I don’t blame Microsoft! They had help. Hence the ‘et al’ appended to the culprits identity. I just don’t have the insight of a Royal Commission or Grand Jury or FBI Special Investigator to Name all of the related parties.
When attributing blame or having contributed to an outcome, whether it was by a deliberate and conscious act or just an unintended consequence - Ignorance is no excuse. Perhaps you don’t know what you can’t foresee if you choose to look in another direction.
Consumer law is meant to help us remedy situations arising from large powerful corporates choosing not to look or worse deliberately look the other way. I see many parallels between what may evolve around legal liability and corporate avoidance of ensuring they delivered security to our online world, the harm it has and will cause to many of us in the future, and how the James Hardy asbestos products saga has played out to date.
We are still living and dealing with the fall out from the later. Are we adequately in control of the former? I suspect not hence my comments that what we say here needs to add to our consumer outcomes.
I can reminisce about mentally converting a LODZ r1 to its binary or hex or octal equivalent. It might make me feel young again and sound like some expert. I’m really just another dumb consumer who sees a moral and real threat that we should not have to carry the burden of weak consumer law, or lack of political resolve. Choice is now much more than an independent review organisation. It does have a profile and a clear presence in the community.