One possible long-lasting cause of the "asymmetry" everyone talks about is that US defenders get quite high salaries compared to Chinese attackers (I assume, not being a Chinese attacker it's hard to know for sure).
Just in pure "dollars spent vs dollars spent" it seems like it would be three times cheaper to be a Chinese attacker at that rate? But I think it's still a question whether or not machine learning techniques make surveillance cheaper than intrusion as a rule. What if it does? What would that change about our national strategy? (And if it DOESN'T then why bother?) -dave
_______________________________________________ Dailydave mailing list [email protected] https://lists.immunityinc.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave
