4 ms·
I agree, it's poor vernacular. What they mean, of course, is an extremely well funded- government sponsored, tech agency acting as an aggressive security servi
by dijit 2y ago
I agree, it's poor vernacular.
What they mean, of course, is an extremely well funded- government sponsored, tech agency acting as an aggressive security service.
IE; NSA, GCHQ.
As opposed to a tech agency that is acting inwards to the country.
IE; CIA, MI5 (Security Service).
And opposed to a self-funded hacktivist group.
I would greatly prefer better nomenclature though. Nation-State is almost a non-term, since every nation is a state, effectively. - Normally I have seen "state-sponsored", which denotes the correct meaning.
In computer science we tend to have quite clear names for things (blue team, red team). Maybe someone could come up with something better?
- viccis 2y ago>Nation-State is almost a non-term, since every nation is a state, effectively. This is not true, especially outside of Europe and the US. Even within Europe, Belgium is not a nation-state for example. Many African countries are not either, with Nigeria being an easy example. State-sponsored is a much better term, I agree, as the phrases are typically used to describe state activity.
- knallfrosch 2y agoThe blue team consists entirely of blue humans, of course.