Hacker News Reader

Comment by pcoweg | Hacker News Reader

Many larger companies have policies surrounding the paying of ransoms for kidnapping. How is paying this "bounty" any different from paying such a ransom?

View on HN

They don't fail to tell law enforcement after paying kidnapping ransoms and don't consider the perp to be law-abiding person. Also if a kidnapper was ever located domestically there'd be about a 0.00001% chance of the person getting a payout.

It's also against Canadian law to pay ransoms for kidnapping, even if you're a private citizen. (Although you'll be hard pressed to find someone who has been prosecuted for this.) The U.S. has a similar "we don't negotiate with terrorists" policy, but I'm not sure if it's explicitly illegal to send money.

>"we don't negotiate with terrorists"

A myth.

Yes, always negotiate. The outcome if worse if you don't.

Here's a book from an ex FBI hostage negotiator. It narrates some real case stories from the inside, it's well written and quite interesting. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Stalling-Time-Life-Hostage-Negotiat...

Refusing to negotiate with terrorists isn’t a strategy designed to produce the best outcome in isolation. It’s to avoid providing incentives for more terrorism, despite the consequences viewed in isolation.

So “outcomes are worse if you don’t” is not relevant. Several times as many terrorism incidents with better outcomes on average is not what most people would consider effective anti-terrorism.

The discussion went through ransoms, hostages and terrorism. It's inappropriate to reply to all situations with "we don't negotiate with terrorists".

Refusing to negotiate with terrorists is not a real strategy practiced by anyone. It’s just tough PR talk with zero basis on reality.

One encourages people theft. The other encourages data theft only. The latter is generally considered less deplorable.

Doesn’t that sort of depend on the data?

E.G. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-leicestershire-42667451

Details of "hundreds, potentially thousands" of vulnerable people, including children, have been emailed to taxi firms by a council.

Just for one example from the headlines.

Sort of? Maybe? I mean, a list of people doesn't really encourage kidnapping. Someone could just use a phone book instead. Perhaps cases of witness protection or something. But those are extreme edge cases.

No, it does not depend on the data, you automata

I’m not sure that a bare denial laced with a petty insult really does much for your point.

What was stolen wasn't company financial data, it was driver personal data.

The digital version of kidnapping would be the hackers who stole Netflix shows and tried to random the money from them.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com