Correct. By the author's logic, the article should _also_ be considered harmful because it is quite vague. In fact, it does not even go remotely into the detail

Correct. By the author's logic, the article should _also_ be considered harmful because it is quite vague. In fact, it does not even go remotely into the detail about vagueness. Moreover, it omits the fact that Asimov actually plays with these laws in all his books (I think this has been mentioned already in another comment), showing exactly the interesting consequences of the wording... While I like AI policy discussions a lot, this article does not help unfortunately. :-/