You're right about this being a one-sided story, but not to suspect ChatGPT - it has none of the hallmarks of AI slop, plus it brings up a couple of reasonable and relevant points. You're only addressing a tiny part of the comment, but the rest stands, in my opinion.
The whole Ukraine situation is an intelligence test. In wartime you never have complete information so it is not like a game of chess where you know what the board is, what the pieces are and the play so far. Some fog of war is expected.
With the hacks that Snowden, Assange and their ilk participated in, we had stuff uploaded somewhere for the world to see. In this way it was self evident that stuff had been exfiltrated.
In this instance we can assume the drone company are going to deny everything. However, if we had some of their trade secrets uploaded somewhere then a data breach could be considered plausible. Or a recorded screen cast of the hack.
However, the intended audience for this story doesn't care about hard evidence, they just need a morale boost, and belief trumps reason on these situations.
My school history teacher taught me how to look at evidence and it is not rocket science. Hence why Ukraine is like an intelligence test nobody thought they needed. If people can't do critical thinking about some war that has been on the news for more than three years, how are they supposed to do science or anything else that needs critical thinking?
