4 ms·

...And I can't agree more. The question is what can be done, if anything. But I've a solution in my wildest dreams as a dictator. :-)

lenerdenator 2y ago
You introduce consequences against the people who have created the system that we're in now.
- dasil003 2y ago
  Even assuming you could narrow this down to a small enough set of people that can credibly be held responsible for creating the system we have now, and assuming you could impose consequences on them without violating their civil rights, and assuming they learnt their lesson and would actively take precautions to avoid their actions leading to such a systemic failure in the future, at best this would only influence those particular actors to avoid the previous failures. The next systemic failure would look quite different on the ground and come from different individuals pursuing different goals who would not have learnt any of the previous lessons. The only people who would see the connection would be more experienced people and/or intellectuals looking from a higher zoom level, but likely would not be empowered to really do anything to stop it given all the direct financial incentives motivating a much larger group of people to direct action. If our culture had more respect for elders and/or thinkers that could be a start, but even then it would still be an uphill battle in a capitalist society.
  - hilbert42 2y ago
    "…failure in the future, at best this would only influence those particular actors to avoid the pervious failures. " Not if laws were like the Monopoly square that has 'Go directly to jail' stamped in bold all over it. Just a few decent lockups would put the shivers down the backs of those so included. Trouble is governments have failed to implement the necessary laws. Unfortunately, as we've seen Big Tech is too big, too powerful, and too money-rich to be challenged effectively by governments.
    - dasil003 2y ago
      GP said "the system that we're in now", not the specific executive decisions and operational practices employed at Crowdstrike. I agree with you the latter could be addressed through accountability, but I struggle to see what kind of law would work the way you intend here. In general, regulation helps large corporations and because they have resources to maintain nominal compliance, as well as the layers/lawyers to maintain plausible deniability if things go sideways. Regulation tends to undermine competition which further cements their power and has many negative effects that span well beyond obvious failures due to poor engineering practices.
      - hilbert42 2y ago
        OK, but I'd argue regulation kept large corporations nominally in check before the greed-is-good mantra along with the belief that the only responsibility a corp has is to its shareholders—ideas that took hold and became prominent in the 1980s (Friedman, Hayek, Chicago School, et al). Big Tech is now so big and powerful that it essentially does what it does with impunity, fines for breaching laws are just a part of doing business, they have negible effect on the bottom line. The way of fixing the problem is not only to hold companies who violate the laws responsible but also equally so its employees, external advisers, accountants, etc. Combine this with reqiring people responsible for certain corporate functions such as those who make policy decisions with respect to the way corporations police laws, check for breaches of the anti-trust/monopoly act etc. to be licensed similarly in the way electricians and plumbers are licensed. Take away their licenses and they'd not be able to carry out their Jobs. I reckon this will eventually come to pass but I'd venture it'll come to Europe long before the US.
        ryandrake 2y ago
        And (as you mentioned in your parent post) send people to prison, at least when the case is egregious enough! Or cause people to lose their ability to be employed. Microscopic fines for companies just aren't working. Judgments where they have to hand their customers a token $9 gift card or give them free credit monitoring aren't working. There needs to be real consequences for wrongdoing.

lenerdenator 2y ago

You introduce consequences against the people who have created the system that we're in now.

dasil003 2y ago
Even assuming you could narrow this down to a small enough set of people that can credibly be held responsible for creating the system we have now, and assuming you could impose consequences on them without violating their civil rights, and assuming they learnt their lesson and would actively take precautions to avoid their actions leading to such a systemic failure in the future, at best this would only influence those particular actors to avoid the previous failures. The next systemic failure would look quite different on the ground and come from different individuals pursuing different goals who would not have learnt any of the previous lessons. The only people who would see the connection would be more experienced people and/or intellectuals looking from a higher zoom level, but likely would not be empowered to really do anything to stop it given all the direct financial incentives motivating a much larger group of people to direct action. If our culture had more respect for elders and/or thinkers that could be a start, but even then it would still be an uphill battle in a capitalist society.
- hilbert42 2y ago
  "…failure in the future, at best this would only influence those particular actors to avoid the pervious failures. " Not if laws were like the Monopoly square that has 'Go directly to jail' stamped in bold all over it. Just a few decent lockups would put the shivers down the backs of those so included. Trouble is governments have failed to implement the necessary laws. Unfortunately, as we've seen Big Tech is too big, too powerful, and too money-rich to be challenged effectively by governments.
  - dasil003 2y ago
    GP said "the system that we're in now", not the specific executive decisions and operational practices employed at Crowdstrike. I agree with you the latter could be addressed through accountability, but I struggle to see what kind of law would work the way you intend here. In general, regulation helps large corporations and because they have resources to maintain nominal compliance, as well as the layers/lawyers to maintain plausible deniability if things go sideways. Regulation tends to undermine competition which further cements their power and has many negative effects that span well beyond obvious failures due to poor engineering practices.
    - hilbert42 2y ago
      OK, but I'd argue regulation kept large corporations nominally in check before the greed-is-good mantra along with the belief that the only responsibility a corp has is to its shareholders—ideas that took hold and became prominent in the 1980s (Friedman, Hayek, Chicago School, et al). Big Tech is now so big and powerful that it essentially does what it does with impunity, fines for breaching laws are just a part of doing business, they have negible effect on the bottom line. The way of fixing the problem is not only to hold companies who violate the laws responsible but also equally so its employees, external advisers, accountants, etc. Combine this with reqiring people responsible for certain corporate functions such as those who make policy decisions with respect to the way corporations police laws, check for breaches of the anti-trust/monopoly act etc. to be licensed similarly in the way electricians and plumbers are licensed. Take away their licenses and they'd not be able to carry out their Jobs. I reckon this will eventually come to pass but I'd venture it'll come to Europe long before the US.
      - ryandrake 2y ago
        And (as you mentioned in your parent post) send people to prison, at least when the case is egregious enough! Or cause people to lose their ability to be employed. Microscopic fines for companies just aren't working. Judgments where they have to hand their customers a token $9 gift card or give them free credit monitoring aren't working. There needs to be real consequences for wrongdoing.