3 ms·
Until they are fined 10% of yearly revenue. That's why you need a strong government.
by lofaszvanitt 2y ago
Until they are fined 10% of yearly revenue. That's why you need a strong government.
- hybrid_study 2y agoagree in spirit. better federal laws to hold companies accountable
- eadmund 2y agoAn alternate, market-based solution would be insurance companies who impose requirements for insurance. That increases the chances of finding an economic balance between security and productivity. A government regulation applies to everyone, even if it no longer makes sense: an insurance company whose requirements are out-dated will be out-competed by others, while an insurance company whose requirements are insufficient will go out of business.
- leonadato 2y agoIt's interesting that you mention this. It's part of the follow up article coming soon.
- fsflover 2y ago> An alternate, market-based solution would be insurance companies who impose requirements for insurance. This is exactly why the CrowdStrike disaster happened: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41011065 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41011065
- fmajid 2y agoThe market for cybersecurity insurance is collapsing: https://www.theinformation.com/articles/companies-are-ditching-cybersecurity-insurance-as-premiums-rise-coverage-shrinks https://www.theinformation.com/articles/companies-are-ditchi... but the OP's arguments also apply to insurance, yet businesses buy insurance every day. The difference is the fines and liability for data breaches are so paltry it is the rational thing to do not to invest in security. This can only change through legislative action. I wouldn't hold my breath.
- hcfman 2y agoCan we not also have really extreme punishments for government officials that break the law?
- acuozzo 2y agoChecks & balances do not work in the absence of empowered incorruptible entities because of collusion. At best, they just slow things down.