Given that I did the audit, I don’t think it’s appropriate for me to offer an endorsement (or a negative endorsement) in this context. What I’ll say is this: the findings on Homebrew were not inconsistent with what I’d expect to find on any similarly sized userspace package manager that serves its own binary builds.
My dumb brain had to read it 3 times before realizing that by saying "the findings were not inconsistent with what I'd expect" you meant "the findings _were_ consistent with what I'd expect"
"not inconsistent" is a common phrase and is used for a reason. It's a subtle difference but "not inconsistent" is not exactly the same as "is consistent".
It needs to convey concepts that are infinitely variable rather than binary.
When a poet or novelist says something in an unusual way, they are being more accurate not less accurate. If there is ambiguity, it is because the concept or observation they mean to express has some ambiguous element.
Trying to avoid that is just downsampling analog color reality to a 200ppi 1bpp fax.
A related concept that even the most aspbergers STEM head should be able to understand, is how a scientist almost never asserts anything unequivocally. Almost every statement is qualified with whatever is appropriate to the context. Even the most fundamental constants of the universe like the speed of light are famously relative. Are those scientists being more or less ambiguous when they decline to say something simple and direct?
Everything they don't say is deliberate and carefully crafted to be as correct as possible, not some sloppy ommission.
