If she’s going for maximum damage, I am surprised this person doesn’t just announce when she’s found a big exploit, and then just sell it to up to 10 people, and then announce in very vague terms what the exploits are. (Like, “just sold exploit for windows defender” or “just sold way to hack into bitlocker”).

It seems like the vagueness of such things would make corporations more worried about being hacked and Microsoft could only guess as to what specific code was hacked, costing them greater resources.

Yes, it would be illegal, and therefore I hope she doesn’t do that and recommend against it. But I am just surprised, given the level of anger, that she has been approaching things in a way that is so easy to patch.

Is her approach more damaging the way she’s actually doing it?

This is extremely unfair to MicroSlop.

There are so many speech restrictions and humans rights violations in China that scare the hell out of me, but then I see rulings like this and their progress on robotics and tech and I think “Well, they are doing something right…” I hope one day there is more free speech for people in China who deserve to be able to say what they want.

It’s a great ruling because companies that would normally favor efficiency and profit increases are in a better position to take these existing workers and utilize them in different ways than just have everyone fired en masse and then somehow the market will sort it out. Even under classical economic theories, governments are supposed to regulate externalities and AI displacing workers too rapidly could be considered a type of externality.