Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

It sounds very dramatic, but the fact that the article didn't include even a single quote from the EO to support their argument makes me skeptical. Perhaps it's a real concern, but the article itself is trash.


sort by: page size:

It really does read like a scare mongering fear article. Including mention of problems but no concrete followup with current details, or at the very least a mention of no resolution to the issue as of a specific time of fact-finding.

I think both the headline is wrong (I don’t see where they explicitly warn people, can someone point it out?) and the interview contains no actual facts. The only statements are "probably" and "I’m not sure"…

I don't understand how that would address the concerns raised by the article.

That is very true. I’m just wondering how this even became an article. It’s a government statement with zero citations or elaboration.

I think this article is an example of poor journalism: repeating the claims of the parties concerned without investigating which parts, if any, are bullshit. Sure, the title has an incredulous tone, but the body has no discernable skepticism.

Odd. It seems unusual for a press release to include criticism from the EFF.

How would the article have to have been written for you to not think it was a press release?


So I've read the article and watched the videos - I haven't seen any actual quotes where any spokesperson had said it was unavoidable outside of the headline and first paraphrased sentence. I only mentioned this initially because it seems like a sensationalized headline of a statement.

This headline isn’t supported by the article at all

Even the text of the article clearly doesn't support the headline.

The claim being made is ludicrous, doesn't hold up to scrutiny or common sense, and the amount of details given is sparse enough to cause disbelief.

If this is real, the article is beyond useless in informing people of what has happened and how it's happened.


That's a lot of assumptions and scaremongering that have nothing to do with the article.

Not a convincing article. Although the writer of the post is in good standing, I doubt the motives.

Maybe, but the article doesn't actually present any evidence that that's what's going on.

I agree. The headline and article seems more geared to making people draw conclusions than pointing out the reality of the situation.

it is not clear from the article whether it is real or hypothetical, which marks this down as atrocious reporting

There's very little substance to the article and it reads like it was designed to gaslight the reader.

There's no evidence of disinformation - being incorrect and talking about it doesn't imply intent or motivation to deceive.


It is supposed to be quoting The Times (UK publication?), but the author and article don't seem to exist. It looks like the entire piece is speculation dressed up as fact.

Not to seem callous but does the article really say anything that has not been said before?

Agreed, the article is grossly inaccurate and sensationalized.
next

Legal | privacy