3 ms·

So what is the inductive reasoning behind the alleged conspiracy in question, then? That it must have happened since the NSA has the intent and capabilities? D

• yellowapple 9y ago
  "Does this mean that any digital conspiracy you can dream up involving the NSA is probable?" Um, yes?
• BearGoesChirp 9y ago
  >Does this mean that any digital conspiracy you can dream up involving the NSA is probable? No. If I dreamed up that the NSA was using frequencies in CPUs to control our behaviors and increase our orange juice consumption, there are still reasons to not treat that one as having any reasonable probability of being true, compared to the notion that the NSA is working to get back-doors into software. Reasons for this difference in probability are based on feasibility, implications if true, how specific the claim is, and if it is in line with past behaviors.
  • eivarv 9y ago
    My point is, to follow your example re: orange juice consumption, that the reasons not to treat it as having any reasonable probability is secondary to the fact that there is no supporting evidence (burden of proof, etc.) As I replied in another subthread, I'd agree that probabilities with regard to what is reasonable to assume (the operative word here) shift as a consequence of circumstantial information, but you can't really draw any conclusions based on that.