4 ms·
At this point, I'm confused, and I'm not sure what point you or the other commenter are looking for me to concede. Zoom is paying some security consultants, pus
by purple-dragon 6y ago
At this point, I'm confused, and I'm not sure what point you or the other commenter are looking for me to concede. Zoom is paying some security consultants, pushed out some product updates, and bought Keybase, so it's a story book ending?
- wutbrodo 6y agoJust as your comment was aiming to narrowly point out a logical fallacy in the parent comment, I'm pointing out a flaw in your own: I disagree with your claim that investing in security practices is just theater, and that more concrete efforts in the same direction are irrelevant. The concrete efforts are Bayesian evidence that the newer investments are more than theater.
- purple-dragon 6y agoI didn't claim that. I believe in investing in security. I'm a security professional.
- albedoa 6y agoYou said that those things are theater until the day the product updates. We are beyond the day when that happened. So for it to be a fallacy you have to reject the context in which it was presented, which nobody but you is doing.
- purple-dragon 6y agoIt's a SaaS world, baby. Product updates (can) happen everyday. I'm not sure what that proved.
- wutbrodo 6y agoGood catch, that was a misphrasing in my comment. I meant to say _Zoom's_ investments in security, not security investments in general.
- ViViDboarder 6y agoI am not looking for you to concede anything. You said nothing has been done to show you that the calculus of their priorities has changed and I listed some things that could possibly show that. It’s up to you if you believe that is significant enough to convince you. Frankly, I don’t care if it does or not. I was just providing some visible signs of investment.
- purple-dragon 6y agoI didn't see you respond to my comment in this thread unless you post under two different accounts.