4 ms·
> The report from Reuters identified people internal to the investigation who said it "bore the hallmarks" of known Russian hacking groups. I too believe that
by tpmx 6y ago
> The report from Reuters identified people internal to the investigation who said it "bore the hallmarks" of known Russian hacking groups.
I too believe that report. That's not what we're discussing though - the supposed straw man was "experts on TV are saying this hack was so sophisticated it could have only been done by the Russians".
What I'm saying is that many countries and companies have the capability to perform something like this. Not that Russia didn't do it.
- hn_throwaway_99 6y agoBut I'm saying it is a strawman because "experts on TV are saying this hack was so sophisticated it could have only been done by the Russians" is not actually true. If it is, I would like to see some specific quotes from these supposed experts.
- Gibbon1 6y agoPedantic: I don't think it's really a strawman. It's conclusitory instead.
- hn_throwaway_99 6y agoPedantic: It is a strawman. A strawman is when you take your opponent's argument and instead recast it as a much weaker version so it's easy to tear down. In this case the actual argument I've heard made is "Experts on TV (in addition to, I might add, Bill Barr, the current US Attorney General) are saying that the hack was from the Russians because investigation insiders said it had hallmarks of known Russian hacking groups" which is being recast as the much weaker argument, which I've never heard any serious expert actually make, of "Experts on TV are saying that the hack was from the Russians just because it's such a complicated hack".
- cheese_van 6y agoI don't recall the source of this paraphrased quote: "You ascribe the hack to a nation-state. So, you believe that the hack was so cunning, so devious, and so elegantly written and deployed that the perpetrators must be civil servants?"