Hacker News Reader

Comment by al_james | Hacker News Reader

I think this may be the Hindenburg moment for services like this built purely on trust. Trust alone is a naive defence that only works when your user base is small and well aligned with your core concepts. In many ways its the coming of age of the concept when it starts appealing to crooks. Mandatory insurance and more strict user verification is the only way this kind of service will survive.

View on HN

Crooks? Someone that would seriously vandalize someone's home is not really a "crook" but a victim of some sort of mental health problem. There will always (in any area of life) be a small percentage of people who do that sort of thing.

The perp also stole money, passports etc.

Yeah but crooks is the biggest understatement I've ever heard. This is a bizarre, mean-spirited act... not simply theft.

Wait--so the guy who trashed the house is a victim?

Someone who would do that is more likely suffering from some sort of mental health problem than simply being mean. Do you know any normal, healthy, reasonable person who would do that?

There is lots of evil in the world. Your statement is far too broad of a generalization to be taken seriously.

There is lots of evil in the world.

As a nonreligious person I just don't agree with that statement at all. The idea that there is some sinister force flowing around the earth is bizarre and medieval.

More accurately, non-insane people behave as they do in order to achieve a goal that they think will bring them happiness. Unless there is a motive of revenge or bad PR then there is no way that the degree of vandalism done in this case could possibly make the vandal happy. Anyone who would go to great lengths to destroy all traces of a stranger's personal property is mentally ill.

Mental illness has a material cause, not a supernatural one.

As everyone keeps telling you, you can't attribute that vandalism to mental health problems. It may be the case but you don't know. I guess you need counter examples to stop saying it:

1. Drugs

2. Thieves who knew/thought they'd get away with this, thus also wrecked the place (Occam's Razor will suggest this)

3. As you mentioned yourself - revenge or bad PR.

I use the word evil as a descriptor of people without guilt or shame when hurting others. Maybe they are down on their luck, addicted to drugs, or just hateful, but I don't think you have to be religious to believe in evil.

I agree entirely, and I think you have made an important point.

The person who did this is mentally unbalanced, and needs help.

I find it curious that you say that. A thief is not just someone who shifts a few numbers in a spreadsheet, a thief tends to break things in order to gain access to valuables, or threaten people's lives. The line between that and willful vandalism is not so terribly thick.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com