> At the time of posting, I didn't know about any embargo. My contact had told me there was no embargo, and her contact had told her the same thing.

If you're not a party to an embargo, and no one told you an embargo even exists... you should not follow the embargo. In fact, you should maybe even consider leaking basic details or challenging the embargo if you are in this situation. In your situation, they had lost information asymmetry before the news got to you. I don't know where people got the idea that unrelated third parties have to follow embargos.

Embargos are not about keeping secrets, they are about the game theory of coordinated disclosure.

▲

tchalla 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

On one hand you have the OP, who is self reflecting. On the other hand you have Dan Lorenc from Chainguard.

▲

adastra22 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Well, this is an iterated prisoner’s dilemma.

▲

deadbabe 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I’d say maybe it’s more like a Roko’s Basilisk. He knew the potential existence of an embargo, but didn’t do anything to protect the embargo. So now that the embargo turned out to be real, he will be punished. Otherwise if he truly did not know an embargo could even exist, he could not be blamed.

▲

syrrim 41 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

There was no embargo. If there's an "embargo" but parties not subject to the embargo know about it... there's no embargo.

▲

adastra22 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Except he won’t be punished, because nothing he did was legally wrong.

	▲	Calazon an hour ago \| parent \| next [-]
		He won't be punished by the legal system.
	▲	deadbabe 16 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		In the tech industry, there are punishments far worse than the legal system.