News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Tailscale didn't stop the Hugging Face intrusion. Parent comment

Re:Tailscale didn't stop the Hugging Face intrusion by smb06 on Friday July 31, 2026 @03:41PM (#49127709)
Glad to see companies owning responsibility and putting out a message without corporate PR spin
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tailscale didn't stop the Hugging Face intrusion by DC-3 on Friday July 31, 2026 @04:12PM (#49128025)
If you can't see the spin on corporate messaging it means it's working (and consequently, to stretch the metaphor, your wicket is in danger).
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tailscale didn't stop the Hugging Face intrusion by senordevnyc on Friday July 31, 2026 @09:56PM (#49130389)
This seems unfalsifiable :)
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tailscale didn't stop the Hugging Face intrusion by fc417fc802 on Saturday August 01, 2026 @01:14AM (#49131247)
Depends on if you can dredge up any examples of corporate statements authored without any intent to add spin.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tailscale didn't stop the Hugging Face intrusion by senordevnyc on Sunday August 02, 2026 @10:12AM (#49144903)
No, according to them that just means I can’t see the spin because it’s working.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Tailscale didn't stop the Hugging Face intrusion by fc417fc802 on Sunday August 02, 2026 @11:01AM (#49145287)
That's why I said "intent" as opposed to "perception". I'm implying that it's unfalsifiable not due to faulty construction but rather due to being inherently true. (Of course I realize that's technically an overgeneralization.)
[ Parent | on HN ]