> there’s no such thing as a secure computer system

Where is your source for this? It is entirely possible to make a secure computer system, though it does require effort. The article specifically mentions "up to" 10% and the fines applying to companies leaking data on purpose or through negligence. I doubt the fines will be nearly as high for a company that tries to secure a system (and thus prevents more leaks) rather than a company that does not try to secure a system (assuming that leaks will occur), if the same breach happens.

Computers are deterministic (excluding cases where practically impossible cosmic ray events occur), so while we have the power to ensure system security, we should ensure system security. Heck, even just encrypting consumer information and protecting just the keys to this data would already decrease the effectiveness of many data breaches.

> Where is your source for this? It is entirely possible to make a secure computer system

You can’t. You don’t need source for that, just common sense.

Exploits are discovered every day, bugs happen, bad actors.

You can do the best system, shit still happen.

BTW you want a source ? Remember when the freaking CIA data got leaked ? Edward Snowden, ring a bell ?

If the cia couldn’t prevent it, I bet you can’t.

It is not possible to make a secure computer system that is also usable. There is ultimately no way to avoid the tradeoff between convenience and security.

You can make a system "more" secure than other systems, but you cannot make it truly secure.

> Where is your source for this?

For one, the lack of any secure computing systems.