574
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Oct 2023
574 points (97.4% liked)
Technology
55692 readers
2872 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I agree there's a problem with corporations and wealthy people treating fines as a mere cost of doing business, but in situations where there was neither malicious intent nor actual harm, it's problematic to create a legal minefield with harsh penalties. The goal of regulation should be to gain compliance rather than punish trivial noncompliance. Of course one might argue that something that does no harm ought not be forbidden at all.
For a case as benign as this that makes a lot of sense but the attitude of entitlement to projects that generate capital is wild, and not doing something as simple as getting the building permits before you start building is really emblematic of that.