2 ms·
do we really need a Fukushima size hacker-induced failure to wake people up. There's no incentive to install the systems correctly or to ensure that they remai
by worren 15y ago
do we really need a Fukushima size hacker-induced failure to wake people up.
There's no incentive to install the systems correctly or to ensure that they remain secure. It isn't illegal to operate a vulnerable system. A Fukushima-like event won't make a difference. The specter of preemptive financial penalties might give pause, but an accounting after the fact? That only matters if something goes awry.
- sp332 15y ago"Criminal negligence" really is a category of crime. If damage is done or lives lost because you failed to take obvious or reasonable measures to avoid it, you can be held criminally responsible for the result. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_negligence http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_negligence
- worren 15y agoIf damage is done...you can be held criminally responsible I was very careful to condition my statement. If something happens, then there is a probability of penalty. The current system conditions operators to gamble. The perceived risk of something bad happening is low. So, it doesn't matter what, if any, penalty may be associated with shirking responsibility. Without the risk of damage dramatically increasing or criminalizing the cause rather than the result, the behavior will not change.