4 ms·

It doesn't seem right that the incompetent people who didn't have backups and got themselves infected don't have to pay the consequences.

metadat 4y ago
Instead the citizens will pay for their fuckup. Sucks, doesn't it? Maybe /this/ is the real web3.
Nathanael_M 4y ago
Who else would be paying for it…? Genuinely, if a government entity has costs (even costs incurred by their own foolishness), who else should pay for it? Are you suggesting the councillors/admin staff should pay for it out of pocket? What other entity works like that?
- metadat 4y ago
  For gov jobs, the incompetents deserve to be ousted and replaced with new people who are only potentially incompetent.
  - speed_spread 4y ago
    What if the workers get more competent as the result of the attack? What if the worker competence's effectiveness was limited by the organizational structure?
    - metadat 4y ago
      That would be amazing. It's also asking a lot of a government employee.
jltsiren 4y ago
Incompetence is just a fact of life, not a moral failure. If you hire incompetent people, you can't reasonably expect them to do their jobs properly. You may save some money and avoid some inconvenience that way, but you may also have to face crises that would have been avoidable. Alternatively, you can spend more money proactively and hire more competent people. Either way, taxpayers will pay the price.
- drc500free 4y ago
  At $37,000 a shot, it seems much cheaper to pay the ransom unless this happens multiple times a year.
MandieD 4y ago
Yes, a county in the south Texas desert with fewer residents than a mid-size office park should just up and fire the one person in the county who could kind of do the job and was willing to do so each year for probably what a FAANG senior staff engineer makes each month. This county, by the way, was bankrupted from having to deal with the corpses of dead migrants who were desperate enough to try to sneak in through it.

metadat 4y ago

Instead the citizens will pay for their fuckup. Sucks, doesn't it? Maybe /this/ is the real web3.

Nathanael_M 4y ago

Who else would be paying for it…? Genuinely, if a government entity has costs (even costs incurred by their own foolishness), who else should pay for it? Are you suggesting the councillors/admin staff should pay for it out of pocket? What other entity works like that?

metadat 4y ago
For gov jobs, the incompetents deserve to be ousted and replaced with new people who are only potentially incompetent.
- speed_spread 4y ago
  What if the workers get more competent as the result of the attack? What if the worker competence's effectiveness was limited by the organizational structure?
  - metadat 4y ago
    That would be amazing. It's also asking a lot of a government employee.

jltsiren 4y ago

Incompetence is just a fact of life, not a moral failure. If you hire incompetent people, you can't reasonably expect them to do their jobs properly. You may save some money and avoid some inconvenience that way, but you may also have to face crises that would have been avoidable. Alternatively, you can spend more money proactively and hire more competent people. Either way, taxpayers will pay the price.

drc500free 4y ago
At $37,000 a shot, it seems much cheaper to pay the ransom unless this happens multiple times a year.

MandieD 4y ago

Yes, a county in the south Texas desert with fewer residents than a mid-size office park should just up and fire the one person in the county who could kind of do the job and was willing to do so each year for probably what a FAANG senior staff engineer makes each month. This county, by the way, was bankrupted from having to deal with the corpses of dead migrants who were desperate enough to try to sneak in through it.