While I obviously think they need to close the security gaps, I just want to make a comment on your comment: it's that kind of thinking that keeps our taxes increasing and our economy in shambles.
I'm with @tsally on the solution to this kind of problem...
@tsally is advocating having 'real' hackers hack on the thing to find vulnerabilities. In this case though, the vulnerability was known but it would have cost more money to actually fix it. Having people attack the thing for vulnerabilities still wouldn't change the fact that you would need to pay however much money to do the fixing.
pff, you didn't address what I said...
"it's only another $1MM"
I was addressing the last thing that you said.
quit these goading, troll tactics please
there is no contradiction: yes "real" hackers, yes spend money, no don't say "just another million"
sheesh
Where did I say 'just another million?' From where I stand, you seem to be opposed to spending more money on something to make it work, and I'm arguing that by agreeing with having hackers hack on the device doesn't fix it on it's own. It still costs money. Whether it's "just another million" or "just another $100,000" is irrelevant. The thing won't fix itself for free and at $20 million a pop it's a waste of money if the thing is broken.
Note: I'm not goading, trolling or whatever it is you think I'm doing. This thread is a conversation, and I'm responding to what you said.
...and I'm responding to what you said
No, you're not, you're actually ignoring my words. Please stop.
Note: You have made one lifetime submission and it was flagged and marked 'dead.' I will not call you a troll, but please stop.
'... it would have added to the Predator's price'
If you're paying $20 million each you'd think another million to ensure your targets don't see you coming would be a no-brainer?