4 ms·
They are already being gamed, and with bad actors who have access to inside information. Not saying it's a good idea, but this isn't a valid reason
by klik99 4y ago
They are already being gamed, and with bad actors who have access to inside information. Not saying it's a good idea, but this isn't a valid reason
- amadeuspagel 4y agoIf some bad actors have access to inside information, that's a limited and solvable problem and doesn't mean that we should give up and give that information to everyone.
- klik99 4y agoStrong disagree with it being "solvable" - bad actors will always exist (don't feel like I need to explain this one, I'm sure we all agree), arms race will always fail because for them it is the PRIMARY focus for income, for tech companies it's always a secondary concern because it's a weaker, more indirect and longer term impact on bottom line. Making information public could (I'm not sold on this by the way, just saying it's more plausible that what is currently being done) weaken the bonus these bad actors have. By making it public you're maybe allowing some weaker bad actors in, but you're also limiting the power these primary bad actors have.
- brookst 4y agoI've never understood the "an imperfect solution is no better than no solution and should be thrown out on principle" view. Door locks aren't perfect; our justice system isn't perfect; software isn't perfect. But they're all pretty useful and I just can't get behind a movement to abolish any of them because they fail to solve every individual case.