On: Hackers extorted $1.14M from UCSF

[marcosdumay]

> You've made the implicit assumption that it is acceptable and desirable for the government to sacrifice some companies to save some others.

That's how governments operate. Every time a government "sneezes" is harms some companies and benefits others.

[nickff → marcosdumay]

No, when governments provide public goods (their most widely-accepted role), they are not picking companies out for the gallows.

[mandelbrotwurst → nickff]

In that case I'm sure you won't mind if we repave all of the roads to my store twice as often and let the ones you rely on fall apart.

[nickff → mandelbrotwurst]

Roads are not exactly public goods, and can be 'club goods' or something between the two; the Wikipedia definition matrix has some nice examples, and the page is quite good overall: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_good_(economics)#Defini...

[mandelbrotwurst → nickff]

OK, fair, although even with the example public goods listed in that Wikipedia page their provision in reality still does end up supporting certain companies and harming others - e.g. if I'm in the business of selling air purifiers, government efforts to reduce air pollution are going to negatively impact my sales.

[nickff → mandelbrotwurst]

I totally agree that government policy can shape the market, and my issue is not at all with that happening as a by-product of public goods, but only when it is a direct and deliberate action.

[mandelbrotwurst → nickff]

Got it. I think where I lost you was in your use of "picking companies out" - I didn't realize that you meant only intentionally as opposed to incidentally.