3 ms·
both sides are at fault here (the "journalist" and Bitvise - the PuTTY maintainers have nothing to do with this). the Bitvise owner shouldn't have responded so
by bstsb 1y ago
both sides are at fault here (the "journalist" and Bitvise - the PuTTY maintainers have nothing to do with this).
the Bitvise owner shouldn't have responded so unprofessionally, and their views on open source software are strange - but they're correct that the domain was never "historically associated with PuTTY", it just uses its name.
additionally, the usage of unformatted markdown in each "journalist" email makes me think this story was at least partially assisted by an LLM
(https://putty.org/20250713-MiraiF-Emails.txt https://putty.org/20250713-MiraiF-Emails.txt)
in short this is a nothing story
- tojumpship 1y agoLLM written, spurring up controversy, holding a private company accountable like they are the government. If they - PuTTY - is bothered enough, they are allowed to sue or request a takedown, and if legal grounds are not viable I don't think Google would mind ranking the correct website up after request. This "issue" has been present for years and this journalist picks up on it, presses on the guy as if he was in the Panama Papers or something and writes the article with newgen LLM no less. Disgraceful.