Live data from Hacker News

FTC takes action against GoDaddy for alleged lax data security

ftc.gov

131–140 of 181 posts

Re: FTC takes action against GoDaddy for alleged lax data security

#131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

It's a bit exhausting that every time anyone says anything about executives in any context, we have to make sure to bring up the cold-blooded murder of one of them and make sure to remind everyone that some people on the internet think that that murder was justified. It's free internet points, I guess, but it's also not constructive and frankly more than a little bit creepy.

> It's free internet points, I guess, but it's also not constructive and frankly more than a little bit creepy.

What makes you think it's not constructive?!

I think it's worth discussing why a large number (possibly even a majority!) of people want to murder executives. Telling those people to shut up removes yet another way for them to express their opinions. I think taking notice of the room is very constructive. I think having a point to discuss (even if it's violence) is constructive. Talk is cheap, after all; and talk is way cheaper than murder.

Moreover, I've heard many many many people insist that violence is never the answer. Alas, they forget that violence is how most countries were founded; ignore that many laws and regulations are written in blood; and rarely consider the situations where all other solutions have been explored and exhausted. Further, if business is so worried about costs, and violence can be cheaper than exploring all alternative options, then there's definitely a business mindset to that. And business is what you want to discuss anyway, right?

If you really think violence is never the answer then you should do everything in your power to prevent it. So instead of insulting someone for expressing an opinion, perhaps you should talk to them instead. You might discover a new/unique point of view, or you might even be able to change their mind.

Re: FTC takes action against GoDaddy for alleged lax data security

#132
post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except Change Healthcare got hacked, lost a ton of records and they are still operating. So those fines must be, could be up to xx,000 per person affected but in actuality, those affected will get Arbys coupon and C Suite will lose a week of yacht time.

Not even that. You always have insurance for this stuff.

But then the insurance company has to pay, and they'll work hard to make sure it doesn't happen. This doesn't sound like an explanation to me.

Re: FTC takes action against GoDaddy for alleged lax data security

#133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a bit exhausting that every time anyone says anything about executives in any context, we have to make sure to bring up the cold-blooded murder of one of them and make sure to remind everyone that some people on the internet think that that murder was justified. It's free internet points, I guess, but it's also not constructive and frankly more than a little bit creepy.

> It's free internet points, I guess, but it's also not constructive and frankly more than a little bit creepy. What makes you think it's not constructive?! I think it's worth discussing why a large number (possibly even a majority!) of people want to murder executives. Telling those people to shut up removes yet another way for them to express their opinions. I think taking notice of the room is very constructive. I…

> What makes you think it's not constructive?!

Because it's completely and totally irrelevant to the topic at hand, the only connection is the general strata of the position that the people held—not even the same title, just the same class of title!

I'm generally not okay with people calling for murdering people based solely on their job title. Subtly hinting that it might be okay to kill those people is not much better.

> So instead of insulting someone for expressing an opinion, perhaps you should talk to them instead.

They didn't express an opinion, they casually referenced a mostly unrelated sensational story while intentionally avoiding expressing an opinion.

Re: FTC takes action against GoDaddy for alleged lax data security

#134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's free internet points, I guess, but it's also not constructive and frankly more than a little bit creepy. What makes you think it's not constructive?! I think it's worth discussing why a large number (possibly even a majority!) of people want to murder executives. Telling those people to shut up removes yet another way for them to express their opinions. I think taking notice of the room is very constructive. I…

> What makes you think it's not constructive?! Because it's completely and totally irrelevant to the topic at hand, the only connection is the general strata of the position that the people held—not even the same title, just the same class of title! I'm generally not okay with people calling for murdering people based solely on their job title. Subtly hinting that it might be okay to kill those people is not much bet…

> Because it's completely and totally irrelevant to the topic at hand

Fun fact: topics can change while discussion continues.

> I'm generally not okay with people calling for murdering people based solely on their job title. Subtly hinting that it might be okay to kill those people is not much better.

To be clear, neither am I. But I do think it's important to discuss with people who think it is okay because, as I said earlier, telling them to shut up will result in worse situations.

> They didn't express an opinion

Perhaps the mere fact that you don't recognize their comment as an opinion is partly why people feel unheard.

Re: FTC takes action against GoDaddy for alleged lax data security

#135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

It's a bit exhausting that every time anyone says anything about executives in any context, we have to make sure to bring up the cold-blooded murder of one of them and make sure to remind everyone that some people on the internet think that that murder was justified. It's free internet points, I guess, but it's also not constructive and frankly more than a little bit creepy.

[flagged]

Re: FTC takes action against GoDaddy for alleged lax data security

#136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What makes you think it's not constructive?! Because it's completely and totally irrelevant to the topic at hand, the only connection is the general strata of the position that the people held—not even the same title, just the same class of title! I'm generally not okay with people calling for murdering people based solely on their job title. Subtly hinting that it might be okay to kill those people is not much bet…

> Because it's completely and totally irrelevant to the topic at hand Fun fact: topics can change while discussion continues. > I'm generally not okay with people calling for murdering people based solely on their job title. Subtly hinting that it might be okay to kill those people is not much better. To be clear, neither am I. But I do think it's important to discuss with people who think it is okay because, as I sa…

> Fun fact: topics can change while discussion continues.

That doesn't make it reasonable to insert a casual call for murder into every loosely related conversation [0].

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42860778

Re: FTC takes action against GoDaddy for alleged lax data security

#137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a bit exhausting that every time anyone says anything about executives in any context, we have to make sure to bring up the cold-blooded murder of one of them and make sure to remind everyone that some people on the internet think that that murder was justified. It's free internet points, I guess, but it's also not constructive and frankly more than a little bit creepy.

[flagged]

[deleted]

Re: FTC takes action against GoDaddy for alleged lax data security

#138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If you own a company, why even bother with security? Security is expensive. Wait until a breach is exposed, offer $10 credit monitoring (at best), accept the free press coverage, maybe pinky promise to not lie if you've been particularly egregious in your handling of multiple incidents, and then carry on like normal. (This is tongue-in-cheek, I work in security, but I am frustrated with how often stories like this o…

[flagged]

> And people wonder why Luigi is seen by some as "the good guy".

There are many reasons to explain why people wonder. No one single reason is enough to explain it.

Luckily, no penalty for breaches can be resolved with laws and/or regulations. I suggest you take this matter up with your lawmakers instead of making comments which incite those very same people you describe.

Re: FTC takes action against GoDaddy for alleged lax data security

#139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because it's completely and totally irrelevant to the topic at hand Fun fact: topics can change while discussion continues. > I'm generally not okay with people calling for murdering people based solely on their job title. Subtly hinting that it might be okay to kill those people is not much better. To be clear, neither am I. But I do think it's important to discuss with people who think it is okay because, as I sa…

> Fun fact: topics can change while discussion continues. That doesn't make it reasonable to insert a casual call for murder into every loosely related conversation [0]. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42860778

You're right, it doesn't.
Post reply on HN