> Jesus, what a tool you are. I absolutely believe you: I think you read this story and eagerly awaited its implications to some random person on HN.
Huh, I've seen your patience tested on HN before, which tends to elicit mostly restrained responses save for a bit of snark, but that's the first instance of actual name calling I've noticed. I'm genuinely curious how this comment annoyed you. The tone I'd expect is more of a "yeah, you got me" <kneeslap>. Instead it sounds like I'm accidentally trolling you.
For what it's worth, I did legitimately get excited to run to HN to play "told you so". After months of debate over this issue across numerous threads, I'm not going to lie, vindication is momentarily exciting.
> For what it's worth, my take on Dual EC (before learning more about it) was the same as noted NSA apologist Bruce Schneier.
Wait, tptacek is calling Bruce Schneier an NSA apologist?
Aside from being absurd, your claim that you shared the same opinion is also false. Your own comment here directly contradicts this, and you even dismiss Schneier's credentials upthread, yet appeal to his authority in your comment:
"I am aware that Schneier believes Dual_EC to be backdoored. I'm aware that Dual_EC comes from NSA. I would not use Dual_EC and would flag it if I saw it in an app I assessed. But I would still, right now, with the information I have, bet against it being an NSA backdoor. Not because I trust the NSA, but because it's a very dumb backdoor."
Edit: In reply to a now deleted comment by tptacek.
> Wait, tptacek is calling Bruce Schneier an NSA apologist?
I think that was intended as sarcasm. He's defending his previous position by saying that he (previously) had the same opinion as Bruce Schneier, whom no one would accuse of being partial to the NSA.
I'd say the original comment by lawnchair_larry comes off as a bit gauche... as if the XKCD "someone is wrong on the internet!" guy came here to post. I never saw the deleted comment, but it seems that after the initial frustration wore off, Thomas thought the better of it.
I've had my disagreements with some of Thomas' positions, including several over crypto/politics stories like this, but if you run out like that to play "gotcha!" it just doesn't feel right.
Whereas repeated pro-NSA apologies are? How many people would approve of them and how would they respond to them, if the person making them wasn't also all powerful in a forum?
Huh, I've seen your patience tested on HN before, which tends to elicit mostly restrained responses save for a bit of snark, but that's the first instance of actual name calling I've noticed. I'm genuinely curious how this comment annoyed you. The tone I'd expect is more of a "yeah, you got me" <kneeslap>. Instead it sounds like I'm accidentally trolling you.
For what it's worth, I did legitimately get excited to run to HN to play "told you so". After months of debate over this issue across numerous threads, I'm not going to lie, vindication is momentarily exciting.
> For what it's worth, my take on Dual EC (before learning more about it) was the same as noted NSA apologist Bruce Schneier.
Wait, tptacek is calling Bruce Schneier an NSA apologist?
Aside from being absurd, your claim that you shared the same opinion is also false. Your own comment here directly contradicts this, and you even dismiss Schneier's credentials upthread, yet appeal to his authority in your comment:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6424920
"I am aware that Schneier believes Dual_EC to be backdoored. I'm aware that Dual_EC comes from NSA. I would not use Dual_EC and would flag it if I saw it in an app I assessed. But I would still, right now, with the information I have, bet against it being an NSA backdoor. Not because I trust the NSA, but because it's a very dumb backdoor."
Edit: In reply to a now deleted comment by tptacek.