4 ms·
It’s hard to address this submission as it is so hyperbolic that it’s difficult to pick it apart. It has a strong second amendment vibe, where the choice is bet
by iroddis 2y ago
It’s hard to address this submission as it is so hyperbolic that it’s difficult to pick it apart. It has a strong second amendment vibe, where the choice is between self-regulation or a future armed stand-off with the government. This is a false dichotomy.
There are already other, non-regulatory, systems in place to deal with issues like this. Market forces and law suits spring to mind immediately.
- gavinhoward 2y ago> Market forces and law suits spring to mind immediately. Those things don't seem to be working. And it isn't a future armed standoff that I am warning about. It is a future where any protest is impossible.
- gjsman-1000 2y ago> Those things don't seem to be working. You're assuming two things: 1. Regulation will decrease the likelihood of a failure (debatable - Boeing is certainly heavily regulated) 2. Cloudstrike will survive unscathed; when this very well could be a long-term corporate extinction event. On that note, let's say you discover a small security bug. If your small security fix takes 7 layers of auditing and 20 lawyers to get fixed to satisfy your guild rules, you're not going to bother. Multiply this by hundreds of little bugs that are "out of scope" or "too small to worry about"; and you're Microsoft right now, a national security hazard, and you have no idea what combination of little bugs got you here.
- ernie97 2y ago[flagged]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]