The reactor that survived the tsunami and its history

> "Corporate ethics and compliance may be similar, but their cores are different," says Oshima from his home in Sendai. "From the perspective of corporate social responsibility, we cannot say that there is no need to question a company's actions just because they are not a crime under the law."

If only we could see those actions before they result in disaster. So many of these decisions happen behind closed doors and the public can't see what future risks are being assigned to them. Whether it's apps downloading a user's entire address book in the name of "standard industry practice", pink slime in a hamburger, or a dangerously constructed power plant, we don't get the chance to participate in these decisions. Sunlight would really help.

I've observed similar attitudes and reactions in matters of security. The advocate insisting we should and can do better is criticized -- perhaps marginalized -- and uses up personal capital to get improvements in place. Some time on, those measures prove decisive.

Unfortunately, as often as not, such efforts end up crippling if not destroying the same person's career.

In part, this is due to a function -- I'd argue; not a side-effect -- of corporations: To dilute and minimize personal legal culpability.

I use the words "legal" and "culpability" purposefully. I agree with the attitude presented in the article: It does not reduce personal responsibility. (Nor, in my opinion, certain definitions of culpability.)