Yes, a very interesting article. And awful to think annout all those top management people that caused this will probably not see any punishment at all. They have actual people’s lives on their conscience after those crashes, but I doubt they care.
It’s frustrating because instead of consequences, all they see are benefits. They got or are getting their paydays so it really worked out for the villains.
on their conscience
🤣
Thanks for the laugh, I needed that. 🙂
I'd say it's on the conscience of people with actual conscience who decided that others have it too, and thus allowed such cockroaches to ruin wonderful systems.
There's a wonderfully complex system of deferred responsibilities making sure that the people who actually caused this can have all the plausible deniability in the world, see themselves as having nothing to do with it, and enjoy a very relaxed life with riches we can only imagine.
In my opinion Hassan ibn Sabbah was the most perceptive libertarian in the history of this planet.
In other words, how good can be all the bodyguards these people can hire to protect themselves from retribution, in case the small part of logically connecting them to an event is fulfilled by peaceful means?
That's the point of the plausible deniability. You can go after them with a personal conviction, but you can't go after them with proof. There's nothing left to "logically connect".
Because they controlled the mechanisms that were designed to hold them accountable, and made sure not to be accounted for.
Kinda like how attackers who intrude on a system delete the logs and other traces of their presence.
But that is a logical connection.
In many countries politicians intentionally try to keep the environment such that nobody would be to blame, but bad things would still happen. In many social structures - influential people.
That fact is enough of a crime itself.
Try approaching this like you would approach electrical engineering.
It's a problem, not a dead end.
"Good boundaries" are a helluva thing.
Ergo: the person or team at fault are the ones who didn't do the specific thing that was needed.
mozz@mbin.grits.dev to 
Yes, a very interesting article. And awful to think annout all those top management people that caused this will probably not see any punishment at all. They have actual people’s lives on their conscience after those crashes, but I doubt they care.
It’s frustrating because instead of consequences, all they see are benefits. They got or are getting their paydays so it really worked out for the villains.
🤣
Thanks for the laugh, I needed that. 🙂
I'd say it's on the conscience of people with actual conscience who decided that others have it too, and thus allowed such cockroaches to ruin wonderful systems.
There's a wonderfully complex system of deferred responsibilities making sure that the people who actually caused this can have all the plausible deniability in the world, see themselves as having nothing to do with it, and enjoy a very relaxed life with riches we can only imagine.
In my opinion Hassan ibn Sabbah was the most perceptive libertarian in the history of this planet.
In other words, how good can be all the bodyguards these people can hire to protect themselves from retribution, in case the small part of logically connecting them to an event is fulfilled by peaceful means?
That's the point of the plausible deniability. You can go after them with a personal conviction, but you can't go after them with proof. There's nothing left to "logically connect".
Because they controlled the mechanisms that were designed to hold them accountable, and made sure not to be accounted for.
Kinda like how attackers who intrude on a system delete the logs and other traces of their presence.
But that is a logical connection.
In many countries politicians intentionally try to keep the environment such that nobody would be to blame, but bad things would still happen. In many social structures - influential people.
That fact is enough of a crime itself.
Try approaching this like you would approach electrical engineering.
It's a problem, not a dead end.
"Good boundaries" are a helluva thing.
Ergo: the person or team at fault are the ones who didn't do the specific thing that was needed.