Also i'd love to dig into how I should rephrase my commentary. I meant to draw attention to the selection of members of a known swatting community in doge recruitment.
Based upon the tactics reported by government employees, doge has conducted exfiltration and installed spyware, making them a cybercriminal outfit that exists in a quasi-legal grey area that exists before court procedures can physically occur.
I would therefore posit that there are two qualities (cybercriminal, and under legal duress and thus maleable) and therefore it is logically consistent to use ambiguity in my cursory and real assessment of the situation.
"Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents."
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
[flagged]
Personal attacks will get you banned here, so please don't do this.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Sorry dang.
Who was personally attacked?
Also i'd love to dig into how I should rephrase my commentary. I meant to draw attention to the selection of members of a known swatting community in doge recruitment.
Based upon the tactics reported by government employees, doge has conducted exfiltration and installed spyware, making them a cybercriminal outfit that exists in a quasi-legal grey area that exists before court procedures can physically occur.
I would therefore posit that there are two qualities (cybercriminal, and under legal duress and thus maleable) and therefore it is logically consistent to use ambiguity in my cursory and real assessment of the situation.
2 replies →
Fair warning. Thanks Dang