@ChrisJWilson you make a couple of good points. I didn't follow the debate all that closely (I only learned about it from reading his post), but I think it developed more after he wrote his blog. I also agree that it's a natural tendency to be more or less amenable to certain ideas by their grouping — it can be a helpful abstraction, but also a deceptive one. I guess it just requires discernment on a case by case basis to determine where to put one's interrogative efforts.
@rcrackley Thanks for the share! Didn’t realize you had a newsletter too. Bookmarked it for later.
@lukemperez that certainly didn't take long.
@lukemperez I've not followed this story very closely, but this paragraph made me chuckle — it makes working in defense/intelligence seem so banal, which, based on the few conversations I've had with those who work in the space, it often is:
Thousands of military personnel and government employees around OG’s age, working entry-to-low-level positions, could plausibly have access to classified documents like the ones he allegedly shared, according to U.S. officials and experts who have seen the documents reported in the media. Despite what his young followers thought, OG would have had no special knowledge compared with his peers. He possessed no special power to predict events. Rather, he appears to have persuaded some highly impressionable teenagers that he’s a modern-day gamer meets Jason Bourne.
@toddgrotenhuis @JMaxB @rcrackley thanks guys — I had to take a break from doing links for a while. Even without being on the Bird App, too much internet reading can be unhealthy. I'm sure I'll write about it some more sometime.