
There is no question that vulnerabilities are important. There is a rich history of vulnerabilities and of their use, yet if that history is a signal, then it is a noisy one. Inferences drawn from agreed upon history of vulnerabilities are still the source of quite conflicting interpretations— proof that it is hard to reduce the question of vulnerabilities to a simple set of inferences. Experts are less likely to agree on a simple set of inferences about vulnerabilities than the non-experts. Often as not, experts claim that all other expert opinions besides theirs are simplistic rather than simple (and that “I have discovered a truly remarkable proof which this [Tweet] is too small to contain”).
Download Article:
Article Section:
COLUMNS
;login: issue: