M.U.G.E.N said:
Kasz216 said:
M.U.G.E.N said:
Kasz216 said:
M.U.G.E.N said:
Kasz216 said:
Read the bold. When i meant average... I meant about average for a large company that loses your private information.
What Sony offered was about average in value to the consumer, though cheaper to them compaired to what most companies offer in the same situation.
|
Again when there haven't been similar situations in gaming industry you can't just compare it to those outside the industry and say that's the 'average' you would expect. And unless you have anything back up your claim that the 'customers' in general expected at least this much from be my guest I would gladly accept that. But fact of the matter is that's just not true at all. Heck a day or so ago we weren't even aware of what we would get for certain and we already saw customers being happy with what Sony was doing with free id protection services and such.
so again, you just made up that statement without anything to back it up with. no one sensible person can ask from sony to do anything more than what they have already done.
|
That's just... a horrible arguement. What in your mind makes the videogame industry special compaired to every other industry out there?
|
what kind of logic is that? 0_o industries differ, companies differ and situations differ.
Ok do me a favor, give an example or two of a company having to compensate for this many users. I can't remember the exact number of psn accounts but think it was 70 something million accounts. Not sure how many of them even had legit info but let's say 50 or so million accounts with real users.
They are rebuilding psn ground up, had a hit in stock market, a company who is not as well off a company than many 'giants' in or out of the industry, they are gonna lose revenue by giving free psn plus, gonna incur a lot of expenses by having adopt free ID theft protection programs across the globe not just a country or two.
you jsut can't generalize, too many variables in situations like this
|
When you argue a company should compensate the victims less because of number you are putting the company ahead of the real victims. Something you should consider.
Aside from which, as you get more consumers... aka more customers, (Aka more money) the cost for securing a database properly goes DOWN per piece of information. So if anything the reverse should be true.
I doubt Sony is going to go bankrupt over this. Some consumers after that year of protection is up might though.
As for them having to rebuild PSN. Well yeah, they have to rebuild it with things most security experts are shocked weren't in there to begin with. I mean, when you consider Sony picked a fight with hackers... yet had nobody actually monitoring their security or advances in hacking or patching their systems... I mean... my god. All they are doing now is what they SHOULD have done in the first place.
|
I'm not putting them ahead of my personal interests (since I am a consumer) at all. I'm just being reasonable and realistic here. Hence why you will never find me cheering on idiotic hackers any situation. Before jumping to conclusion just try and understand there is a difference.
Not sure what you were trying to prove with that second statement of yours. Was it regarding the expenses comment I made? or about having to rebuild the psn? cuz if it's about the expense of compensating for many users, it makes no sense since it will still cost a lot which was the only point I wanted to get across.
and I might be a milliionaire in a year, nintendogamer might turn optimistic, who knows. And I am not naive enough to think Sony will go bankrupt or even leave the gaming scene. That's just silly, they are a stronger and bigger company for that to happen.
and again not sure why you are stating this? Of course they effed up. plain and simple, I never disputed that and OBVIOUSLY that's why they are rebuilding the system from ground up. better late than never and I'm grateful they are taking their time to do so at least now properly. But I never denied or was ignorant of the reasons behind why they were made to do so.
so again within reason, they are doing more than enough.
|
No, they're doing... about as much as any company would in this situation. Though again... you are. You are claiming that the size of the breach means they should be allowed to offer less then what's standard. Which is a clear show of considering the company more then the individual.
I mean, seriously just stop and think about it for a second. How does it matter to the end consumer how many users data sony lost? All that matters is that they lost their data.
What Sony's offering is fine. Claiming it's generous or something they didn't have to do however is wrong.
It's about industry standard for this kind of F-up.
