2 ms·
Comparing these two numbers doesn't make sense, because: 1) Cybercrime activity has an immediate impact, whereas the impact of climate-changing activity will b
by rahimnathwani 6y ago
Comparing these two numbers doesn't make sense, because:
1) Cybercrime activity has an immediate impact, whereas the impact of climate-changing activity will be felt for many years, and
2) The impact of climate-changing activity results in actual destruction of value, whereas cybercrime results in only the transfer of value (from the victims to the perpetrators).
Of course, the threat of cybercrime results in other value-destroying activity, like the effort spent on cybersecurity ($200B/year according to Statista).
- vnorilo 6y agoWhile I agree with the overall sentiment, crime is usually negative sum: the perpetrator gains less than the victim lost, thus some value is destroyed even before security spending.
- PeterisP 6y agoCybercrime generally results in actual destruction of value, as even for pure ransomware attacks where a ransom is paid, the losses to businesses and recovery costs are on the same scale as the ransom itself, and of course there are cases like the NotPetya attack, which caused billions of damages and did not even have a working mechanism to extract money from victims, it was purely destructive.