Perhaps, but it's the truth. And wouldn't it be even more dangerous to ignore the fact other sources are doing it too?
I disagree. Trusting the source to delete sensitive information would be complacent. The only reason Naps is getting heat on this issue is because he got caught. That's not diligence, it's locking the barn door after the horse got out.
I must have not been clear with my post because I don't disagree. Let me try to clarify:
Yes, it would be more dangerous but, I don't think I said, suggested, or implied to ignore that other sources also store customer information. Nor do I think I said trust the source to properly discard sensitive information, even if they say they do.
When I say I want people to be diligent, that means considering that others store information too, with naps being a prime example of what can happen. Complacent in this case would be to just assume its "part of that game," thereby marginalizing its importance when considering a purchase - not to ignore it.
I think the narrative is used by some as a tool to marginalize the seriousness of that fact, for the purpose of damage control and/or to retain customers. And in that capacity - as well as in others, such as the need to rationalize a situation - it also has a tendency to foster more reckless behavior because it's thought to be just "part of the game" thereby diminishing the importance of the inherent risks involved in playing "the game."
IMO, I don't think a majority of people take purchasing AAS as serious as they should. When I read people seemingly writing off incidents such as a data breach that originated in data collection and storage as being normal, it ends up losing priority in source evaluation, across all sources, when it should be a major consideration; especially now with happened with naps.
As far as the heat naps getting heat then and now: I think they deserve it, then, now and in the future so everyone is reminded of the risks involved. Additionally - as alluded to above - I think this incident is a stark reality check, that should be applied to all sources, when considering a purchase.
Again, maybe I wasn't clear with my other post, because when I read your rebuttals I don't disagree with your content and message but only how I'm reading your interpretation of mine. Hopefully this one came out a little clearer.
