>if banks and similar didn't keep screwing this up They aren't "screwing it up". They eliminate the problem from their perspective via forcing people into bind

>if banks and similar didn't keep screwing this up They aren't "screwing it up". They eliminate the problem from their perspective via forcing people into binding arbitration and forbidding class actions, and also through promoting the concept of "identity theft" which eliminates the sense that they have any agency when there are compromises. Every user agreement I see goes on and on about how you the consumer are responsible for any compromises on your end, so there's no question that the concept of being responsible for security is widely understood. It simply is not applied to corporations because they are able to reject it where individuals have no bargaining power.