> but they don't need FreeBSD exploit-writing capabilities for that.

That's a solid point. There was a piece the other day in the Register [1] that studying supply chains for cost-benefit-risk analysis is how some of them increasingly operate. And, well, why wouldn't they if they're rational (an assumption that is debatable, of course)?

[1] https://www.theregister.com/2026/04/11/trivy_axios_supply_ch...

▲

tclancy 2 days ago | parent [-]

>if they're rational (an assumption that is debatable, of course)

Feels like crime is an almost perfect simulation of the free market: almost/ all of the non-rational actors will be crowded out by evolutionary pressure to be better at finding the highest expected values, where EV would be something like [difficulty to break in] x [best-guess value of access].

▲

exogenousdata 2 days ago | parent [-]

This is a total tangent. However note that the creator of the ‘free market’ idea, Adam Smith, wasn’t an advocate for zero law/regulation regulation.

In fact Chapter 10 of his “Wealth of Nations,” specifically states, “When the regulation, therefore, is in favour of the work-men, it is always just and equitable.” He goes on to explain that regulation that benefits the masters can wind up being unjust.

Smith’s concept of ‘laissez-faire’ was novel back in the day. But by today’s standards, some of his economic opinions might even be considered “collectivist.”

	▲	tclancy a day ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Oh for sure and a good point. I meant the free market in the sense certain groups tout as the solution to all problems but that the studiously avoid themselves because it’s dog-eat-dog.
	▲	joquarky 2 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		I hate getting old because I can never remember this when it's relevant.