Have they ever issued a fine for 4% of revenue? That's the maximum fine possible, under the non-standard "higher maximum" category. This breach surely won't be given the maximum considering there isn't really anything noteworthy about it.
We should consider the maximum that has actually been issued, than subtract some off of that. You also have to subtract out all of the money they saved over the years of reduced investment into security.
I think that lands us squarely back into "cost of doing business" land.
It's impossible to take their fears seriously—literally any kind of social obligation is going to be scary for an entity with no desire to do anything but feed its owners.
Wait until you see what kind of reaction 40% gets! Existential threats will be the only things that work.
Have they ever issued a fine for 4% of revenue? That's the maximum fine possible, under the non-standard "higher maximum" category. This breach surely won't be given the maximum considering there isn't really anything noteworthy about it.
We should consider the maximum that has actually been issued, than subtract some off of that. You also have to subtract out all of the money they saved over the years of reduced investment into security.
I think that lands us squarely back into "cost of doing business" land.
It's impossible to take their fears seriously—literally any kind of social obligation is going to be scary for an entity with no desire to do anything but feed its owners.
Wait until you see what kind of reaction 40% gets! Existential threats will be the only things that work.