Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

MGM losing up to $8.4M a day due to cyberattack, analyist says

reviewjournal.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 111 posts

Re: MGM losing up to $8.4M a day due to cyberattack, analyist says

#81

Post by thefourthchime »

xfitm3 wrote: post #14
irtefa wrote: post #11

I'm curious if MGM fully understood their cyber risks. Many companies underestimate threats until something like this happens. After seeing MGM, if other hotels beef up security too (very likely), will overall costs for consumers go up?

Security is a SG&A line item, I am sure they are far more fixated on physical security due to their business vertical and had a gap. There will be many cyber companies chomping at the bit to get a piece of the inevitable (I made this number up) 100m MGM will spend on Cybersecurity over the next 5 years. They won't make the same mistake twice and will build a comprehensive cybersecurity program, and it will succeed. U…

“ They won't make the same mistake twice and will build a comprehensive cybersecurity program, and it will succeed. Up until someone questions this cost and they forgot what they are paying for because everything was so smooth and repeat the cycle.”

You couldn’t have said it better.

Re: MGM losing up to $8.4M a day due to cyberattack, analyist says

#82

Post by willis936 »

kube-system wrote: post #75
mrguyorama wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In exactly the same way a heroin dealer provides leisure and entertainment. Selling access to an inherently addictive substance should not be a for profit endeavor. The incentives are inherently biased towards harming people for profit.

You say this as if "addictive" and "harmful" are boolean concepts. These concepts have a wide spectrum in reality. People die every day from addictions to all kinds of socially acceptable products and services, whether it be the dopamine rush from an unhealthy or dangerous activity, a buzz from their favorite beverage, or the sugar rush from an unhealthy snack.

I encourage you to walk through some casinos and take stock of what you see. The scales of enrichment and addiction are nowhere near the balance of candy and soda.

Re: MGM losing up to $8.4M a day due to cyberattack, analyist says

#83

Post by infamouscow »

pphysch wrote: post #43
nico wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It never stopped, and the US is one of the worst offenders Check out War is a Racket, by US general Smedley Butler Also the Snowden documents and the whole Asange/Wikileaks case

The "World's Policeman" thesis really fell flat. There is an urgent need to have effective international law-enforcement and justice.

Urgent to whom? We live in a multipolar world now.

Countries already use criminals as political tools to advance their goals on the world stage. What makes you think expanding these efforts will somehow change existing geopolitical behavior?

All systems of law break down into the imposers, and the imposed upon. You don't have to impose anything on the voluntarily compliant, but what about those that refuse? Are you going to invade or kill innocent people just because a few leaders don't want to play by your rules?

Sanctions don't work for their intended political purpose. The only reason politicians talk about them is because it enables their corporate masters to swoop into markets and make a lot of money. (And if you disagree, I ask you find a study pointing to how sanctions were politically successful.)

Re: MGM losing up to $8.4M a day due to cyberattack, analyist says

#84

Post by baobabKoodaa »

ToDougie wrote: post #80
mrguyorama wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah yes, a physical addiction is "Poor decisions", like being born poor is a poor decision

They can walk somewhere else. They don't have a disease.

Their ability to walk to another casino remains unhindered by the terminology arguments of internet commentators.

Re: MGM losing up to $8.4M a day due to cyberattack, analyist says

#85

Post by pphysch »

mcpackieh wrote: post #65
pphysch wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "World's Policeman" thesis really fell flat. There is an urgent need to have effective international law-enforcement and justice.

> There is an urgent need to have effective international law-enforcement and justice. What makes you think any other organization given such privilege would do any better with it than the US? Even if they started out with good intentions, that kind of power will inevitably corrupt them. Embrace multipolarity. Benevolent, wise and just unipolarity will never happen.

International doesn't mean unipolar. Effective international institutions are multilateral in nature.

Re: MGM losing up to $8.4M a day due to cyberattack, analyist says

#86

Post by pphysch »

infamouscow wrote: post #83
pphysch wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "World's Policeman" thesis really fell flat. There is an urgent need to have effective international law-enforcement and justice.

Urgent to whom? We live in a multipolar world now. Countries already use criminals as political tools to advance their goals on the world stage. What makes you think expanding these efforts will somehow change existing geopolitical behavior? All systems of law break down into the imposers, and the imposed upon. You don't have to impose anything on the voluntarily compliant, but what about those that refuse? Are you g…

> Urgent to whom? We live in a multipolar world now.

What does that have to do with it? We should expect more of international institutions in a multipolar world.

It's urgent to anyone that has had to deal with ransomware gangs.

It's urgent for countries suffering from violent cartels.

It's urgent for Canada, which just accused India of assassinating one of its citizens on Canadian soil.

And so on.

Re: MGM losing up to $8.4M a day due to cyberattack, analyist says

#87

Post by JetSpiegel »

SoftTalker wrote: post #37
anonymousiam wrote: post #2

I never like it when writers use the word "lose" to describe money not earned. Yeah, MGM is not earning as much as it could because of this attack. They are under pressure to settle with the attackers. Articles like this can increase that pressure. I'm glad that they aren't settling, and I'm certain that they will survive this attack.

If your salary was cut 20% next year, would you think you were not losing money because you had not yet earned it?

I have a contract that requires my employer to pay up.

Not the same think as avoiding shopping somewhere.

Re: MGM losing up to $8.4M a day due to cyberattack, analyist says

#89

Post by mcpackieh »

pphysch wrote: post #85
mcpackieh wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is an urgent need to have effective international law-enforcement and justice. What makes you think any other organization given such privilege would do any better with it than the US? Even if they started out with good intentions, that kind of power will inevitably corrupt them. Embrace multipolarity. Benevolent, wise and just unipolarity will never happen.

International doesn't mean unipolar. Effective international institutions are multilateral in nature.

If you have in mind the kind of international courts that already exist, e.g. the ICC,... well they already exist. I took your emphasis on "effective" to imply that you would like international courts to have substantially more power than presently exists. With enough power to truly be effective, that court would become the unipolar power. It would attract the power hungry like moths to a lightbulb.

Re: MGM losing up to $8.4M a day due to cyberattack, analyist says

#90

Post by infamouscow »

pphysch wrote: post #86
infamouscow wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Urgent to whom? We live in a multipolar world now. Countries already use criminals as political tools to advance their goals on the world stage. What makes you think expanding these efforts will somehow change existing geopolitical behavior? All systems of law break down into the imposers, and the imposed upon. You don't have to impose anything on the voluntarily compliant, but what about those that refuse? Are you g…

> Urgent to whom? We live in a multipolar world now. What does that have to do with it? We should expect more of international institutions in a multipolar world. It's urgent to anyone that has had to deal with ransomware gangs. It's urgent for countries suffering from violent cartels. It's urgent for Canada, which just accused India of assassinating one of its citizens on Canadian soil. And so on.

> What does that have to do with it? We should expect more of international institutions in a multipolar world.

The whole reason why the world went from unipolar to multipolar is because the existing international organizations failed. What you're missing is these international organizations are political instruments used to obstruct and hinder Russia and China's development. The people in those countries don't share your supposition that more international organizations are a good thing.

> It's urgent to anyone that has had to deal with ransomware gangs.

What makes you think an international organization can do anything about ransomware? It's existed in this form for over a decade and nobody has done anything about it.

> It's urgent for countries suffering from violent cartels.

Why hasn't some international organization been formed to handled this then? Multipolarity is a very recent.

> It's urgent for Canada, which just accused India of assassinating one of its citizens on Canadian soil.

Do you think Canada is going to war with India over this?

Post reply on HN