In his in depth evaluation of Sony's "predictably pitiful" reply to the stream crisis, Campbell poses a many disturbing possibility. Imagine if, in a year's time, we were to look back and reflect: "'It only kinda went away, didn't it? Sony wholly laid the censure on the hackers, launched a lot of authorised flak, refused to take any responsibility, offering the minimum clearness and token recompense. But nobody cares any more. At smallest they've encrypted my personal information now.'" Could we unequivocally choose that?
While Campbell lays out an instead credible preferred diversion outline for Sony to follow -- where is KB on this one, really? -- he's moreover suggesting that, in reserve from inevitable short-term costs, the predicament could blow over is to company. It would seem, then, that to be able to head off such a remorseful (non) reply from Sony, video diversion media and consumers comparison will have to deed and not only conflict . Now that we've altered our passwords and checked our credit reports, what next? Do we only lay back and hope a freebie is forthcoming our way? Is that how small it takes for us to pardon and forget? Or can we go on to pull Sony for a deferential reply -- and, if that fails, take our business elsewhere?
The video diversion residents at considerable doesn't have to washed up Sony's mess, but we owe it to ourselves and any other to make sure Sony does the work right. Otherwise, we chance stability to be treated with colour as uninvolved, teenager basement-dwellers. The hackers amid us shouldn't be the only ones to learn Sony a lesson.
No comments:
Post a Comment