| The security argument against cloud based monitoring has sailed. With or without cloud based monitoring, our power grids can be disrupted. That's the commonly accepted meaning of "that ship has sailed" as a colloquialism with respect to cloud based monitoring. Also, you, yourself, brought up the idea of cold war style confrontation. The basis of most actions against proxy supporters in cold war style conflicts is plausible deniability. It's not a red herring, it's a widely adhered to tenet of cold war style conflict planning when targeting said proxy supporters. I tried to cover total war, open war, and cold war to address the full spectrum of likely super power on super power active confrontations. In each scenario, the existence, or non-existence, of cloud based monitoring of solar panels, has no effect on the ability or inability of your adversary to disrupt your power grid. Which disruption was the central thesis of your assertion. I was simply explaining why it was false. You are being willfully argumentative at this point. If you didn't want to address cold war scenarios, why did you bring them up? You have a nice day sir or ma'am. |
No, I didn't.
I think it's clear that China shutting down Europe's power grid would not be a cold war scenario. That would be quite hot. But also clearly not total war either.
Since you don't want to converse any more I won't make any further points, but please don't claim I said things that I clearly didn't.