emotionalize. It's about focusing on people with (1) the most leverage over the decision-making process and (2) perfect visibility into the consequences (legal and otherwise) of their actions. That is -- when you're dealing with the mob, you doing go after the delivery boy. You go after the foot soldiers and kingpins.
- cool_dude85 5y agoI would argue that when it comes to developing software, usually the one with the most leverage is the worker who develops it. If she says no, then it doesn't get developed. Maybe in team environments it's a bit trickier when you're looking at a feature as a whole, but each individual has full leverage over the code they produce. That they don't have leverage over the decision-making process seems like a cop out.
- vanusa 5y agoIf she says no, then it doesn't get developed. That's not how the world works. When she says no, they just find someone else. That they don't have leverage over the decision-making process seems like a cop out. No one said they have "no" leverage. Just that those at the executive level have infinitely more.
- yawaworht1978 5y agoBy that logic, if every dev would face very serious legal consequences, the client could not just hire another dev. I never liked the "will find another" trope. The Chinese , after the opium wars, simply executed dealers and users. Very radical, but you bet dealers wouldn't just find the next user and vice versa
- jeltz 5y agoI am for fines for the developers and prison times for the execs. I think both are culpable.
- DangitBobby 5y agoUsers could also just not use these apps. Are they not also culpable?
- yawaworht1978 5y agoThat's a bit like saying heroin addicts simply shouldn't use it, the companies are starving for revenue.
- wincy 5y agoIt’d be quite the three ring circus to see France attempt to arrest Mark Zuckerberg or Larry Page. I’m 100% sure the US would flat out refuse to extradite such people, they might as well try to arrest John Roberts.
- sofixa 5y agoDoesn't matter that much if the US doesn't extradite them ( of course they won't, like France doesn't Polanski), they still have to avoid every EU member and close to France country, which can be pretty limiting.
- yawaworht1978 5y agoSpain would not hesitate to do so, they don't care much about title or rank or name, so long it's not one of their own.
- antaviana 5y agoWhat about the non-adopted children of these founders and board members? There's potentially a lot of inherited DNA out there that could cause damage to society in the future.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]