@rolento25: “Safe” is a relative term. You lock your door at night because it's “safer” than not locking it. Everyone would say that, and yet no one thinks a door lock makes them immortal.
There have been dozens if not hundreds of stories of large companies under-financing their corporate cyber security staff/departments over the last decade. In most of those cases a single password was enough to get in, in some cases “password” or “123456”, and once in, the data wasn't even encrypted, it was just downloaded then uploaded as is. And those are only the ones that get caught and exposed.
If a CEO “randomly” decides “Hey I think we need to bulk up our cyber security now”, then in most cases, the shareholders won't see the point, think it's a waste of money, his profits for that/those quarter(s) go down, they don't get to cash in, and the board gets annoyed with him. That's what I meant by the “corporate mindset”.
@zerojuice: I'm so glad someone who knows every corporate cyber security system in the world could help us understand the situation better. Thank you so much, mister professional hacker, sir.
That “of course” suggests to me that for Snyder, the art form is basically irrelevant, and it's all about the money.
Of course = obviously and the only reason it would be obvious that he'd make a film out of garbage, is because it obviously would mean a pay day. That's the only obvious thing about adapting a game that doesn't even have a story.
@angrycreep: Whatever pride you found in that comment is only what you projected and put there yourself. It was about as close to a flat objective statement as it gets.
“... and says it's because he wants to make more money.”
There's nothing here anyone can criticise. Even if you labelled him greedy, if all the greedy people were honest, we'd be living in a totally different world.
naryanrobinson's comments