|
|
|
|
|
by popalchemist
61 days ago
|
|
I agree it's a shit tactic, but one thing I can say for those running software businesses is that it's not an equivalent linear increase on both sides. It's asymmetric, because # of both attackers and the amount of attack surface (exposed 3rd party dependencies, for example) is near infinite, with no opportunity cost for failure by the bad actors (hackers). However a single failure can bring down a company, particularly when they may be hosting sensitive user data that could ruin their customers' businesses or lives. I think Cal are making the wrong call, and abandoning their principles. But it isn't fair to say the game is accelerating in a proportionate way. See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CieKDg-JrA Ultimately, he concludes that while in the short run the game defines the players' actions, an environment that makes cooperation too risky naturally forces participants to stop cooperating to protect themselves from being "exploited" (this bit is around 34:39 - 34:46) |
|