5 ms·

This reminds me of the earlier cyber attacks on a pipelines. One could speculate that those are climate activist attacks.

• gruez 5y ago
  Don't hacktivists/eco-terrorists usually claim responsibility? Shutting down beef/oil production for a few days isn't going to do much for the environment, if at all since demand basically stays the same, so claiming responsibility and/or getting awareness is the only reason for hacking.
• titanomachy 5y ago
  This is being downvoted, but it seems like a reasonable theory to me. I know a decent number of brilliant engineers/hackers who are strong proponents of a vegetarian diet. Or maybe it's just a general attack on US food production, and meat is the most vulnerable sector due to its complexity.
  • yaw11 5y ago
    It isn’t reasonable at all.
    • Arrath 5y ago
      As a prelude to Rainbow Six, it might be. Otherwise..
• yaw11 5y ago
  You could speculate that. Then you could ask yourself why a climate activist would create a situation where cattle starve at the plant and are put down and not used economically. There are thousands of cattle in transit to just one of these facilities every hour of every day. Most are not equipped to feed incoming cattle - they arrive hungry and with minutes to hours to live. If you’re annoyed about the climate, forcing a manufacturer to throw out and waste hundreds of tons of perfectly fine beef does what, exactly? Send a message? This isn’t spiking trees. You’re dealing with live animals. I have a hard time believing an activist environmentalist would be fine with exacerbating an animal welfare situation they already don’t like. Putting thousands of cattle through even worse experiences than usual. Yeah, no. Source: One degree removed from a foreman at an impacted plant. What I’m describing is already happening - plant I’m aware of has 14k head on hand with about 24 hours to figure it out or kill and discard. The administration is already involved and aware of the details, too, and everyone should be vigilant regarding speculation as to who’s behind it (this is likely misdirection, given who it actually is).
  • Arrath 5y ago
    >This isn’t spiking trees. You’re dealing with live animals. I have a hard time believing an activist environmentalist would be fine with exacerbating an animal welfare situation they already don’t like. Putting thousands of cattle through even worse experiences than usual. Yeah, no. Animal rights activists aren't always known for thinking about the consequences of their actions. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/freed-mink-bring-death-to-a-forest-1170769.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/freed-mink-bring-death-to... https://slate.com/technology/2017/07/thousands-of-minks-die-after-being-set-free.html https://slate.com/technology/2017/07/thousands-of-minks-die-...
    • genericuser314 5y ago
      "Thus, by a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak." ~ Umberto Eco
  • unclebucknasty 5y ago
    Wait. So, you're saying that by virtue of being "one-degree removed from a foreman at an impacted plant", you know who the attackers actually are, and that it contradicts the White House's statement that it's "likely" Russia?
• simonw 5y ago
  Occam's razor says that the most likely reason for this is that a ransomware group knew that they could extort a lot of money from this company.