Corporate thug pages

As transparency heats up we will benefit from corporate thug pages that keep a running record of offenses of corporate thugs. Part of smashing the robber barrons was recognizing them for what they were. The smashing didnt go far enough, but it was massively helpful. Corporations should not be allowed to manage PR, they should be held to their record. Applying these process to PR and media firms first and foremost.

Ban PR departments?

Seems kinda tyrannical to me.

Par for the Warren.

The problem is that if you invent a new kind of thug to (ban PR for example), you will have a new kind of thug that you will need to invent a new kind of thug to control. You don’t ban thugs by being a thug.

No just triple ledger the record of their wong doing and distribute it widely. It will always be subject to interpretation but it won’t be spun and swept under the carpet by PR depts. The PR system will become much less effective and desired, because profit isnt the value, at the very least it would be profit efficiency. Its a way of breaking down the veil, establishing a cycle of consequence and taking back power that never should have been transfered. No more thugs as heros.

Triple entry accounting of what? Can you give me a very specific example?

Wrongdoing according to who? The thugs of your choice?

Simple open record keeping tech that bit coin inttoduced.

Look up the actions of Michael Lynton coming out of the Sony leak. Most of them are mining the public interest with their extractive firms.

Triple entry accounting, as I understand it, does not require a company to disclose anything that it chooses not to disclose.

It only timestamps the history to show that the books have not be retroactively doctored.

No, Slur accounting with triple ledger based on what constant and increasing leaks expose.

Read through this:

"Mobile & Telecom
AT&T Pays $105 Million to Settle Phony Charges on Phone Bills
By Joshua Brustein October 08, 2014

AT&T (T) has agreed to a $105 million settlement with federal agencies and state attorneys general for allowing companies to add fraudulent charges to its customers phone bills—and taking at least a 35 percent cut of what they made.

This process, known as cramming, has been around in various forms since the 1990s, and carriers have sworn numerous times to put an end to it. In total, customers have spent hundreds of millions of dollars on charges they never asked for, officials said in a press conference Wednesday. The Federal Communications Commission has taken 14 enforcement actions on cramming since 2010, covering $122 million in activity. The AT&T case is the largest such settlement in the agency’s history, according to FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler.

The settlement money will be split between consumers ($80 million, distributed through the Federal Trade Commission), the states ($20 million), and the FCC ($5 million). The FTC has set up a website for people who believe they deserve a refund.
Video: How Many Text Messages Are Sent Each Year?

While AT&T wasn’t the one directly charging for the services, FTC Chairwoman Edith Ramirez says that the company played a key role in the fraud. “We think its important to take action against all links in the chain here,” she said. The company, Ramirez argues, ”had strong reason to suspect that such charges were unauthorized, yet continued to place such charges on consumers’ bills.”

In some cases, 40 percent of the people being charged were complaining about the charges—yet, according to the FTC, the company also told the crammers that it would work to lower the proportion of people who got refunds. AT&T also made it nearly impossible for customers to understand what was going on by looking at bills.

The company made a lot of money by doing this. In 2013, for instance, AT&T earned $161 million from charges for third-party subscriptions. While not all of them were unauthorized, the large number shows that AT&T had a strong financial incentive to keep the charges flowing. (The total penalty that the company is paying amounts to about one-half of 1 percent of net income in 2013.)
Video: T-Mobile’s Legere: We Are Not a Utility

AT&T wasn’t alone. Late last year all four of the country’s biggest wireless carriers said they had cut the practice out for good, acknowledging that they had failed to stop abuse.

Earlier this year the Federal Trade Commission filed a cramming suit against T-Mobile (TMUS). Wheeler said there was nothing to report on that suit. “Stay tuned about the other wireless carriers,” he said.
Story: The New iPhone Has Carriers Hustling for Customers "

I think most people would agree the executives should be locked up for this type of stuff and this is precisely what they mean when they don’t want more regulation, the want make easier to have more fraud. How many people have for instance went to term or downgrade AT&T and then been told that the rate increase was cancelled and then find out a year or two later that a grand was taken from them that wasn’t intended due to auto bill paying where the rate then subsequently went up and then instead of halting to clear the payment increase and even letting service lapse they simply helped themselves with an increase.

1, that had nothing to do with Triple entry accounting or slur.

2 Slur is an absolute joke. Once information is out, you cannot pay somebody to censor it, and expect the information not to also be sold to tabloids or whomever else… The contract is absolutely unenforceable because there is no way to proof the person who published the information is the person you paid blackmail to, and further, by acknowledging that such a contract existed in the first place , one would look twice as guilty…

So stop pretending like Slur is anything more than a joke. It makes you look foolish, and also sells SAFE as a place for Criminal activity. That isn’t what it is all about , and is never what it will all be about.

3 Triple entry accounting requires no disclosure. I provides proof to an auditor that your books where done on the fly, and not retroactively doctored. Triple entry accounting has to do with accounting not PR, so I don’t see how it is relevant here.

What are you hiding? Its the indelible record of t ledger that will get leaked, its a t ledger type mechanism to which leaks will get published.

You still dont get Slur. Psychopaths dont need a perfect mechanism they will play the odds. What you are citing is only part of the model. The better part is psychopaths getting paid for exposing wrong doing, sometimes even their own. That is incredibly high profit efficiency.

Also sites that dont monetize will be just as sucessful. Its the basis of a DAO replacement for news.

I get slur. It is a joke. You don’t negotiate with crooks unless you want to get burned twice.

I am not hiding anything. You misunderstand the technology and use the wrong terms for the wrong things, and confuse people What you are describing is not triple entry accounting, but you use the term as if it is. And you fail to describe whatever technology you are actually referring to, so it is pretty hard to make on ounce of sense out of what you are saying.

There are plenty of leaks now, and anonymous leaks will be far less credible than leaks where people have their necks on the line. I see SAFE as a tool first and foremost for privacy. That makes leaking harder, not easier.

There are also plenty of blogs out there leaking the news. Obama’s Birth Certificate etc. More of that? Woo Hoo! That will change the world. :wink:

We’re not in disagreement about the incredible off the scale importance of privacy. I simply see organizational transparency as crucial to that end.

Even where people stick their necks out the info has to be verified before it can be acted upon. But with tried and true anonymity some very important stuff that would have been certain death or ruin before can come forward for verification. For legitimate law enforcement this will be a huge help that balances important privacy systems becoming more opaque.

A Sony style leak for all the big firms and states would result in a huge power redistribution back to the ordinary people it was taken from.