this post was submitted on 03 Jul 2023
2976 points (98.3% liked)

Technology

59559 readers
4793 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Yikes.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Are you seriously trying to argue that corporations should be allowed to get away with harming humans, because human rights? We're not discussing the current system, were discussing what would be the most fair. Is this really the take you want to go with?

Some places execute criminal people, why should criminal organisations be any different? With those, there doesn't even have to be any actual killing involved. But you think its untenable because it would harm the people who own it, and benefited from the crime?

The only reason hiding personal wealth in that way is possible, is because government lets it happen, mostly because the people making the laws, do it too.

That should obviously stop.

[–] Syrc@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The issue is that it's a slippery slope. When you start taking human rights away from one group of people, it could very easily lead to innocent people, or entire groups, being framed and legally stripped of their possessions. That's why I think opening that can of worms is a bad idea.

And it's not that easy. People figured hundreds of ways to hide wealth and there's no way you can regulate them all. Split it between relatives, buy non-quantifiable assets, hell they could buy bitcoins with multiple proxies on the dark web from an old pc in the middle of Africa and we'd know absolutely nothing of that. Unless you build some sort of utopic database which documents every living person's possessions and the exchange between them, it's just not possible.

[–] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

What exactly is your point?

That because it would be difficult to get right, we shouldn't try?

Isn't that true for most things worth doing?

[–] Syrc@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I just think giving the government a legal way to close down corporations and seize their assets doesn’t set a good precedent and could do more harm than good.

In contrast, I think having fines that actually matter and laws more strict on what a site can do without permission from the user are easier to do and have overall less ways to be exploited.