that's a credible perspective but let's not be vague: fitzpatrick wasn't a primary source, he is an expert on hardware implants who was consulted by the reporter prior to the original publication.
Fitzpatrick wasn't a primary source, but somehow his theories on how an implant could theoretically be implemented appeared in the Bloomberg story, as details of how it was actually implemented. This seems really fishy.
Reading between the lines, Fitzpatrick's claim is that other primary sources could be fictitious, and the writer fabricated them based on interviews with him.
