undefined | Better HN

0 pointsbeagle32y ago0 comments

Not really. In those cultures, just like in armies everywhere, authority comes from the boss/commander and they can override their previous instructions at any point (and many do at some point).

There’s often a distinction in armies between “illegal command” issued by a commander, which one has to obey (or risk disciplinary action) and “blatantly illegal command” which must be disobeyed. An example of the former would be “keep your post for 20 hours straight” (where regulations limit a shift to e.g. 12 hours). An example of the latter would be “cut the limbs off other members of your platoon”.

An army setting is a much better model of some cultures. They are not as bad, but if taken ad absurdum they would look like an army setting.

0 comments

usrusr2y ago

Armies are a good example of authority clearly coming from the role, not from the person, and roles inseparably tied to a lot of expected formal behavior. In an impersonation-hardened army (or corporation), you simply wouldn't make it beyond the very lowest rank unless you demonstrate flawless authentication on both receiver and sender side. Just like you wouldn't make it badly dressed.

beagle3OP2y ago

Except .. there’s no effective authentication protocol in place to verify that a specific person is indeed in a specific role (or is indeed person they claim to be).

usrusr2y ago

Sure, that's the gap that needs to be filled. In the age of deep fakes even more urgently than before.

But which work cultures will find it easier to effectively deploy countermeasures?

Informal ones, where everybody acts like first names buddies all the way to the CEO, where they believe they are invulnerable because all those pretend-equal underlings are invited to speak up when they sense something fishy? What if they don't sense anything?

Or formal environments, where authentication tools could be systematically added to the preexisting and deeply entrenched set of rituals?

"That guy is not just acting like a colonel, the device we now all have to hold while saluting confirms that the biometric checksum embedded in his uniform insignia matches and is signed with central command keys". Yes, that protocol is not in place, but if it was introduced it would actually work. Now try the same in an informal environment where everything is supposed to be solved through good personal relations. The exact same tools, deployed in a buddy-org, would only ever get used retroactively, for pushing blame down the hierarchy.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointsbeagle32y ago0 comments

Not really. In those cultures, just like in armies everywhere, authority comes from the boss/commander and they can override their previous instructions at any point (and many do at some point).

An army setting is a much better model of some cultures. They are not as bad, but if taken ad absurdum they would look like an army setting.

0 comments

usrusr2y ago

beagle3OP2y ago

Except .. there’s no effective authentication protocol in place to verify that a specific person is indeed in a specific role (or is indeed person they claim to be).

usrusr2y ago

Sure, that's the gap that needs to be filled. In the age of deep fakes even more urgently than before.

But which work cultures will find it easier to effectively deploy countermeasures?

Or formal environments, where authentication tools could be systematically added to the preexisting and deeply entrenched set of rituals?

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse