gallabytes comments on Blackmailers are privateers in the war on hypocrisy

[gallabytes]

This argument would make much more sense in a just world. Information that should damage someone is very different from information that will damage someone. With blackmail you’re optimized to maximize damage to the target, and I expect tails to mostly come apart here. I don’t see too many cases of blackmail replacing MeToo. When was the last time the National Enquirer was a valuable whistleblower?

EDIT: fixed some wording

[jessicata]

Information that would damage someone is very different from information that will damage someone.

What do you mean?

[Benquo]

Seems like the implication is “would damage [in a just world]” vs “will damage [in our actual world].”

[gallabytes]

correct. edited to make this more obvious

[Benquo]

Right now people covertly getting away with unobjectionable stuff are making it easy to punish honest people who do the thing openly. Plausible that the former should in fact pay costs for their complicity. The addendum to this Overcoming Bias post seems relevant:

OK, maybe there are three main types: 1) abstainers – those who don’t want promiscuity, 2) stoners – those who do want promiscuity, are willing to admit it, and use drugs to help get it, and 3) cheaters – those who want promiscuity, but aren’t willing to admit it, don’t use drugs to get it, and compete with stoners for partners. Groups 1&3 together support anti-drug laws, while groups 2&3 together keep punishments of promiscuity weak.

[DanielFilan]

I think this is the OB post Benquo is quoting from, but accidentally forgot to include the link.

[Benquo]

Thank you, fixed