3 ms·

And Google isn't a person to jail. Which nicely illustrates one of the major problems of having granted corporations 'legal person' status: the punishments fo

And Google isn't a person to jail. Which nicely illustrates one of the major problems of having granted corporations 'legal person' status: the punishments for various crimes were originally intended to punish natural persons and have never been sufficiently adapted to punish corporations. What's a proper punishment for flagrant contempt of the court by a corporation? And corporations have a way of making these things not attributable to any one person. That is in fact their raison d'être.

annnnd 12y ago
> the punishments for various crimes were originally intended to punish natural persons and have never been sufficiently adapted to punish corporations Good point! :) Jail == cannot conduct business for X years?
davidw 12y ago
> That is in fact their raison d'être. This looks like an example of @ziobrando's "Bullshit asymmetry principle" in action. You whip out some bullshit (unless I'm really misunderstanding what you are saying) in a one liner with no citations, but to refute it, someone would have to talk about the history of corporations, legal theories around them, compare and contrast with societies that never developed a similar idea (an interesting take on things: http://www.amazon.com/Long-Divergence-Islamic-Held-Middle-ebook/dp/B0046A9MA4/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&sr=&qid=&tag=dedasys-20 http://www.amazon.com/Long-Divergence-Islamic-Held-Middle-eb... ), and so on and so forth. That's a lot more effort than simply spouting some snark.
- ctdonath 12y ago
  Thank you. I have long been trying to pin down the description of, and term for, that principle. http://t.bigboxcar.com/post/87256202522/bullshit-asymmetry-principle-via http://t.bigboxcar.com/post/87256202522/bullshit-asymmetry-p... There's still a corollary in need of succinct definition/labeling: in context of a casual discussion, you make a fair point in a one liner with no citation, then someone criticizes it (in effect) for lacking peer-reviewed encyclopedic depth & thoroughness. (Ex.: "this car does 0 to 60MPH in 10 seconds" "uh, NO, you're not taking relativity into account! and you didn't cite any certified testing labs!" and from social context you feel compelled to elaborate on why your comment was sufficient, while the other loudly labels you a liar, ignores your objections, and marches off to disrupt other sane conversations.)
  - Confusion 12y ago
    Which is why I'm not going to challenge the accusation of 'bullshit'. I don't think the principle applies here. It does suggest I need to clarify that I believe that it is both the great strength and the great weakness of corporations.

annnnd 12y ago

> the punishments for various crimes were originally intended to punish natural persons and have never been sufficiently adapted to punish corporations Good point! :) Jail == cannot conduct business for X years?

davidw 12y ago

> That is in fact their raison d'être. This looks like an example of @ziobrando's "Bullshit asymmetry principle" in action. You whip out some bullshit (unless I'm really misunderstanding what you are saying) in a one liner with no citations, but to refute it, someone would have to talk about the history of corporations, legal theories around them, compare and contrast with societies that never developed a similar idea (an interesting take on things: http://www.amazon.com/Long-Divergence-Islamic-Held-Middle-ebook/dp/B0046A9MA4/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&sr=&qid=&tag=dedasys-20 http://www.amazon.com/Long-Divergence-Islamic-Held-Middle-eb... ), and so on and so forth. That's a lot more effort than simply spouting some snark.

ctdonath 12y ago
Thank you. I have long been trying to pin down the description of, and term for, that principle. http://t.bigboxcar.com/post/87256202522/bullshit-asymmetry-principle-via http://t.bigboxcar.com/post/87256202522/bullshit-asymmetry-p... There's still a corollary in need of succinct definition/labeling: in context of a casual discussion, you make a fair point in a one liner with no citation, then someone criticizes it (in effect) for lacking peer-reviewed encyclopedic depth & thoroughness. (Ex.: "this car does 0 to 60MPH in 10 seconds" "uh, NO, you're not taking relativity into account! and you didn't cite any certified testing labs!" and from social context you feel compelled to elaborate on why your comment was sufficient, while the other loudly labels you a liar, ignores your objections, and marches off to disrupt other sane conversations.)
- Confusion 12y ago
  Which is why I'm not going to challenge the accusation of 'bullshit'. I don't think the principle applies here. It does suggest I need to clarify that I believe that it is both the great strength and the great weakness of corporations.