nanog mailing list archives
Re: The Economist, cyber war issue
From: "andrew.wallace" <andrew.wallace () rocketmail com>
Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 14:51:20 -0700 (PDT)
There is a part 2 as well http://www.economist.com/node/16478792?story_id=16478792 Andrew ----- Original Message ---- From: Jeroen van Aart <jeroen () mompl net> To: NANOG list <nanog () nanog org> Sent: Thu, 1 July, 2010 19:57:08 Subject: Re: The Economist, cyber war issue andrew.wallace wrote:
Article: http://www.economist.com/node/16481504?story_id=16481504
I know it's shortsighted, but any article with the word cyber in it, used in such a way as being about "cyber this-or-that", already lost its credibility by virtue of using the word. It must be a of rather high quality to win back its credibility. This economist article sadly does the opposite. Regards, Jeroen -- http://goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/
Current thread:
- The Economist, cyber war issue Gadi Evron (Jul 01)
- Re: The Economist, cyber war issue andrew.wallace (Jul 01)
- Re: The Economist, cyber war issue Jeroen van Aart (Jul 01)
- Re: The Economist, cyber war issue andrew.wallace (Jul 01)
- Re: The Economist, cyber war issue Randy Bush (Jul 01)
- Re: The Economist, cyber war issue andrew.wallace (Jul 02)
- Re: The Economist, cyber war issue Randy Bush (Jul 02)
- Re: The Economist, cyber war issue Dmitry Burkov (Jul 04)
- Re: The Economist, cyber war issue Jeroen van Aart (Jul 01)
- Re: The Economist, cyber war issue andrew.wallace (Jul 01)