I am not sure what the point of Mattathias Schwartz's "Malwebolence" story is, beyond being a typical N.Y. Times word fad-fart piece that attempts to ride internet related themes in order to generate readership. Many words enslaved, building a seven page tower of zzzzzzzzzzzz.
At best the article seems to have trouble distinguishing between trolls, typical hackers, and outright criminality, and at worst, it's a rather boring read, at the end leaving uninteresting questions thankfully unanswered in any depth.
The more you read, you wonder if the "trolls" he is interviewing, and whose homes he is camping out in, are playing a simple hoax on the author, who seems wide-eyed (or lazy) enough to be entirely lacking in journalistic curiosity.
A fellow named Jason Fortuny is profiled, and his claim to impressive fame seems to be his prank of posting a fake sex ad and outing the respondents. He topped that by creating a fake website that mocked a 13 year old that committed suicide. After getting justifiable death threats, Fortuny assures us that “Anyone who knows who and where you are is a security hole ... I own a gun. I have an escape route. If someone comes, I’m ready.” Someone should test that out because I am betting that if he was not trying to be so publically anonymous, his ass would have been kicked seven ways to sundown.
The author moves on to the story of another young man. But what is the point of telling us that a chap named Weev has lost $10K in commodities speculation, without offering any level of proof? Proof would make Weev's later claim, that "As a member of a group of hackers called “the organization,” which ... bring in upward of $10 million annually ... he can wreak ruin from anywhere," that much more interesting. Otherwise it's all a bunch of been there, lied like that too.
Something that would be just dandy fascinating if remotely true becomes sleepy dull if veracity is in doubt.
In introducing this independently wealthy Weev, we are half told the story of a female who runs an online troll archive who gets into trouble with the trolls she is profiling. She calls on Weev, but the author does not bother to tell us how Weev actually resolved the young lady's difficulties. That little introductory story is dropped, denying us any ability to understand Weev's reputation or skill set, if any.
What we have is just another Times puff piece that attempts to ride buzzwords and trends without having a clear idea of where it is going or the depth of the reality it is attempting to portray. It's a bait and switch piece, offering something potentially interesting and substituting banal observations that offer no enlightenment on the dubiously contrived subject at hand.
Readers probably deserve better.
No comments:
Post a Comment