[oefrha]

Maybe try to read the blog post https://objective-see.com/blog/blog_0x56.html instead of a Twitter thread. People trying to glean information from truncated 140-char messages (often written in the most attention-grabbing way possible) is one of the main reasons why Twitter is full of misinformation.

[DenisM]

From the HN guidelines: Please don't comment on whether someone read an article. "Did you even read the article? It mentions that" can be shortened to "The article mentions that." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

"Maybe try to read the blog post" can be easily replaced with a less patronizing and just as informative "It's in this blog post".

You have good points to make, they don't need the vitriol to be taken.

[oefrha]

I was responding to a comment that explicitly said they couldn’t find the information in the Twitter thread.

I was clearly also making a meta-comment about Twitter misinformation, so the patronizing part was inevitable.

[obmelvin]

I've tried googling and didn't see any blog posts. 140 chars is certainly enough for someone to link that :). Anyway, thank you for making me and others aware of this blog.

[oefrha]

The blog post is linked to in the article being discussed and honestly would be a better link.

[greendave]

Thanks for this link - I found it a much more technically interesting and insightful description than the TC article.

[saagarjha]

(The TechCrunch article also misinterprets parts of the blog post.)