...and so, I suspect that simply being born in the 70s or 80s, and picking up some interest in infosec in the 90s, was a far better predictor of success
I think it's hard to deny they weren't highly visible, and with that influenced observers by demonstrating successful business model, no? I think it's a fair comment that they weren't groundbreakers though.
-
-
So it's a feedback loop of they should be recognized for being recognized for...<this is the part no one can answer it seems> Sourcefire was founded 2 years after @-stake, people were still releasing exploits for free well into the early 2000s. I'm struggling to see any influence
-
I think we're probably closely aligned on this, but I do think just being a highly visible example of a fledgling business model counts as influential. Note: "fledgling" doesn't necessarily mean entirely novel

- 1 more reply
New conversation -
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.
