Hacker News Reader

Comment by anoy8888 | Hacker News Reader

The only way to win here is to make it expensive to produce lies . Make people take responsibility of the consequences and punish them .

View on HN

The consequences already exist, but are not enough to prevent the fraud. The linked article speaks of criminal charges. And here is a CEO going to prison for similar charges of fraud over nuclear construction:

https://www.powermag.com/former-scana-ceo-will-land-in-priso...

Nuclear projects tend to attract fraudsters that are not intimidated by the possibility of jail time.

I would claim that the whole construction industry tend to attract fraudsters that are not intimidated by the possibility of jail time. It is, if I remember right, the largest source of human trafficking in the world.

Who has the truth though?

Prediction markets

Good answer, but isn't that a practical answer, based on consensus? Ie its what people believe is true, but might not be actually true.

They are useful for things that become less ambiguous in the future.

Lehman Brothers anyone?

Courts.

Is legal truth, actual truth?

In the case of the opening story in the link, yes.

It's close enough, and is good enough to generally satisfy our institutions and culture. The standard shouldn't be, and isn't, objective perfection.

It's not usually difficult to determine whether a nuclear reactor does or does not exist.

The comment I responded to said:

> The only way to win here is to make it expensive to produce lies .

But which authority can be trusted to provide truth, in order to have a metric on what a lie is? Which authority is even unbiased and impartial?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com