[anonINFP]

I want to ask you a serious question, OP. Have you looked for the underlying facts behind the Russian hack claims yourself? Have you done your own research? Have you familiarized yourself with Russian & Soviet historical precedent, to see whether what's being claimed is actually characteristic of Russia's historical style? Have you listened to or read any of the congressional testimonies, or looked into their background sources? Have you examined any of the academic reports, public policy think tank reports, cybersecurity reports, and/or programming & data analysis work done on the publicly available data - several of which have been shared right here on HN? Have you done ANY of these things to come to your own conclusion - even just one?

Given that this piece characterizes the entire argument of Russian active measures activities as a "religion" devoid of empirical evidence, leaves out a lot of important details regarding the Manafort and Papadopolous indictments which are publicly available in court documents, and generalizes over the merits & technical details of the analytical work products of Crowdstrike et al. on the one hand and VIPS on the other, and given the fact that this article resonated with you enough to share it, I get the disquieting impression that you have not done such background research.

If so, why hold the position that everyone around you is accepting this issue on unreasonable blind faith without any empirical evidence, when you yourself have not examined any of the supporting evidence? Why define the data and the legitimacy of that view out of existence like that?

Please tell and show me that my perception is mistaken here. I really want it to be.