fumplow

Well reasoned, and presented, arguments, but it’s all in service of the low balling of an independent researcher by one of the most wealthy companies in the world.

Your arguments here tactfully dance around the reality that there are near zero privacy protections in the US, and so it is impossible to say what a bounty should be worth.

An exploit of this vulnerability would unlikely lead to a civil case, and even when one does, the fines are so low they are considered “part of doing business”.

Your authoritative tone used to mock the other commenters gives the sense or your opinion being objective when it is just as subjective, and conveniently is a docile subservience to the powers that be.

You could make a, similarly styled to your own, argument to defend American style speeding ticket calculation over the Finnish, but the reality is both exist and for rational, reasoned arguments.

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/03/finland...

I mean, anyone can see the basic argument that “the same crime should result in same fine”, right?

But what’s the purpose of the speeding fine?

To encourage a change in behavior?

So if I speed 11 miles over the speed limit with my 26k/year income and someone with 26M/month income also gets clocked at 11 miles over, who’s going to feel that fine more?

This exploit affected 4 billion people.

Hyper rationalization is fine and all, but man, can you at least utilize it to help make the world function more rationally?

Or at least admit, acknowledge, or realize who your masters are.