Healthcare companies are yanking info from their leadership pages | Hacker News Reader

Healthcare companies are yanking info from their leadership pages

old.reddit.com

101 pointspaganel114 comments

It's highly likely the FBI reached out to many of these organizations to do some initial contact and provide them some information regarding the current threat outlook. The worry is always copycats.

This strikes me as an overzealous internal response by the content team who otherwise doesn't know what to do with any of this. Since they're publicly traded all of this information is required to be in SEC reports anyways.

To be fair "doing something, anything, mostly stupid" is well established american standard procedure when something happens. Something "has" to be done - so something gets done.

Geez, next you're going to tell me we're not made quantifiably safer by removing our shoes at airport security (unless we paid money to not have to).

Anybody motivated enough to murder someone in this fashion would probably know or learn about the internet archive.

criminals are generally really dumb

Catching a criminal is usually a much bigger story than not catching a criminal. And criminals that get caught are tautologically "dumb enough to get caught."

We're biased to believe that criminals are dumb because we only catch the dumb ones.

The opposite of survivorship bias?

I would say it's an example of sampling or selection bias

A lot of white collar criminals seem pretty smart. They get away with commiting their crimes in public for decades and society rewards them for it.

It's easy to commit a crime it's hard to get away with it - mostly.

Given limited attention spans, removing prominent publicly available information (i.e. with other publicly accessible information still being available) would help reduce the chances of an incident slightly. This is the reason why all those private jet trackers of those prominent individuals were removed from both Twitter and then later Meta too, despite the information still being available publicly in aviation filings.

There's a shocking amount of #EatTheRich crowd totally happy with the assassination as supposedly justified vigilante justice.

Divide and conquer. The weaponized ideological mob is quite the useful herd to wield.

Not what I’m reading. People on my timeline are asking why we’re forced to pay into a feudal system in which health coverage is not guaranteed leaving them with hospital bills in the tens of thousands of dollars for minor procedures after their claim was arbitrarily denied. Others are asking how in the wealthiest nation on earth 1 million people go bankrupt from medical bills when guys like this CEO are making $56 million a year

Or maybe vigilante justice isn't people's first choice, but justice is justice to them.

Herds are notoriously hard to wield. It's a rather foolish mission.

Anyways I see all these as "signals of despair." It shouldn't be that shocking it's just the particular form it is taking this news cycle.

You don't need precision with a herd. You need to send them in a general direction to "trample" and for just a few of the more skilled-competent ones to feel emboldened and righteous in their vigilante justice - not being competent enough to understand the vast complexities and nuances of every situation.

Hmm maybe those CEOs should look into why so many Americans who rarely agree on much hate then so much.

I guess "not being assholes" has been given all the consideration it deserved and been rejected after a vivid internal debate.

While the attention the case is getting from the public is understandable, if this had been some random shop owner opening his store for the morning that got shot, would the NYPD give it the same level of attention? If not, why is it ok for this CEO's killing to get greater resources than the random shop owner?

If you want an honest boring answer:

It's because killing a CEO of a megacorp is a nationwide signal for civil unrest. A lot of people want to see those with power be shot on the street. Virtually no one wants to see a random person be shot on the street.

Everyone is talking in my town about how it feels like its 15F outside today. In Alaska I bet that would not be news.

Executions are somewhat less commonplace than random lethal violence. Plus, everyone knows how to reduce random killings, though we don't do it... this, on the other hand, is a problem requiring more attention.

Because the US is a class based society.

Because if CEOs and billionaires can't feel safe, then what's the purpose of having all that money?

Also, there are a myriad of channels on which $$$ people can donate to police departments (nycpolicefoundation.org https://gothamist.com/news/5-facts-about-new-nypd-commission... etc), but poorer people are not going to do that, so why bother spending as many resources?

Out of curiosity I looked up how much other companies pay to protect their CEOs. Aprox:

Andy Jassy: $986,164 2023 - Tim Apple: $820,309 2023 (plus 1.6mill in jet use) - Jensen: 2.4ish mill 2024 - Doug McMillon (Wal-Mart) 1.5MM 2022 - Sundar Pichai: 6.7MM 2024

FWIW, I saw Tim Cook in Pac Heights a few months back just walking around. There were two "guys" in plain clothes in front and behind him on that Saturday morning. I was able to say "hello" and he was nice. I imagine there are probably others monitoring his security that I couldn't see also.

Prediction: CEO salaries increase to account for hazard pay.

[flagged]

Americans React to UnitedHealthcare CEO's Murder: 'My Empathy Is Out of Network'

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42327272

Torrent of Hate for Health Insurance Industry Follows CEO's Killing

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42334016

Mentally replacing every CEO's about-page blurb with “Here are some words you can use to describe me: bulletproof, golden, untouchable, ironclad, godly.” https://youtu.be/UsGcg1icSyA?t=125

Cyber Security companies always recommend against putting personal information on websites/linked in, guess it took physical security for anyone to actually listen.

The two key things I've been wondering about since the initial shooting:

1. Do you think this could lead to a cascade of murder attempts towards CEOs who are perceived by many as doing harm or being evil?

2. Do you think this assassination will lead to companies with a negative public image to invest more heavily in reforming how they're perceived?

It's the third high-profile assassination (or attempt) in the US this year. I think the Gretchen Whitmer kidnapping plot in 2020 was the closest thing we had before that. Sadly, I think the answer to 1 is yes.

I'm guessing the attempt on Donald Trump was the first, but what was the second?

There were two attempts on Trump less than a month apart. The second wasn’t AS big of a story because I think they got the guy before he was able to get a shot off.

Does archive.org accept takedown requests?

Yes. Copyright issues are handled in the way you'd expect. Take down requests outside of copyright are reviewed internally without guarantee of outcome.

https://help.archive.org/help/how-do-i-request-to-remove-som...

Wonder if AI companies are updating their LLM filter rules to account for this.

This is actually kind of darkly hilarious. A CEO is gunned down and their solution is... "Let's try to keep secret who our CEO is!" Top minds at work here.

Trying to obscure information from people has never backfired in the history of the internet, and certainly nobody will be motivated to publicize the information further.

Going to make a site that pulls executives for all Fortune 500 companies. Internet Company Executives DataBase (ICEB).

I mean idk about you, but I don't want anymore of these people to die. I might not like them, but they're still people.

Not encouraging it to keep happening, just pointing out the fact that this isn't an effective response. If someone wants to get your information, and is motivated enough to kill you, they will.

The best response would be to up security in the short term, and try to change how you work so people aren't so motivated that they'll want to kill you in the long term.

The people they decline healthcare to are people. Are you not an inhumane executioner denying life saving procedures based on 10 sec check and some AI data?

Sure, I don't condone it and the system must be fixed instead, but 'they are still people' seems not good. A lot of very evil people in history and today are also people.

>Are you not an inhumane executioner denying life saving procedures based on 10 sec check and some AI data?

Parent pointed out that the CEO was a person. Sophistry ensues, where you denied the humanity of the deceased because of your disapproval of his enterprise, but then conclude by appearing to double back and not deny his humanity at the end.

Or asking for treating someone like a human who consistently for decades didn’t do the same. Tough.

Not so tough; I would not personally not consider a pencil pusher that causes, indirectly but he knew what he was doing, 100k-1m of deaths and suffering, a human at all. People defend him by saying he was just an accountant; you can say that for a lot of unsavory people throughout history.

But I am against insurance as a business at all; it is by design perverse: you want to deny claims, how is or can it be ever good for the client? Where I live, healthcare insurers are not allowed to deny claims, but other insurers can; I always take them to court if they do, even for a few 100 euros. These 'humans' have no right to screw over innocent people without recourse; it's simply stealing and in the case of health or disability it is torture or murder; they need to be held accountable, including the ceo and not just money fines (slap on wrists they are insured for!); prison time. If you deny cancer treatment and it turns out the claim was valid and you had ai decide or someone (or multiple people) knew it was valid but still declined it, that's prison time for negligence, theft and possibly murder (with intent as you knew the outcome and did it anyway); in any other scenario it would be anyway.

I don't want anyone to die, but I feel a lot more empathy with innocent shooting victims than with the CEO of a company known for driving people into bankruptcy or death. Any school shooting victim's life should be considered equally valuable as that of any CEO. Or the lives of people dying from preventable diseases.

If you want to be absolutely disgusted by humanity, go over to reddit.com, pick any random post about this event on the frontpage, and look at the thousands of people celebrating Thompson's murder. And begging for more.

He was the CEO of a company who used an "AI" to deny over 90% of claims. His choices indirectly impacted the life of millions and possibly killed 1000s prematurely. The healthcare industry had it coming, he just happened to be in the wrong place for it.

Okay, do rank and file employees have it coming to? Let's say the software engineers who helped create that AI - should they be on the hit list?

developers should think long and hard about what they do, where they work and what is the impact of their work on society. if your “ticket” says “do some data mining shit to figure out a way to deny claims” perhaps polishing up your resume is a good idea

I didn't ask if they need to think long and hard, I asked if they are on the hit list.

I guess nurses, and medical coders are on the list too. 400,000 people actually

By the way, what do you do for a living?

If someone did something shitty to contribute to someone else's misery, they shouldn't be surprised the afflicted is upset with them. Where to draw the line for what's shitty and what's an appropriate punishment is subjective, but lawful and ethical only have so much overlap. Job title is irrelevant. Employer is irrelevant.

I completely disagree with everything you're advocating for. I've worked at shitty companies and I quit because I didn't want to do shitty things. This is HN. The majority of people here are incredibly privileged and aren't forced to work an immoral job just to afford necessities. Barring extenuating circumstances - which absolutely do not apply to most people here - it is a choice.

Anyway, I don't really wanna have a back and forth with you. You come across as incredibly childish to me. I don't respect you enough to care what you think about me and I assume the feeling is mutual.

Sorry, what am I advocating for?

I find it interesting that you think I'm childish, whereas there are dozens of people in this hn thread celebrating a man being murdered with a gun in NYC literally 3 feet away from an innocent bystander. That seems pretty childish to me.

I dont work for UHC or any shitty place like that, my Mama raised me right.

if you knowingly and wilfully do something that can cause death of other humans - yes, 100% you might be on someone’s hit list regardless of your profession.

Those poor people doing the Nazi’s bidding putting the people in gas chambers were just rank and file too.

90? My info was 30

No HCU had a company denial rate of 32%. 2x the industry average. The AI they were using in their approval process was 90%.

Good! The world is a better place without them. Anytime that is true I will be happy.

Go kill a random nurse then working for UHG

This is useless. The SEC requires public companies to list their entire c-suite on their annual proxy statements which anyone can find with a 2 second google search.

Not all heroes wear capes

This comment section is a disgrace. HN really has fallen.

Good luck finding a website where people are not happy about this shooting in the comments.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com