Hacker News Reader

Comment by bigiain | Hacker News Reader

> So if someone opens your unintentionally unlocked front door and steals your laptop, you don't care who's liable?

I'm not the person you're responding to, but...

If I hear my neighborhood has started to become targeted by people checking houses for unlocked doors and stealing stuff, I think an appropriate response for me is to ensure it is difficult or impossible for me to "inadvertently" leave my own doors unlocked so my stuff doesn't get stolen, and also to encourage or perhaps even enforce[1] my neighbors to ensure their doors are always locked to make this sort of theft impossible and remove the temptation for that sort of crime.

1 - Where I'm from, you can be fined for leaving you car unlocked, and cops have been known to walk round testing doorhandles and issuing fines: https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/blog/is-leaving-you...

View on HN

If you knew that there are 2 specific well known people in your neighborhood that are walking around trying to open doors and steal stuff - is your suggested solution for everyone to improve own security? I would say its far more economic to get the 2 people to stop or at the very least be more careful?

If I found out this metaphor for neighborhood windows was actually a window into massive amounts of institutional data, then no, I don't want someone to talk me out of getting more security on my kitchen window.

I was simplifying, but why can it not be both?

Continuing with your metaphor - sure get more security - you likely can never eliminate a threat. But if the bad actors are reigned in at a systemic level, you can get away with a lock on your window instead of steel bars.

I'm of a view that in a society we are better off when we all can get away with lighter individual protections as otherwise, thos who cannot afford the necessary security end up suffering.

It's more like there are two locksmiths who try to open any door when someone pays them. Should we make them check if the person calling them is the home owner?

Yes, but it needs to be done the right way so legit customers don't get rejected, and you can't do things like make everyone mail them a photo of their ID because they could sell that to a thief or credit card scammer. Or someone could break into their office and take it. Or they sell it and pretend it was stolen.

And when you start talking about regulation the two locksmiths will say the best way to do it is ban lockpicking tools so they can keep them away from other less ethical people, or ban other locksmiths coming from the next town over.

Yes, much better analogy - I was trying to stick with the OPs example as much as possible.

I clearly have committed the mortal sin of an imperfect analogy, which in this case may not even be relevant, as the article in question implies that the data wasn't left "unlocked."

But giving you the benefit of the doubt, what's the crime for actually breaking into a car that was left unlocked and taking things?

ETA: and furthermore, what crime is worse? And should it be?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com