4 ms·
That "the DoD believes this threat" is not the same as it actually happened. The threat is real, the article is very likely fluff.
by Daho0n 6y ago
That "the DoD believes this threat" is not the same as it actually happened. The threat is real, the article is very likely fluff.
- jtbayly 6y agoYes, but everybody already knows the threat is real, most especially Schneier. Something made him change his mind.
- datavirtue 6y agoAll you people are in denial. The first bloomberg story was credible but was protecting sources. They go further and get people on the record and double down....literally stretching their necks out, and you people keep propping up strawmen from the original article. Admit it. You were skeptical, determined that it couldn't be true, ran around shooting your mouth off about how it was fake news and now you can't help but continue smearing the egg all over your face.
- himinlomax 6y ago> but was protecting sources As others have pointed out, the problem was not (just) with lack of sources, but with the fact that the few technical details they gave didn't make sense. As a result, the article read like it was written by someone who was completely ignorant and was just not credible on the face of it.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]