61–70 of 331 posts
On one hand, we (as a society) want it to hurt, to cause the company real pain. On the other hand, we don't want to actually destroy the company. This leads to a "cost of doing business" problem, where evil practices become a preferred path for management, if evil is sufficiently profitable.
The underlying problem is that corporations are NOT people, whatever the law says, and the corporation itself has no inherent ethics or morality. The fire doesn't choose to burn the forest, it just does.
edit: I suppose the problem in part is society. We see a beauty and symmetry in capitalism, so we assume beautiful == good, a philosophical failing going all the way back to the ancient Greeks. Just because it's beautiful and useful doesn't mean it's "good" in a moral sense.
Isn't that just like 1 month's worth of revenue? That amounts to absolutely nothing in today's world, not even an incentive to reduce the bad behavior. Jail time for lawbreaking executives needs to happen . The financial penalties do not dissuade bad behavior or act as a deterrent, so the same crimes will continue to be committed. Are there any peer-reviewed studies looking at deterrence of financial/tech/privacy cri…
I don’t know man, 20% of your annual income would be seen as a sizeable fine. That’s 20% of their yearly profits, and it wipes out most of their earnings for Q1.
Before this thread becomes a Facebook bashing session, please keep in mind that Equifax leaked all your SSN data along with names and addresses and got away with no fines.
Seems like they should add another 0 to the fine after the recent hat trick: 1) Prompting users to give Facebook their email passwords.[0] 2) Using that email access to "inadvertently" upload the information of their email contacts.[1] 3) Storing said passwords and others in plaintext. [2] It's pretty impressive that a company could do something so brazenly malevolent and be confident that they will escape with no mo…
> 3) Storing said passwords and others in plaintext. [2] in logs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 3) Storing said passwords and others in plaintext. [2] in logs.
If you're a small business - I get it, it's good to whitelist whatever information you're logging explicitly, but for smaller teams a hard to diagnose issue might lead the team to "log everything so we can sort it out later". Facebook is Facebook, whether this decision was the product of the corporation as a whole, a small dev team, or a highly paid consultant/third party, Facebook is a big enough company that they d…
create_user('Bob', 'BobPassword123')
assert "BobPassword123" not in logfileSeems like they should add another 0 to the fine after the recent hat trick: 1) Prompting users to give Facebook their email passwords.[0] 2) Using that email access to "inadvertently" upload the information of their email contacts.[1] 3) Storing said passwords and others in plaintext. [2] It's pretty impressive that a company could do something so brazenly malevolent and be confident that they will escape with no mo…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed. This small of a fine comes off as a cost of doing business for a company as large as Facebook.
This is why we need GDPR in the US. Make the fine like 5% of global annual profit (not sales). Something that will hurt and make them actually think it's not worth it and actively avoid it rather than just the cost of doing business and a snicker as they walk away.