Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

1. It is stealing

2. Its a tiny amount of power

Both can be true. Taking a single grape at the supermarket is illegal but no one would arrest you for it.



"Taking a single grape at the supermarket is illegal but no one would arrest you for it."

Petty crime can have serious consequences regardless. In Germany we had a famous case, where a supermarket cashier redeemed a deposit receipt worth 1.30 EUR a customer had forgotten.

She was let go without notice for that and only got her job back after fighting through three instances. Only the highest court found the termination disproportionate and only because she had been working this job for 31 years.There was never a debate if this was stealing or not, just if the termination proportionate .


It can have serious consequences even (especially) if ignored.

If every customer slurped one grape, eventually there would be no grapes. Death by a thousand paper cuts and tragedy of the commons.


"Stealing"

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/blog/2022/10/26/the...

And those are just the ones that are so obvious the POTUS needed to make a statement.

Corporations steal trillions through dark patterns, intentiona obfuscation, mailicious marketing, price fixing, collusion, fraud etc.

Every piece of personal data shared between every online entity I have no relation to, or awareness of - is stealing from me.

stealing, in this case is a broad, vulgar term.

If you don't like stealing - then you wont get any place in successful business it would seem, based on the observable, documented, litigated and governmental precedents throughout history.


"One person steals so other people stealing is ok" seems like a difficult moral position to defend.


It depends on who's doing the theft. If it's a high status organization or individual they get away with it, including those behind the 2008 financial crisis. If it's a low status individual, they get put behind bars. It's a dominance hierarchy and those at the top hold all the cards.


Where does the notion of "depends" "whom" - lies...

(etymology on lies, lay ... it all boils down to, druidic functions of WERD. - And may Holy Wood be of interest - as its Druidic knowledge is scrubbed yet ensconsconced into the fabric of digital reality...)

[There is a significant impact on tech with Druidism that is not known]


Programming.

Is.

A.

Formulation.

(look at the druidic etymology of SPELLING, CODING.

I am utterly dumb-founded (reaching upon dumbness once FOUND the conclusion)...

How few 'smart' people understand the functions.

FFS, networking was based on LSD.

DOS was a hottub LSD session, just like RIP and BGP.


The HV lines run over someone's property, which implies there is some sort of contract in place, that presumably spells out what the property owner is allowed or not allowed to do. I'm not sure if this would be any kind of criminal issue instead of a private dispute.


Bingo.

The correct answer is that this is a contract dispute, not a state or federal dispute.

The electrical company leases a right of way for the lines across private property. There's a contract in place for that lease.

Does that contract have anything to the effect of "property owner will guarantee a stable, non-interfering electromagnetic environment in this right of way"?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: