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

You just manufactured a completely different scenario.

The comment I responded to was this:

>it's only fair for them to financially award people that responsibly inform them of vulnerabilities instead of easily and anonymously selling those.

That comment includes the threat ("instead of easily and anonymously selling those").

So, yes. That is the definition of extortion.



I think preventing people from having that incentive vs an actual threat are not the same, which is how I read the hypothetical.


>I think preventing people from having that incentive vs an actual threat are not the same, which is how I read the hypothetical.

The following two sentences read the same to me:

"To remove my incentive to harm you, you should pay me".

"To remove my incentive to share information with others who may harm you, you should pay me".

And, the threat is pretty clear IMO.


Do you not lock your doors because you feel you shouldn't have to worry about people stealing your stuff because it's morally wrong to steal or do you do it to mitigate risk? Suggesting someone should mitigate potential risk is all we are talking about.


You're making a different argument now.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40577683




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

Search: