[dstick]

It does make sense. You're confusing corporate liability with personal liability. The parent's point is that if the investors / shareholders would be responsible. Stuff like this would be severely reduced because resources would be allocated to prevent it. Right now, the only damage is a financial one. And as long as the damage is lower than the cost of prevention, hacks like this will continue to happen.

[ghayes]

So isn't the solution here to up the penalties, specifically with codified minimums ($X per leaked phone number, $Y for leaked SSN, etc)? The corporate death penalty would end up hurting the consumers significantly more than this method, which would primarily hurt the share/debt-holders, which is the intent. Corporate dissolution seems like a concern when fraud or malfeasance is specifically involved.

For context, I'm very likely in this breach, but it wouldn't make me any happier to hear T-Mobile was shut-down tomorrow.

[dstick]

No that wasn’t the point at all. Corporate death penalty was a completely overblown analogy by someone else. What this is about is that a manager / CEO / shareholder can be held personally accountable with punishment that could include jail time. As a deterrent.

Right now only the company is accountable as if it’s some sort of living creature, and the penalty is always money. Which as you aptly put, they have in abundance!

[gibba999]

Yes, the solution are astronomical penalties.

And a corporate dissolution isn't the outcome. The outcome is that T-Mobile goes into bankruptcy, with its customers as the debtors. The outcome of that is that a bankruptcy court divides up the assets to maximize payout to you.

Most likely, this means:

- T-Mobile, as an entity continues to exist, as-is..

- Shareholder value is wiped out...

- And handed to customers, as the customers become shareholders.

T-Mobile has a 180B market cap, which probably means you acquire stock worth a grand or so.