Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News

Drudge Retort

User Info


Subscribe to humtake's blog Subscribe


Special Features


Just more politicians trying to fix a problem they know nothing about. But if it sounds good on paper, then great, right?

They still have the same fundamental problem as HIPAA, GDPR, etc., and that is a lack of oversight. They make all these laws and cripple companies, while increasing costs of doing business. But they have no one who is actually making sure companies follow the law. For example, HIPAA has never fined one company for not following the rules until after a breach occurred. All of those regulating bodies leave it up to the companies to make sure they are following the law, and companies typically don't do the right thing until something bad happens. But, by that time, the damage is already done.

This is my career. I make fat paychecks for costing companies money in the short-term but end up saving them a huge amount of money and reputation damage by preventing breaches. So, while the laws can be as well-natured as possible, they don't actually stop anything from happening. In my industry, compliance laws are called money-getters. It's a way for the government to profit off of a company's bad fortune. And the biggest kicker is, one that CA just makes worse, is that in many cases breaches occur even when a company is doing everything right. Because privacy and security is a reactive game. It's very rare that attack vectors are blocked until a bad guy actually finds one and exploits it. Only then does the world know about the vulnerability and, by then, it's too late.

And lastly, these laws hurt the common person more than many of you realize. Since more than 70% (higher depending on the metric you look at) of breaches occur due to stupid people falling for stupid phishing scams, companies are slowly changing their culture where the person who fell for it is on the hook for the breach and is sued for damages. And it's not the companies themselves who are leading that charge, it's the fat cat cyber insurance companies who are doing this...and lobbying for laws that make it possible.

"Why would they? Roe was decided law. Ask any of Lewzer's SCOTUS nominees."

Slavery was decided law. I guess maybe that explains why Dems ignored it so long until it impacted their pocketbooks and then fought in a civil war to keep slavery.

The saddest part is these comments prove beyond any doubt that so many liberals don't actually listen to what the other side says at all. In general, and most comment boards and online personality rhetoric proves it, cons have wanted it to be state law for a very long time. And when the SCOTUS reversed it, cons saw it as a huge win for state law. Now, I'm with liberals being irked that cons went way too far and didn't even compromise, but both sides do this often. But, cons went to the extreme and started wanting it banned everywhere and now the extreme right is fighting to make it federal...which is the dumbest response to the situation that one could come up with. That doesn't take away the fact that most cons want it to be left at a state level. To prove this, I went to Fox and opened an article about this, and the majority of the comments are about people agreeing with Trump and that it shouldn't be tackled at the federal level.

But, don't let doing doing your own research across multiple paths get in the way of making knee-jerk, partisan responses. In fact, I KNOW that DR members don't since not long ago and article came up about this and someone commented how using multiple sources isn't a good thing, and many agreed with that person. I'm still blown away by that, which says a lot coming from DR comments.

Drudge Retort

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2024 World Readable