i think the drive to reduce every bit of human behavior to economic incentives backed by a government force structure is ultimately counterproductive. would you agree?
If there were millions of dollars to be made in the flaming dog shit Segway getaway business, I am positive many would succumb to the temptation.
So your comparison is unfair, it's easy for you to avoid such a behavior because you have no benefits. Not securing a device is a significant economic win for the manufacturer, as explained by the thread originator. You get a device that "just works" as opposed to one with complex key setup instructions that by necessity must default in the misconfigured state (else, you bet everybody is using the defaults).
> there are three classes of humans 1) those who will throw the rock at you with the mob 2) those who will not throw the rock and avert their eyes 3) those who will speak out against throwing the rocks
> the ratio is probably 90:9:1
We don’t typically go around continually throwing actual rocks at each other, so it is possible to make progress on these issues.
The author of the tweet quoted was speaking metaphorically based on his own experience. Virtually no one supported him publicly when he needed it.
When a drug causes problems, customers often end up suing the manufacturer/developer of said drug. If doctors prescribe said drugs after it becomes common knowledge that it could cause a problem, they also might be sued for malpractice.
Are people sing IoT companies for poor security practices? If so, are they winning? Without that, what inventive is there for those companies to do anything more than they already are? It's not like there's actually any level of brand awareness for the vast majority of these devices, so it's easy enough to just ignore complaints and rely on the fact that nobody pays attention to your track record when it comes to this market.