4 ms·

I find it interesting they keep pushing "election hacking" which is not the case. The DNC was hacked, which is vastly different from the "election" being hacked

• MrZongle2 10y ago
  This is another semantic game, along the same lines as "it depends on what your definition of 'is' is": the hacking allegedly took place during the election season and involved the disclosure of information about a candidate and their campaign staff, so it technically can be called "election hacking". But of course calling it such also makes it sound like actual votes were affected, which nobody has claimed at this point. Using this terminology not only brings attention to a potentially serious issue, but allows one party to undermine the legitimacy of the other's election victory.
• ianai 10y ago
  We don't know the full specs yet as they have not been declassified and divulged. If one part of a two party election benefits from something the other part loses and vice versa. That's tampering and foreign entities shouldn't be doing it.
  • mdekkers 10y ago
    > That's tampering and foreign entities shouldn't be doing it. Surely you mean "That's tampering and foreign entities shouldn't be doing it _to us_". Because the US does that all the time.
    • ianai 10y ago
      We shouldn't be doing that either but I left it out. Two wrongs don't make a right.
• pcvarmint 10y ago
  Not Russian, but U.S. hackers and insiders: http://blackboxvoting.org/fraction-magic-video/ http://blackboxvoting.org/fraction-magic-video/