[Pigalowda]

Be offended and then clarify - why are so many furries in the infosec field? Do you have a speculative answer?

By the way a person using a dark market to get drugs and then meeting up with other consenting adults to “cosplay” as animals may very well be an illegal and potentially humiliating event for a person. Maybe just growing up with the subculture created an early need in a person to hide/obfuscate and therefore motivates entry into infosec. I don’t know - that’s why I’m speculating. Going straight to the child angle is too narrow/myopic.

[some_furry]

> why are so many furries in the infosec field? Do you have a speculative answer?

Honestly, the answer has already been posted several times. It has nothing to do with the incorrect associations you have in your mind.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32778682

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32779209

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32779917

> By the way a person using a dark market to get drugs and then meeting up with other consenting adults to “cosplay” as animals may very well be an illegal and potentially humiliating event for a person.

I have no idea what this means, considering:

1. I don't use dark markets

2. I don't use drugs

3. Being a furry isn't "animal 'cosplay'" in the sense your comment implies

> Maybe just growing up with the subculture created an early need in a person to hide/obfuscate and therefore motivates entry into infosec.

Roughly 80% of furries are LGBTQ+.

https://furscience.com/research-findings/sex-relationships-p...

An early Internet tradition, started by Something Awful, was to use "anti-furry" as a dog-whistle for anti-LGBTQ+.

https://soatok.medium.com/if-you-hate-furries-youre-anti-lgb...

This also motivated a lot of LGBTQ+ and furry people to need to learn security just to exist online. What you're gesturing towards is actually self defense against shitty people.

> I don’t know - that’s why I’m speculating. Going straight to the child angle is too narrow/myopic.

It's probably better to ask questions than to speculate incorrectly, especially when it's a nontechnical matter.

[Pigalowda]

It might be better not to speculate online but come on - this isn’t an in person group where you can see there’s a person waiting in the wings to answer questions.

If my blunt speculation motivated you to give the answer you did then it kinda worked, did it not? Of course that point is moot if you would have taken the time to answer the OP’s question.

And I wasn’t that far off anyways, just wrong on the timing in a persons life. From your answer apparently the motivation for infosec comes from an early need to obfuscate online identity from parents/family because of non-traditional sexuality. Is that humiliating for a person or is it trying to avoid feelings of humiliation that discovery would bring up in a parent. Does it really matter?

[some_furry]

> It might be better not to speculate online but come on - this isn’t an in person group where you can see there’s a person waiting in the wings to answer questions.

This observation might have any merit at all if you weren't commenting on an HN thread for an article posted on my furry blog wherein I answer questions about the furry fandom all the damn time.

> If my blunt speculation motivated you to give the answer you did then it kinda worked, did it not? Of course that point is moot if you would have taken the time to answer the OP’s question.

This is a silly justification for assuming incorrect things publicly. This is how misinformation and willful ignorance spreads.