Pfft comments on Unpacking the Concept of "Blackmail" - Less Wrong

25 Post author: Vladimir_Nesov 10 December 2010 12:53AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (136)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Pfft 10 December 2010 01:52:18AM 19 points [-]

I wonder if this question is related to the revulsion many people feel against certain kinds of price discrimination tactics. I mean things like how in the 19th century, train companies would put intentionally uncomfortable benches in the 3rd class carriages in order to encourage people to buy 2nd class tickets, or nowadays software that comes with arbitrary, programmed-in restrictions that can be removed by paying for the "professional" version.

People really don't like that! It seems like there is some folk-ethics norm that "if you can make me better off with no effort on your part, then you have an obligation to do so", which seems like part of a "no blackmail" condition.

Comment author: Tesseract 10 December 2010 11:34:06AM 7 points [-]

That makes sense from a reciprocal altruism perspective. If someone can benefit you at no cost to themself, and doesn't, that probably indicates a lack of intent to cooperate under all circumstances. The natural response is hostility.

Comment author: [deleted] 10 December 2010 03:34:50PM 5 points [-]

In Bombay, the only difference between first- and second- class cars is the price. The second-class cars are more crowded. I've been trying to think of a nice analogy to blackmail but didn't.