> I don't think you should be criticizing reverse engineering here any more than you should be criticizing ... No, sure, real reverse engineering is fine. But

> I don't think you should be criticizing reverse engineering here any more than you should be criticizing ... No, sure, real reverse engineering is fine. But when "reverse engineering" is used in the sense Theranos (and/or Holmes' defense team) apparently did -- i.e. tampering with a competitor's machines so they sometimes don't work properly, and passing off the sometimes-invalid results as super-duper hot stuff created by your new and superior WonderTech™ -- then yes, it darn well should be criticized to Hell and back.