No need. It's a thin line between spreading concerns and FUD . Additonally my tin foil hat is wearing out.
Would say it was to be expected that the flaws will be exploited. This is just the beginning. BTW: that one was quite dilettantic and tried to use the scaremongering which is all around the net.
This is what happens when a large corporation, like Intel or Microsoft, rises to a point where they dominate a market. Because they dominate a market, they become arrogant, believing they can do no wrong. Because of their arrogance, they become complacent, believing no one can threaten them or make them change their ways. And their complacency is what got us to where we are now.
Since it is a generic design flaw that has survived since 1995 I have to assume that there never had been a reasonable concept and awareness on cyber security. What counts is to spread devices and to increase performance, speed. Speculation across protection domains is actually a no-go. I consider meltdown and spectre based design flaws as products of a wrong human perception. Faster, greater, wider....such physics I can use to show off how cool I am....whereas security is a sort of lame and nothing to brag. Every year a new smartphone, every year faster devices and new cool features....sell many make a lot of money......to invest for security evaluation and research costs money and decelerates and delays...another competitor could be faster when releasing new stuff and make more money.... It is the human ideology that is wrong.
I remember when we were still kids talking about hacking or leaving hardware open on level closest to the machine code and that no one would discover it, or that all of the manufacturers would work in agreement to protect mankind from violence and evil .
Or maybe this was never a flaw and was intended to be used as a backdoor for govt's? at least until it was leaked publicly