Re:Three ex-US intelligence officers admit hacking for UAE
by kbenson on Wednesday September 15, 2021 @08:37PM
(#28546384)
Eh, pretty sure there's more than one moral there. No reason to ignore the "don't run off half-cocked spreading information you haven't confirmed or may not mean what you think" just because there's another lesson in there also.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Three ex-US intelligence officers admit hacking for UAE
by inopinatus on Thursday September 16, 2021 @02:52AM
(#28548859)
This is the lie told by the failed managers of the community in which the chicken lived, hoping to shift the blame for their own poor attention to contingency planning onto a chicken.
If you have an early warning device with a high false positive rate, you don’t avoid catastrophe by ignoring the warning.
Re:Three ex-US intelligence officers admit hacking for UAE
by randomswede on Thursday September 16, 2021 @10:47AM
(#28552513)
No, you don't ignore the warning to avoid a catastrophe, you ignore the warning to avoid alert fatigue, burnout and other bad effects.
If your only early warning device has a sufficiently high false positive rate, scrap it, or find another early warning device with a sufficiently different set of false positives and then require both of them to alert, before you pay attention.