But they're not killing people. They're extorting foreign business which is not explicitly illegal, and in fact encouraged, in certain countries. They even go above and beyond that with self-imposed restrictions against healthcare and infrastructure to try and minimize harm. I'm not saying I like what they're doing, but it seems hard to outright stop when their own country doesn't care. Same with Chinese businesses engaging in fraud with foreign investment firms. It's effectively accepted practice encouraged by their country. The market is the only real punisher. So if these types of activities are effectively allowed because people can play by the rules and engage in them, then as a society or as a company you have to respond rationally. "Well it's illegal where I live" is not really an answer. Thus my question is, "should companies pay security professionals more to combat the economics of these organizations?". People seem to think companies should pay out bug bounties on a scale much closer to what e.g. ZERODIUM would pay for 0 days to fix the economics. I guess I'm just asking if there's an economic "solution" to these ransomware groups in absence of a legal one?
It seems we both agree it's not ethical by our relative standards. But you're not actually responding to my question. I mean hey even killing is justified against foreign actors in the name of war. Doesn't matter. I'm asking whether there's an economic solution because I'd rather not devolve into some form of war.
> That some countries legalize theft of property in other countries does not change the ethics of this at all.
It literally does. Because those people are participating in a society where their actions are not strictly unethical. Their society does not necessarily view them as sociopaths.
Well I should concede it depends on whether your worldview accommodates different ethical frameworks or not. If you are absolutely ethical then all people must adhere to the same ethical standard and you can rightly justify punishment of outsiders.
Even if your worldview doesn't accommodate different ethical frameworks (i.e. I stand behind my own ethical principles, and believe that anyone who disagrees with me is unethical), surely you have to admit that some people will disagree with that stance, will hold their own views that are incompatible with yours, and will call themselves ethical until the cows come home, right?
We're not arguing about whether that's ethical, we're simply pointing out that people like that exist.
You and the parent commenter are no longer arguing about what is and isn't ethical (as you've stated, you both seem to agree), but instead on what to do about the practical reality that society in Russia does see this as ethical, and doesn't give a flying fuck what you or I think.
Now the question becomes, what should we do about that.
