[idealogue]

I agree with you. The majority of people in this thread have completely internalized that property rights are more valuable than human rights. Only one comment I've seen has acknowledged that all we have is a single webpage with a single accusation, and yet many people leap straight to the conclusion not only that the individual in question exists and is guilty, but that there can be no justification for a person destroying a business. Businesses destroy people all the time. I for one would like to see the tables turned more often.

[_Codemonkeyism]

" I for one would like to see the tables turned more often."

I don't know you.

But what I have learned that people who do not care about other peoples property, care very much about their own. Destroy other people business? Go for it! Destroy my car which I could kill someone with? No way, it's mine, I've worked hard for it. Vandalize houses of rich people? Go for it! Steal my iPhone? Hey, where is the police when you need them?

In Berlin people cheer the burning of other peoples BMWs - yes this is a thing. The same people go to court when the police scratches their table tennis table during a raid.

[xupybd]

We have responded to the article based on the information presented.

There is nothing to imply human rights have been violated. If such information is presented im sure people will respond in kind.

[DashRattlesnake]

> We have responded to the article based on the information presented.

> There is nothing to imply human rights have been violated. If such information is presented im sure people will respond in kind.

What are you talking about? There is no "article," only the statement of one involved party. It's right to be skeptical and theorize about what else might have gone on that was omitted from that statement out of self-interest.

[pythia__]

>I for one would like to see the tables turned more often.

The most prominent example of this in recent memory is Peter Thiel sponsoring Hulk Hogan's lawsuit against Gawker. Do you approve of what he did?

[SomeStupidPoint]

HN is full of baronets arguing in favor of the modern social order -- because while they're not real aristocrats, they're not peasants.

Corporations function as de facto titles of nobility in the US, so crossing one is crossing social rank.

[DashRattlesnake]

> HN is full of baronets arguing in favor of the modern social order -- because while they're not real aristocrats, they're not peasants.

I think that's very on point. While HN is a technology site, it's also one for "founders" * who aspire join the elite of that social order, which explains the exaggerated empathy for the interests of shareholders and companies.

* (and those with fantasies of being one)

[t123]

you have to be "someone" to become "someone", even if you suddenly earned 30% of shares in facebook, it would not make you "part of the elite", there is only so high you can get without [the right] family background (see billy gates who's mother - the less interesting part of the picture - was co-chair at / IBM CEOs personal friend .. so much for the hollywood story of the "deal of the century" ft. young billy and DOS .. aaand FTCvIBM but the cast/story gets even more interesting later on

[valuearb]

"Businesses destroy people all the time".

Lol. Citation please.

I'd like to see the justification for forcing thousands of customers into expensive disaster recovery because the company fired a sysadmin, likely for good reason.