4 ms·

It's worth it b/c corporations only get penalized with measly fines

timemct 4y ago
I’ve often thought that when a company, especially one as big as Alphabet/Google, gets fined, it’s simply seen as an operating cost and not as a motivator to do better.
- verisimi 4y ago
  So do the execs at google. And what is "better" anyway? Morality won't pay the bills.. Engineering society to do whatever it is you want society to do is good business however. You'd hope this is where government and its legislative arm would step in to speak up for the 'citizens' but in fact, government is just the other wing of the same bird.
- Ekaros 4y ago
  Clearly fines aren't sufficiently high. I think we need to scale them with revenue. Like towards 25-50%. Maybe with some payment plan if needed taking money from employer/executive bonuses, stock buybacks and dividends until it is paid with full interest.
- Gibbon1 4y ago
  Random thought people say you can't put a corporation in jail. Well they're wrong. You could sentence the board to serve a stint in jail. Or management. Or even everyone that works there. Want to talk about lighting a fire under people.
  - tracker1 4y ago
    I look at so many issues in the US... the East Palistine train derailment and SVB bank... and wish that would actually happen (to sr mgt and boards) in practice.
  - midoridensha 4y ago
    That would be great, but it's hard to see this ever happening in America.
- rodgerd 4y ago
  The reason that banks generally take AMLAT rules so seriously is that the fines are vastly higher than any profit that can be generated by breaking them. Where I live they're in the order of up to a million per transaction that violates the rules. CBA in Australia was fined $700 million and Westpac $1.3 billion for mere tens of thousands of transactions that were in breach. They have spent a lot of time and money fixing their shit since then, unsurprisingly. Fines that punch through to individuals are another great motivator. Health and safety rules suddenly started getting taken a great deal more seriously in my neck of the woods when managers became personally liable for up to $200,000 for breaches.
henriquez 4y ago
[flagged]
- darth_avocado 4y ago
  People who directly contributed to destroying evidence should also be arrested the same way you would for destroying evidence in any other crimes. (Even if you’re claiming negligence)
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    > People who directly contributed to destroying evidence should also be arrested the same way you would for destroying evidence in any other crimes. This is not a criminal case, so “evidence in any other crimes” is inappropriate.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- gsatic 4y ago
  We haven't yet figured out how to shutdown cancer once they get past a certain scale. Large tech firms are like cancer is what the last two decades have taught us.
  - tracker1 4y ago
    "too big to fail" pretty much sums it up... roughly equivalent to, we do a lot of campaign funding.
- drstewart 4y ago
  Governments should be in the habit of shutting down any and all enterprises at a drop of a hat. Any infraction should result in immediate termination + mass arrests as you correctly point out. Countries that have taken this approach (i.e. Cuba, Zimbabwe) have shown great success and flourishing, thriving economies.
  - 4y ago
Tuna-Fish 4y ago
What's in play here is not a fine, but courtroom sanctions that potentially hurt their case. For example, the most powerful remedy Epic has asked from the court is "adverse inference", which would mean that the judge tells the jury that instead of judging the case on the basis of evidence presented by both parties, they should consider absence of evidence to be in favor of Epic. This can be quite devastating for your case.

I’ve often thought that when a company, especially one as big as Alphabet/Google, gets fined, it’s simply seen as an operating cost and not as a motivator to do better.

verisimi 4y ago
So do the execs at google. And what is "better" anyway? Morality won't pay the bills.. Engineering society to do whatever it is you want society to do is good business however. You'd hope this is where government and its legislative arm would step in to speak up for the 'citizens' but in fact, government is just the other wing of the same bird.
Ekaros 4y ago
Clearly fines aren't sufficiently high. I think we need to scale them with revenue. Like towards 25-50%. Maybe with some payment plan if needed taking money from employer/executive bonuses, stock buybacks and dividends until it is paid with full interest.
Gibbon1 4y ago
Random thought people say you can't put a corporation in jail. Well they're wrong. You could sentence the board to serve a stint in jail. Or management. Or even everyone that works there. Want to talk about lighting a fire under people.
- tracker1 4y ago
  I look at so many issues in the US... the East Palistine train derailment and SVB bank... and wish that would actually happen (to sr mgt and boards) in practice.
- midoridensha 4y ago
  That would be great, but it's hard to see this ever happening in America.
rodgerd 4y ago
The reason that banks generally take AMLAT rules so seriously is that the fines are vastly higher than any profit that can be generated by breaking them. Where I live they're in the order of up to a million per transaction that violates the rules. CBA in Australia was fined $700 million and Westpac $1.3 billion for mere tens of thousands of transactions that were in breach. They have spent a lot of time and money fixing their shit since then, unsurprisingly. Fines that punch through to individuals are another great motivator. Health and safety rules suddenly started getting taken a great deal more seriously in my neck of the woods when managers became personally liable for up to $200,000 for breaches.

henriquez 4y ago

[flagged]

darth_avocado 4y ago
People who directly contributed to destroying evidence should also be arrested the same way you would for destroying evidence in any other crimes. (Even if you’re claiming negligence)
- dragonwriter 4y ago
  > People who directly contributed to destroying evidence should also be arrested the same way you would for destroying evidence in any other crimes. This is not a criminal case, so “evidence in any other crimes” is inappropriate.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
gsatic 4y ago
We haven't yet figured out how to shutdown cancer once they get past a certain scale. Large tech firms are like cancer is what the last two decades have taught us.
- tracker1 4y ago
  "too big to fail" pretty much sums it up... roughly equivalent to, we do a lot of campaign funding.
drstewart 4y ago
Governments should be in the habit of shutting down any and all enterprises at a drop of a hat. Any infraction should result in immediate termination + mass arrests as you correctly point out. Countries that have taken this approach (i.e. Cuba, Zimbabwe) have shown great success and flourishing, thriving economies.
- 4y ago

Tuna-Fish 4y ago

What's in play here is not a fine, but courtroom sanctions that potentially hurt their case. For example, the most powerful remedy Epic has asked from the court is "adverse inference", which would mean that the judge tells the jury that instead of judging the case on the basis of evidence presented by both parties, they should consider absence of evidence to be in favor of Epic. This can be quite devastating for your case.