Its interesting to me that the discussion around ransomware attacks on HN is full of victim blaming.
When stores are forced to close in SF because of rampant theft, nobody suggests that Walgreens or Target should hire armed guards.
If a mall were to be bombed, nobody would suggest that malls should just be built to resist bombing attacks.
The entire point of a government is to provide security and protect the rights of citizens. It is the government's job to solve / prevent / deter crime. If we are willing to put the burden of security on the individual, then why would we organize into states at all?
I think there could be "IT security codes" just as there are "building codes" to enforce security good practices. But "survive impact from a 747" is not part of our building codes, and similarly "be resilient to targeted, state sponsored cyberwarfare" should not the responsibility of the individual.
When stores are forced to close in SF because of rampant theft, nobody suggests that Walgreens or Target should hire armed guards.
If a mall were to be bombed, nobody would suggest that malls should just be built to resist bombing attacks.
The entire point of a government is to provide security and protect the rights of citizens. It is the government's job to solve / prevent / deter crime. If we are willing to put the burden of security on the individual, then why would we organize into states at all?
I think there could be "IT security codes" just as there are "building codes" to enforce security good practices. But "survive impact from a 747" is not part of our building codes, and similarly "be resilient to targeted, state sponsored cyberwarfare" should not the responsibility of the individual.