Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Deafening Silence from the Cybersecurity Industry

forbes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 280 posts

Re: Deafening Silence from the Cybersecurity Industry

#211

Post by jjtheblunt »

K0balt wrote: post #182
jjtheblunt wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But what is more horrifying for me is that apparently this administration remains representative of a large section of the US population - with seemingly unshakeable approval by between 40% and 50% of the US adult population according to polls. It’s possible that percentage counts dissatisfaction with the previous administration more than approval for the current one. That is, it might just count people wanting any…

It is disheartening to me to observe that the thing that broke the once proud USA, the final straw, the thing that disenfranchised hundreds of millions of people and made them rabid and reactionary (on both sides of the rage algorithm) was a black man in the white house and women on the presidential ballot. The retrograde prejudices so deeply ingrained in the country’s memome that we are still in the throes of an ana…

> a black man in the white house and women on the presidential ballot. The retrograde prejudices so deeply ingrained in the country’s memome that we are still in the throes of an anaphylactic reaction to an acute melatonin allergy.

This is the most obscenely wrong take I can imagine, and I'll gladly explain why I say that.

Your AI-generated response plainly ignores a country in love with Michael Jordan and Whitney Houston for decades, for example, and are choosing skin deep characteristics to fit _your_ narrative, while ignoring the things voters repeatedly emphasized as damning, all of which were color blind: a complete lack of policy by the "woman on the ticket", condescension from Hillary that people not following her directives "need to get over themselves", Obama chastising black men that they must vote as he says. It's a playbook on the alienation of voters.

Re: Deafening Silence from the Cybersecurity Industry

#212

Post by grumio »

wakawaka28 wrote: post #203
grumio wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given up being a debunked 2020 election conspiracy apologist? The Steele Dossier was commissioned in 2016, before the election. Trump is claiming the 2020 election was "stolen" well after. Both bad. But not the same. Trump's allies challenged the election results after losing, 60 times. (edit to add: Challenging, and getting their day in court, is fine! However,) No credible, election-result-changing fraud found. (ed…

Well this is what I'm talking about: https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/30/politics/clinton-dnc-steele-d... Hillary paid a fine for her 2016 antics during the Biden administration. >Trump's allies challenged the election results after losing, 60 times. No credible, election-result-changing fraud found. Clinton did not challenge the election results after losing. Not the same. Not even close. I think the key here is that not…

> The media pretends that everything is uniquely bad when Trump happens to do it and they turn a blind eye to Democrats doing the exact same stuff. It is exhausting to argue with people who refuse to understand this hypocrisy happening right before their eyes.

Got it. Did Clinton try to gain the presidency despite losing? Did she ask the vice president to "do the right thing" and throw out electoral votes?

That's what Trump did.

They did not do the "exact same stuff".

Re: Deafening Silence from the Cybersecurity Industry

#213

Post by belorn »

basejumping wrote: post #60
jjtheblunt wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But what is more horrifying for me is that apparently this administration remains representative of a large section of the US population - with seemingly unshakeable approval by between 40% and 50% of the US adult population according to polls. It’s possible that percentage counts dissatisfaction with the previous administration more than approval for the current one. That is, it might just count people wanting any…

You should then be dissatisfied with both at the same time. When people wish 'any change' they actually wish a change into better, otherwise it's plain stupid.

It is difficult for people to be unhappy with two choices unless given a third that they can be happy with. When you are either with us or against us, there aren't much people who will be dissatisfied with both at the same time, since that isn't an option given to them.

Re: Deafening Silence from the Cybersecurity Industry

#214

Post by UmGuys »

wakawaka28 wrote: post #163
chairhairair wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please, some reasonable Trump voter explain how this is acceptable. How can the sitting president still be openly claiming that a previous election was fraudulent after all this time?

[flagged]

[flagged]

Re: Deafening Silence from the Cybersecurity Industry

#215

Post by UmGuys »

wakawaka28 wrote: post #198
titaphraz wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He is a self-made multi-billionaire HAHAHA! No he's not. He inherited his dad's empire. Tanked it and the Russians bailed him out. He's a charlatan, fraudster and a con artist.

Prove that Russians bailed him out, please. I've got to hear this. He did inherit money, like $10M if I recall correctly. But he made the rest of his money. Even if not literally a rags-to-riches case (I never said he was, either), he does not need money. Compare that to, say, AOC who is suddenly worth millions of dollars after a few years on a salary of $180k. Who is more suspicious?

He inherited money, ran through it, went back and fleeced his dad and siblings of their money. Ran through that. Racked up hundreds of millions of debt, then ran for president. Now he bastardizes public office and exploits his position to generate wealth.

Re: Deafening Silence from the Cybersecurity Industry

#216

Post by BenjiWiebe »

ndsipa_pomu wrote: post #205
krapp wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jesus was a Jew preaching within a framework of Judaism which he clearly believed in and claimed authority from. That framework rejected him, and I can sympathize with arguments that the system of "Christianity" that developed was not the system he intended, but I don't think it would be accurate to describe Jesus as anti-system per se. Either way, any definition of Christianity that excludes Catholicism or any other…

> It's like people defining Capitalism to require pure free markets, just so they can say the US or British Empires never really engaged in Capitalism. It just seems like an exercise in semantics. Not quite as real-world Capitalism has an approximation of free markets. I would say that's quite different from "Christians" going against welcoming strangers and feeding/healing the poor. In my view Jesus was against bein…

As a Christian, I totally get your cognitive dissonance and agree with you, that Jesus was very much not racist or xenophobic, and instead preached love and compassion.

Re: Deafening Silence from the Cybersecurity Industry

#217

Post by FireBeyond »

wakawaka28 wrote: post #198
titaphraz wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He is a self-made multi-billionaire HAHAHA! No he's not. He inherited his dad's empire. Tanked it and the Russians bailed him out. He's a charlatan, fraudster and a con artist.

Prove that Russians bailed him out, please. I've got to hear this. He did inherit money, like $10M if I recall correctly. But he made the rest of his money. Even if not literally a rags-to-riches case (I never said he was, either), he does not need money. Compare that to, say, AOC who is suddenly worth millions of dollars after a few years on a salary of $180k. Who is more suspicious?

He inherited a lot more than $10M from his father's death. He got given a $10M ($85M in 2025 dollars) "loan" to start his first solo enterprise.

Re: Deafening Silence from the Cybersecurity Industry

#218

Post by FireBeyond »

wakawaka28 wrote: post #195
ripe wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The margins were extremely thin in 2020, and there were many sketchy things going on around mail-in ballots and stuff. These allegations from Trump supporters have been disproved in court many times. What will iy take for you to admit that he's misusing his power to target people who disagree with his election lies?

Considering how ill-treated Trump and his supporters have been and still are by courts, it is no wonder that they don't trust the courts. Regardless of what you or I think, he is going after people he believes are corrupt. The exact same people who targetted him unfairly for years, in some cases. I'm not losing sleep over this.

It's not ill treatment. In many of those cases they openly said they didn't have any "specific evidence", but "belief".

That's not how courts work, and it's not unfair of them to hold you to an evidentiary standard.

Re: Deafening Silence from the Cybersecurity Industry

#219

Post by tstrimple »

wakawaka28 wrote: post #198
titaphraz wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He is a self-made multi-billionaire HAHAHA! No he's not. He inherited his dad's empire. Tanked it and the Russians bailed him out. He's a charlatan, fraudster and a con artist.

Prove that Russians bailed him out, please. I've got to hear this. He did inherit money, like $10M if I recall correctly. But he made the rest of his money. Even if not literally a rags-to-riches case (I never said he was, either), he does not need money. Compare that to, say, AOC who is suddenly worth millions of dollars after a few years on a salary of $180k. Who is more suspicious?

Why do you speak so confidently around something you clearly know nothing about?

https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/12/21/how-russian-money-helpe...

> But Trump eventually made a comeback, and according to several sources with knowledge of Trump’s business, foreign money played a large role in reviving his fortunes, in particular investment by wealthy people from Russia and the former Soviet republics. This conclusion is buttressed by a growing body of evidence amassed by news organizations, as well as what is reportedly being investigated by Special Counsel Robert Mueller and the Southern District of New York. It is a conclusion that even Trump’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., has appeared to confirm, saying in 2008—after the Trump Organization was prospering again—that “Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets.”

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/aoc-is-multi-millionaire/

> According to the most recent disclosure from 2023, Ocasio-Cortez had documented that she had no more than between $1,001 and $15,000 in each of three different bank accounts. The total for these three accounts would land somewhere between $3,003 and $45,000. She also recorded in the disclosure having between $1,001 and $15,000 in additional funds in a fourth account for a 401k plan. Further, she noted in the disclosure that she was still paying off student loans, with an "amount of liability" landing somewhere between $15,001 and $50,000. In other words, Ocasio-Cortez was at least $940,000 short of being a millionaire, with the maximum possible amount of the four accounts totaling $60,000, and that's before even factoring in her student loan debt.

Do you get your information from anywhere other than random twitter posts?

Re: Deafening Silence from the Cybersecurity Industry

#220

Post by FireBeyond »

shadowgovt wrote: post #204
layer8 wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He'll likely live another 15 years or so. I'm pretty sure he's imagining a future for himself. He's talking about a third term, which means at least eight years of "future". He also has children whose continued success he probably cares about. That said, I agree that he doesn't seem interested in building anything but his personal kingdom (including walls to protect it).

> He also has children whose continued success he probably cares about. Does he ever talk about them using anything other than abstract platitudes like "great?"

Well, "If she wasn't my daughter I'd probably be dating her" is a bit more on the specific side...
Post reply on HN