2 ms·
Baking in resiliency is expensive. Its not obvious to me that it would be better to deal with that than to deal with issues like this once in a blue moon. Why n
by HDThoreaun 2y ago
Baking in resiliency is expensive. Its not obvious to me that it would be better to deal with that than to deal with issues like this once in a blue moon. Why not let the markets decide? If this ends up costing a bunch of money it will be fixed, if it doesnt it wasnt that big of a deal.
- lenerdenator 2y agoBecause there's stuff money can't buy back, and in a lot of cases, that's human life and health. (1) And do the markets really decide? Do you really think the C-suite of Crowdstrike is going to spend the rest of their lives destitute for the losses they caused? Of course not. We have laws on the books that limit liability of businesses in these situations, and the "let the market decide" crowd are the first people to tell you these laws are a good idea because you can't possibly expect George Kurtz to do business in an environment where his 3 billion dollar fortune could be completely wiped out as the result of a court case, no matter how much damage his company did. Meanwhile the people who were screwed by this whole thing will be lucky to get a few grand out of a class-action judgment or settlement in five years. Markets _never_ actually decide. Not in a way that makes peaceful human society possible. You have to introduce systems to give minor players a way to redress grievances, or they'll find their own, often through less-than-sporting means. (1)
- warkdarrior 2y ago> (1) Citation needed
- lenerdenator 2y agoOpe https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/siblings-miss-crucial-life-extending-treatment-seattle-childrens-because-crowdstrike-outage/Y5EMEXGGQJE7PHDEAEKCWG6U4M/ https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/siblings-miss-crucial-life-...