It’s a bit like legalizing violence from shopkeepers because most of the time they’re punching thieves.
Robin Hanson argued that negative gossip is probably net positive for society.
Robin Hanson: On average, letting people know about other people’s dirt is a good thing.
The act of providing negative gossip to the public ‘for free’ is a public good. In a transaction-cost-free market, the blackmailer might try to sell the secret to the public (e.g. via assurance contract).
surely blackmail gives more incentive to lie
Lying about someone in a damaging way is already covered by libel/slander laws.
Robin Hanson argued that negative gossip is probably net positive for society.
Yes, this is what my post was addressing and the analogy was about. I consider it an interesting hypothesis, but not one that holds up to scrutiny.
Lying about someone in a damaging way is already covered by libel/slander laws.
I know, but this only further emphasizes how much better paying those who helped a conviction is. Blackmail is private, threat-based, and necessarily unpoliced, whereas the courts have oversight and are an at least somewhat impartial test for truth.
Robin Hanson argued that negative gossip is probably net positive for society.
The act of providing negative gossip to the public ‘for free’ is a public good. In a transaction-cost-free market, the blackmailer might try to sell the secret to the public (e.g. via assurance contract).
Lying about someone in a damaging way is already covered by libel/slander laws.
Yes, this is what my post was addressing and the analogy was about. I consider it an interesting hypothesis, but not one that holds up to scrutiny.
I know, but this only further emphasizes how much better paying those who helped a conviction is. Blackmail is private, threat-based, and necessarily unpoliced, whereas the courts have oversight and are an at least somewhat impartial test for truth.