2026-09-04 22:32 UTC
@flyingpenguin@infosec.exchange I feel like you're trying too hard to make widespread AI cyberattacks a thing. I deliberately structured my entire argument around the fact that people would still attempt to resurrect their AI-boogeyman no matter what I said.
"For argument’s sake, let’s take CrowdStrike’s AI-enabled claims at face value, assume AI is driving the drop in breakout times, and that trend does continue as a result of it. The core argument of this piece still stands, regardless of opinions on why breakout times are dropping."
Replies (1)
-
@flyingpenguin@infosec.exchange 2026-09-04 22:44
@malwaretech@infosec.exchange other way around. i've spent twenty-plus posts since April arguing that the AI attacker boogeyman is a Nessie sighting, the AI Loch Ness thing I've been on about for over a decade. my objection is the method being inconsistent. your conclusion doesn't depend on who's right about adoption. and your piece is stronger if you avoid the dates and keep the basics. that's what I'd like people to hear.