I'll give you a read.

If you haven't read it already, I strongly recommend the Knapp Commission Report. Its about police corruption in New York City in 1972, but its lessons on systemic and institutionalized corruption are highly transferable to other contexts.

Probably the most common naive mistake I see is people thinking their subfield is special and they are the first to really notice / understand fraud within it. I've certainly seen people in the "sleuth community" (scientific fraud whistle blowers) reinvent the wheel a few times.

All fraud is basically the same. Financial, scientific, police corruption...it almost doesn't matter. I'm not even the first to say this. A really good summary can be found in Ashforth 2003 ("The Normalization of Corruption in Organizations").

So, with the caveat that I haven't read your work yet and maybe you already know, I'd say look at past corruption far outside your area of interest / expertise. There's a lot you can learn there. Police corruption reports are usually great because of how accessible they are in several senses (more numerous, usually simple to understand), but I have no police related agenda to push here and it really doesn't matter where you decide to look. Just pick any Commission and read their findings.

In the opening words of the Knapp Commission "We found corruption to be widespread".

gotta love HN. Top comment on an AMA with an author who's actually written books is "Here is a book you should read".

I don't understand what's wrong with someone suggesting a book to an author? Do you think all authors have read all other books?

If you had pointed out the original commenter's patronizing comment, as if they with 100% certainty know better than the author who has just written a book about said topic (at least the commenter thinks so), then I'd have agreed with you.

Gotta love HN. A commenter does literally nothing other than recommend a book and the top reply is "don't recommend books to him - he's written books, don't you know that?"

TBF I think it's just a remark on the upvotes. It's a perfectly cromulent comment with no business being at the top of an AMA.

I upvoted it - because I loved those two suggestions and have already have them open in another tab. I believe a bunch of others would have done the same.

Gotta love HN. You can't just have a thread without a psycho-analysis on how people interact with each other on a social media website.

Right, and it's quite possibly not even very relevant to the book.

Thanks for the suggestion

I think he's talking about company enshittification because of marke pressure, and not direct fraud though I haven't read the book.

Why did things worsen afterward ?

For the most part it didn't, but to the extent it did, the answer is in the later Mollen Commission Report.

i should have said “crime, safety and blight” rather than “things”. I meant the broader experience living in NYC vs the corruption

thanks that’s insightful.

Its a real shame we don't have any transcripts or other court records from that hearing...for obvious reasons.

Gather round kids and grab your muskets. The Qui Tam Clan ain't nuthin to fuk wit.

wheres the part that had anything to do with subway stations?

Fifth paragraph.

Hold up. you can't just have the train take the parenthesis off screen and hand wave away what happens to those cars. What happens when your forced to keep the garbage of a computation because you can't delete anything?

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reversible_computing)

Jokes on you, you learned to program.

Didn't let schooling interfere with their education.

I learned programming on that calculator. I learned programming because of that calculator. I owe so much to that calculator.

Same.

I distinctly remember my teachers having a debate around whether or not the functions I had programmed into my calculator were "cheating". On one hand, it was a tool and notes that I had access to my peers did not. On the other hand, I had created those tools myself, and if school was supposed to train me for the real world, wouldn't I be able to use the tools I created in the real world?

Ha in my school's math department the cheating thesis won and my silly single variable CAS system (which in retrospect did nothing you couldn't do with the graph functions!) got calculator programs banned. Luckily enough my specific math teacher that year didn't care enough to enforce it and it was soon forgotten

I faced a similar issue with my teachers in high school - iirc I was able to argue that by programming the formulas, I was demonstrating an understanding of them. Being able to show that understanding in our testing was the concern from my teachers’ point of view.

Wow, there were actually principles behind the rules and they bothered to reason about them. That's way different than my experience with school teachers.

Same. I hid custom calculators behind game levels so my teacher couldn't find them.

There are many of us, I make a living today because my dad brought home a Ti-83 Plus and I kept messing with the "PGRM" menu

>More generally, the best bet to solving a problem more efficiently is always to use more information about the specific problem you want to solve

It is both obvious and profound, the more information you already have, the more information you already have.

Its a honeypotpot

No, it's a honeyhoneypot.