Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
But they allowed that exact situation for a while now and no one cared. Stupid security but politically safe since Trump would never investigate.

Big corps never pivot throughout the whole corp for a single issue, only when risk in a certain context keeps compounding. The Dem wins compounded risk of legal action; it's not just that the laws are on the books. They were on the books a month ago.

"Yeah that's what I said it's to hedge legal risk."

It's the way you said it; ignoring potentially relevant political context. A lot the rhetoric demonizing politics is intentional to embed a negative reaction causing us to discount it's value

> they allowed that exact situation for a while now and no one cared

Source for them having allowed it versus not tightly enforced IT rules?

loading story #50423314
This is global, starting with Hong Kong months ago. I doubt fear of US regulators were was the motive.
ELINA, please! As a non-American, I don’t understand why anyone would care about Trump in this context. Aren’t the people who look into these things different departments? And don’t they only look into anything after a breach?
The current administration was basically "corporations, do whatever you want as long as it doesn't interfere with our money making".

A lot of people felt, and there seems to be mounting proof, that the administration wasn't going to enforce a lot of laws, especially since their stance was to cut the agencies in charge of that (SEC, FTC, FCC, EPA, FDA, IRS, etc).

loading story #50420343
loading story #50417752