3 ms·
This is wishful thinking at best and intellectual dishonesty at worst - you're thinking of just the IT people; what about the vendors who depend on MasterCard a
by Aaronontheweb 16y ago
This is wishful thinking at best and intellectual dishonesty at worst - you're thinking of just the IT people; what about the vendors who depend on MasterCard and can't process payments that they need in order to make payroll?
Should we just shrug and say "oh well - at least we're getting internet justice?"
- Qz 16y agoIt's Visa and Mastercard's responsibility to make sure their system is secure, that's what vendors pay them for.
- Aaronontheweb 16y agoYou're being intellectually dishonest, and you're not fooling anyone. This doesn't absolve Anonymous of any responsibility for that they're doing.
- Qz 16y agoWhat they're doing is both simultaneously petty and upstanding. The idea that they shouldn't do it because a vendor might not make payroll, because a sysadmin can't handle a DDoS attack on a major credit card system is absurd. Armored cars are armored for a reason. Major money networks should be armored as well, and if they're not, its the money networks responsibility if it happens, same as its the armored car companies responsibility if the car gets robbed. Also, don't confuse fault with responsibility -- they are not the same thing. edit: typo