Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

That "the DoD believes this threat" is not the same as it actually happened. The threat is real, the article is very likely fluff.


Yes, but everybody already knows the threat is real, most especially Schneier. Something made him change his mind.


All you people are in denial. The first bloomberg story was credible but was protecting sources. They go further and get people on the record and double down....literally stretching their necks out, and you people keep propping up strawmen from the original article. Admit it. You were skeptical, determined that it couldn't be true, ran around shooting your mouth off about how it was fake news and now you can't help but continue smearing the egg all over your face.


> but was protecting sources

As others have pointed out, the problem was not (just) with lack of sources, but with the fact that the few technical details they gave didn't make sense. As a result, the article read like it was written by someone who was completely ignorant and was just not credible on the face of it.




Consider applying for YC's Winter 2026 batch! Applications are open till Nov 10

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: