logoalt Hacker News

tocs3yesterday at 7:01 PM3 repliesview on HN

Holding actual people liable sounds like a more effective option. The insurance would just be included into the cost of doing business and make everything more expensive. Insurance makes everything worse.

Holding actual humans liable (with appropriate levels of harshness) would make actual humans more likely to take preventative steps. Holding shareholders somewhat liable (maybe extra taxes on sales of a companies stock) might be useful also.


Replies

jimbokunyesterday at 7:39 PM

If you think there is never a valid use for insurance policies I can’t take you seriously.

show 1 reply
p_lyesterday at 8:58 PM

In EU, NIS2 regulations already hold top management personally liable both financially and in worst case criminally.

Does wonders for how c-level treats compliance work, now if only middle management followed...

show 1 reply
jm4yesterday at 7:24 PM

Are we talking hypothetical utopia or something that could actually happen? Insurance probably isn’t the most perfect solution but it’s the most feasible. These exact policies and insurers already exist.

And why the hell would anyone want a job where a mistake results in personal ruin? Sure, there are a lot of shitty companies and people running them, but mistakes also happen when people are trying to do a good job. It’s not possible to completely prevent a data breach even with an unlimited budget.

I think the best solution is to weed out the people who behave irresponsibly and have an environment where we learn from the ones who are responsible and fail anyway.

show 3 replies