I haven’t yet read his specific arguments, and it’s probably true that legislators will continue to do nothing upon nothing about the increasingly unanimous demand to take (the population’s) cybersecurity seriously. That’s been the historical pattern.
But it might go down differently. I’ve noticed that a lot of recent political upheavals could be viewed as instances of people pushing with all their might on a door that is suddenly wide open. (Presumably because of the internet)
Like, with gay rights, and especially trans rights, after decades of slooowly chipping away at it, people suddenly found that the public consensus, and policy makers, just turned on a dime. With net neutrality – though there are forces actively working against it – on several occasions public protests have produced immediate results, which no one really expected. Women have been pointing out systematic sexual abuse since, you know, the dawn of time, and suddenly things like #MeToo just explode, to the point where in some cases the consequences for abusers have been more rapid and severe than anyone really expected (albeit not so you’d lose sleep over it).
And on the negative side, you have, well, basically everything that motivates Turmp supporters. Those people spent generations espousing horribly cruel and bigoted opinions (“send 'em all back to Mexico”), as hyperbole, and all of a sudden those nasty opinions are literal GOP platform items. Yes, the deplorables may have doubled down rather than dialling back their rhetoric, securing Hell as their destination, but I think even the nastiest mainstream Republican was taken by surprise at how easily things changed.
Anyway my point is that a lot of the time, the social and political consensus now reacts to pressure much faster than it used to. IoT security is probably still a little bit of a niche concern, but it might be possible to turn things around based on even a relatively minor headline.
