5 ms·
Can people who have read the article address specific facts the author brings up, or specific errors in the analysis? Maybe we can have a serious discussion rig
by hackuser 10y ago
Can people who have read the article address specific facts the author brings up, or specific errors in the analysis? Maybe we can have a serious discussion right here.
I read the article and it looks straightforward to me, but I don't independently know the facts. The analysis seems solid, but perhaps someone knows something I don't.
Unfortunately I've rarely seen so much noise (i.e., non-contributing comments) on HN, though the level tends to rise when someone doesn't buy into a Wikileaks' message.
- ploggingdev 10y agoThe article gets all the facts and analysis right. The article is most likely meant for a less tech savvy audience than HN i.e the average internet user who falls for fake news such as "WhatsApp is hacked". Yes, such nonsense is circulating on social media. Since this article does not bring anything new to the table for us HNers and has a reasonable number of upvotes, people start creating noise here.