I think of nuclear energy/weapons as a great example in this space. They should never be online so to avoid absolute catastrophe. Healthcare as already mentioned is interesting – I saw in a TV show once that a pacemaker could be hacked and kill the user. While obviously fictional, it illustrates the harm that medical devices could cause if online. Another example in the other direction however is guns. I’ve heard legislation that would make you have to login into some digital part of the gun to be able to use it. While hackable, I doubt the triggering part is online however. I guess I would just be weary of situations where direct immediate harm is possible, and more forgiving of putting stuff like personal information on some kind of server.
As we deal with people’s logins for several different businesses so they can access loyalty points, it’s important to have their privacy in mind. In our case, having the blockchain do the “plumbing” and things being on a record anyway creates a more safe product. Reading this case study affirmed that for me a bit.
If she didn’t speak up the company probably wouldn’t have come to her conclusion and that of the security consultant and lost a lot of money and possibly the family recipe. She challenged a room full of men, some of higher standing in the business, and pushed back against tech, not for it, to increase the company’s safety over the long term. It was important she spoke up because it was simply the best opinion.
As a team, we should encourage every group member to speak freely and openly about their opinions – especially when challenging another member who has more domain experience or expertise. Perspectives are always useful.
