> Because otherwise one day you might find yourself facing bankruptcy.
> I'm a strong advocate for liability for software producers because it seems we as an industry are categorically incapable of doing the right thing. Until it directly affects the bottom line
These two statements seem to contradict each other. If it's not directly affecting the bottom line today, how would one go bankrupt?
I do agree with you there should be some force pushing to eliminate this negative externality. We could compare poor security practice with toxic waste. In general the force I'm talking about is government that creates smart regulations. You'd like to do it by allowing consumers to sue after the damage has already been done. I'm not going to get into that debate, but both of us have proposed solutions and I agree either would be an improvement over what we have today.
> I'm a strong advocate for liability for software producers because it seems we as an industry are categorically incapable of doing the right thing. Until it directly affects the bottom line
These two statements seem to contradict each other. If it's not directly affecting the bottom line today, how would one go bankrupt?
I do agree with you there should be some force pushing to eliminate this negative externality. We could compare poor security practice with toxic waste. In general the force I'm talking about is government that creates smart regulations. You'd like to do it by allowing consumers to sue after the damage has already been done. I'm not going to get into that debate, but both of us have proposed solutions and I agree either would be an improvement over what we have today.