I not only see that: I specifically explained the expectation and how it was reframed into a new target above.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=11693426" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=11693426</a><p>Your failing to see my actual concern here. I&#x27;m one of those old-school types that rate people on impact their work has first and how clever&#x2F;funny it is second. The first, expected challenge had consequences with impact. Tackling that with effort even close to success would be praiseworthy &amp; even contribute something new to INFOSEC.<p>The other thing is the kind of shit I do to coworkers and people online all day for fun. One I hadn&#x27;t thought of and clever for sure but same concept. It&#x27;s a combo of wit and sophistry that focuses on technicalities of people&#x27;s statements who aren&#x27;t thinking carefully about them. Outside policy and procedures, outthinking a statement has no impact at all.<p>So, as I think along both lines, I recognize it as clever trolling in the second category like I do 20 times a day. Similarly pointless. Just fun and funny. Then, acknowledge that the real target or challenge would&#x27;ve been more valuable. Implicitly encouraging people to go for that one in case we learn something important. You know, relevant to information security. Plus, I give highest props to people that pull off difficult or nigh-impossible feats.