@SecAndSecTech You think @rabite is wrong? That all disclosures go according to plan, even when the researcher plays nice?
@stylewar You seem to have a very black & white view on things that are absolutely not so.
-
-
@attritionorg really??? You believe that he was purely motivated, free from wrong, and justified in action? That he was PURELY a researcher? -
@stylewar You said jury doesn't need to be technical to understand "basic actions" for starters. In compsec cases, they really do. -
@attritionorg point is that they don't need to understand all perfectly in order to come to a reasonable conclusion. -
@stylewar "case is about motivation, action & outcome" and "they don't need to understand all to come to reasonable conclsn". Contradiction? -
@attritionorg you deleted the word "perfectly"... No contradiction. -
@stylewar so "partially" understand and come to a reasonable outcome? I don't think that is fair to any accused. -
@attritionorg neither is it fair to expect experts to only be convicted by experts. That's a nonsensical and unachievable notion bro. -
@stylewar right, don't expect jury of experts. but do want a jury of reasonably educated on a given subject matter. has to be middle ground - 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
@attritionorg because it seems to me that YOU are being black and white. Research = getoutofjailfree ? On what planet?Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.