3 ms·
Did you read the article entirely? `And that makes you wonder what contingencies the company has put into place in the event that it is someday taken over not
by esturk 6y ago
Did you read the article entirely?
`And that makes you wonder what contingencies the company has put into place in the event that it is someday taken over not by greedy Bitcoin con artists, but state-level actors or psychopaths. After today it is no longer unthinkable, if it ever truly was, that someone take over the account of a world leader and attempt to start a nuclear war.`
It's pretty disingenuous if you read the article and still says there's nothing there and then repeat the same thing the article wrote.
- ldoughty 6y agoI think you quoted the entirety of the article that addresses national security... The other 95% of the article was recap of what every article says about the incident, or otherwise not related to national security... I was excited to read any possible national security implications, perhaps things I wasn't even thinking of... And I was disappointed that the 2 sentences you posted, buried in the tail of a rather long article, were the justification for the headline "profound national security implications"... I at least hypothesized potential national security risks, instead of making vague national security claims... The article is using those 2-3 sentences to give a scarier headline to drive clicks, when it's not much better than the other stories already on here.