3 ms·
> There is no reason why any person on Capitol Hill should vote against this. If I were an elected official, one reason why I would be very cautious about voti
by leroy_masochist 8y ago
> There is no reason why any person on Capitol Hill should vote against this.
If I were an elected official, one reason why I would be very cautious about voting for this is that, if we make allowing a data breach a felony punishable by imprisonment, it is likely to have a somewhat chilling effect on the likelihood of engineers to start new companies where they as founders would be potentially prosecutable for such failures.
I share the author's stated frustrations, and agree that jail time for gross data-related negligence would be right at least in some cases, but it's not the simple problem-simple solution issue he's making it out to be.
- crooked-v 8y ago> it is likely to have a somewhat chilling effect on the likelihood of engineers to start new companies where they as founders would be potentially prosecutable for such failures You seem to think that's a bad thing, for some reason.
- chillacy 8y agoPerhaps some of us browsing HN, a site by a venture capital firm in the bay area, might want to consider the effects of legislation on tech startups.
- scarejunba 8y agoPlease. This forum has more people saying they just want a 9-5 job than actual founders. It’s no surprise it’s anti-startup. It’s just /r/programming+technology now.
- thekyle 8y agoWell, less competition is generally considered to be a bad thing.
- Apocryphon 8y agoMaybe the result will not be less competition but rather better competition, as the entrants will be founders who have actually done their due diligence and research and are prepared to act responsibly in compliance with the public interest.
- rfrey 8y agoA chilling effect on the likelihood of engineers to start new companies whose business model is the collection and monetization of user data, to be a bit more specific.