This was silly, but if they were good vulnerabilities, the commentary would be useful. Short sellers need customers to respond without providing full details (or they would be fixed, and then the stock market wouldn't care), so experts saying claims are valid would help veracity.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @4Dgifts
It definitely doesn't optimize for public interest, but the counter-argument is that research can cost a lot of money, so they're balancing recouping those costs with informing users about risk. I'm not making that argument btw, just saying what the argument is.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @4Dgifts
Yeah, this was clown town for sure. For the purpose of discussion we can imagine someone doing this competently, I think it's still an interesting discussion.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @4Dgifts
I know, I'm not making this argument, just think it's an interesting discussion. You know my position is full disclosure is optimal, not many people have pushed harder than me for it
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @4Dgifts
Well obviously. If you want to discuss the abstract idea of short selling driven by vulnerability research, let me know. I'm not interesting in discussing what these people are doing, because it's stupid.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
Tavis, you know Ivàn… “stop” has never been part of his vocabulary.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.