I hope that the people arguing that this implies more than it does and the people arguing that this implies less than it does both realize that they are retarded.
I don't know who if anyone in Bitcoin is compromised, but pretending that this doesn't validate that substantial efforts to compromise Bitcoin are a serious, active, long standing threat are retarded.
The deeper point about compromise is that it can rarely be proved but is always happening to some degree.
Moreover, it's not a binary state. "Hey kid, take this briefcase of money and destroy Bitcoin or we will show everyone what you did with the monkey"... Probably rarely happens. But there are an infinite number and levels of ways to apply and respond to incentives.
The conversation should stay open but also reasonable.
Both sides should stop being retarded so we can actually navigate the threat
