You know, I didn't think I wanted to dignify this with this level of response, but maybe someone else is going to get confused and I have terrible insomnia: you responded to someone (me) telling someone else "the information you think is relevant to changing my mind is information you should know I already have, which means there is some framing problem in our conversation that needs to be addressed" with a (slightly indirect, and thereby to me incredibly snippy sounding and extra insulting) comment claiming that is an "appeal to authority", when that statement wasn't even an argument and so wasn't an "appeal": you can't read that comment from me as "I am right because of who I am", as it is simply "you are trying to convince me of your point using information I do not disagree with (and which you should know I have, and so should probably know I don't disagree with...)" and was nothing more than a lead-in to my actual point, which was "given that I know that and that we don't even disagree there, you should go back and notice the following thing about what I said: we are talking about different points", which was the actual statement in that comment: I believe the article is not actually focusing on the same problem as Apple's bug bounty program.