Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | singleshot_'s commentslogin

They’re called ethical walls now, for obvious reasons (although the room is still Chinese, for whatever distinction).

No they aren't.

> I'd be foursquare behind a progressive prosecutor in a major city that ran a tight ship

Strongly inclined to hire such a prosecutor. Has this model been successfully deployed in any large U.S. cities? My only experience is watching it struggle in a medium one.

On your last point: given the ethical responsibility of a prosecutor, I’d go one step further. If you’re the prosecutor for a jurisdiction where a journalist works, and you make any statement about the legality of the journalists works, you better be substantially likely to secure a conviction, otherwise you should mind your business.


Yes. It is a weird document. Journalists are unfair to prosecutors and police chiefs all the time. Shut up and do the job.

(I have feelings here because we're in a mini-spat between our PD and our terrible local newspaper, which is upset that our chief won't give them an interview after the local police union gave her a no-confidence vote; where I live, that vote is, reasonably, viewed as a sign she's doing the job well. But either way: she's not going to give an interview on this!)


No, what insulates them from fiduciary responsibility is the fact that there is no fiduciary responsibility to shareholders. I’ll say that again: members and/or managers of an LLC, and officers and directors of a corporation owe no fiduciary responsibility to the shareholders to make them money. The fiduciary duties owed under US law are as follows: 1) the duty to be informed; 2) the duty not to usurp corporate opportunities.

As far as I can tell the fiduciary duty to make money for the shareholders is something that Jack Welsh of GE said enough times that people remembered it. However, I’m always interested in additional details concerning the history of this meme, and happy to learn more.


This is true in some states, like Texas; but not in Delaware where Disney is incorporated and where directors and officers owe fiduciary duties of care and loyalty to both the corporation and the shareholders.

(Not legal advice. I'm not licensed in either state.)


You are correct to note that there are two fiduciary duties: the duty of care, and the duty of loyalty. However, you are incorrect to imply I stated the law incorrectly.

The duty of care is otherwise known as the duty to be informed. And the duty of loyalty is otherwise known as the duty not to usurp corporate opportunities. I stated the law in Delaware, which is consistent with the law on the rest of the United States on these points.

You and I simply use two different sets of words to describe the only two fiduciary duties of an officer.


None of those mean "duty to make money for the shareholders" though.

(The first person to observe that an LLC has no shareholders gets a lawyer high five).

> No paperwork, no contract.

Two adults, a legal subject, sufficiently specified, offer, acceptance, consideration, mutual assent… a contract.


Article 1 judges in US Tax Court?

And the judges are likely to be looking for good faith as much or more than technical accuracy in the valuation. So the IRS is not going to bring you in front of the tax judge unless they have evidence of bad faith.

OTOH, most work is not "unique, innovative and visionary" and has a relatively transparent fair market value.


Typically how it works is you pay the taxes assessed, then you sue in Tax Court.

No. If you talk to an attorney and they take reasonable precautions to maintain the integrity of the confidential attorney client relationship, the privilege is preserved. If not, not preserved.

Why do you think this would be less discoverable than hosting your own email server?

If you use a stateless client (like just rawdogging cli llama.cpp) there’s nothing to discover. Setting a program with an option to have logs to not do that could conceivably get you in trouble but using a widely used program that never had logs seems like it has to be fine. Maybe they could nail you for googling “which local llm approach generates logs?” also, don’t get nailed by your bash history!

Because you don't keep logs.

Because nobody would know about it unless you told them for some reason

That might fall under the “unethical” part of my question. Could “probably” get away with it if done carefully, but I’d rather be fully in compliance.

Why would self-hosting for privacy reasons be unethical just because the query would be subject to subpoena in principle?

If you have records, and the discovery is worded in a way that covers the records you have, then deleting or not producing them would be unethical.

More importantly, I’d rather use SOTA models over self-hosted ones if possible.


That is the saying

That is not the saying


> They are the ones amplifying and distributing this content, why should they have zero responsibility for it?

If LinkedIn started allowing hardcore pornography, many of their advertisers would leave.

With that in mind, are you certain LinkedIn takes “no responsibility” for the content they distribute? It would seem they have a multimillion-dollar stake in the outcome of their efforts to shape their commercial product.


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

Search: