Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Cantora t1_iwhxxft wrote

Because we can choose not to only think of ourselves when we make these kinds of decisions. Why be so selfish?

As for that analogy, you should have insurance and if the police arrest the criminal then you shouldn't need to pay the excess. We're taking about Australia here.

But in the end, you're making a good point that the average person doesn't really give a shit about the greater good. It all boils down to not inconveniencing "me"

The law would need to make sure the ambiguity around insurance was clear, and would need to be tied with the right kind of education campaign to help people understand how to protect themselves and their data.


Informal-Lead-4324 t1_iwhz5b1 wrote

You're being selfish wtf. You're saying YOU get to decide whether or not someone has the ability to recover their data. Wtf. YOURE being authoritarian. And it's funny because we know Damn well corporate interests in your country would be exempt. There's 0 fucking chance your government is going to fine Facebook for paying a ransom on their own data.

So in this case what happens. The authorities "look into it" and you're out your data lol. Thanks officers.

Your last paragraph Is moot. In a world with 0day no click exploits, you're literally victim blaming people who technically could have done absolutely zero to prevent it.


Cantora t1_iwl0q9q wrote

You're on a very arbitrary tangent based purely on, what seems to be, biased speculation. You're not someone who has any input on this issue in Australia. Thank fuck for that.