Hackers Find Open Back Door to Power Grid With Renewables

No, it doesn't. Poorly securing your network opens back doors that Crackers will exploit whether you are in the green energy industry or just manufacturing widgets. But, thanks for the AGW alarmism anyway.

But wait...

I thought phrases like this - from a mainstream source - mattered: "according to computer security experts advising governments and utilities.".

What are you? Some sort of "denier", or something.

I think you confuse me with someone.

Since places like the New York Times and Washington post have allowed advertising disguised as articles (written by 'reporters') inline with the 'news', I question even the 'big boys' as far as editorial ethics are concerned. This article is no different.

CNN style sensationalism of an issue that doesn't exist, no more. Thanks Obama!

Oh c'mon though, you really think those science by press release crap things the warmist favored press puts out are any better?

You know what I mean, like at the BBC or the Guardian where they inflate a claim of a half thumb nail thick claimed rate of rise from a study on the West Antarctic glacial melt into a preposterous claim pulled directly out their ass of 3 metres of sea level rise. Get your scuba gear out Manhattan...cause the Beeb says so, that's why.

Hey btw, here's one you won't hear from the Guardian. You know what another problem with wind turbines is? The vibrations cause earth worms to desert the land around it turning once fertile land into clay. I got that from a Sun news special report.

Unlike yourself, I don't discount the messenger because the message doesn't fit the pigeonhole I've decided it should fit. (as identified by the words 'warmist' and 'crap' on a story about 'renewable energy' and 'security'). I don't trust reporters to get science right, but I do trust science reporters to paraphrase science studies reasonably well. That doesn't mean that I won't look at a Bloomberg or Briebart story skeptically, because they are not always wrong. Just 'usually', because they get paid by page views and controversy sells advertising.

That said, I'd like to think that my 20+ years in I.T. and having passed the CCNE exams many moons ago makes me a bit of an 'expert' on networks security. As a long time debater I can see that the 'Appeal From Authority' in pretty much every paragraph of the story, and that means I can safely discard everything this story claims. Which if you notice, doesn't actually blame 'renewables' directly like the title implies, but 'communication networks and software'.

Renewable energy does not make the power grid less safe; idiot Admins who connect critical infrastructure to the Internet make the power grid less safe. But blaming renewable energy for it surely meets the bias requirements of Bloomberg's advertisers.

But isn't that the Bloomberg guy's point. More idiots, more holes.

And incidentally Bloomberg is one of yours. Here you'll see him having one of his boys push the precautionary principle argument to excuse subsidizing fantasy Climate controls.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-06-3 ... rsell.html

I know why you'd like to, but don't be trying to pass that little mutt off as one of ours. You guys are happy enough to welcome him to the fold when he's passing his gun control money around, and doing his Nanny state thing.

And incidentally Bloomberg is one of yours. Here you'll see him having one of his boys push the precautionary principle argument to excuse subsidizing fantasy Climate controls.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-06-3 ... rsell.html

I know why you'd like to, but don't be trying to pass that little mutt off as one of ours. You guys are happy enough to welcome him to the fold when he's passing his gun control money around, and doing his Nanny state thing.

Us guys? You guys? Gun control? Nanny State?

Again, you seem to have me confused with someone. And you seem to be projecting meanings on my posts that just don't seem to be there.



No. The title of the article, meant to draw more advertising clicks, is intended to equate 'Hackers' (the bad connotation) with 'Renewables'. Something the article failed to do.