4 ms·

You guys, I can't tell if it's foreign bots flooding this thread with disinformation, but it's obvious that using a Huawei phone isn't going to keep you off of

You guys, I can't tell if it's foreign bots flooding this thread with disinformation, but it's obvious that using a Huawei phone isn't going to keep you off of American intelligence servers. All it's going to do is make it easier to get on Chinese ones too. I'd take these warnings seriously. The Chinese have a long history of stealing IP and disregarding norms.

emodendroket 9y ago
I doubt foreign bots are flooding this thread.
- Tasboo 9y ago
  Yeah that would never happen /s. This is one of the most frequented social media sites for tech people. This place is a perfect target for foreign bots.
  - emodendroket 9y ago
    I think we have plenty of homegrown distrust of intelligence agencies post-Snowden without needing to import it from abroad.
  - golergka 9y ago
    What's much more important, HN is a constant source of reposts. Half of what I see on all other tech sites I see on HN first.
JumpCrisscross 9y ago
> All it's going to do is make it easier to get on Chinese ones too. I'd take these warnings seriously. The Chinese have a long history of stealing IP and disregarding norms Agreed. To those arguing "the Chinese having all my information is better than the Americans," three points: 1. As 3pt14159 says [1], just because the Chinese have access to your phone doesn't make it safer against American law enforcement. 2. Every phone isn't made by American or Chinese firms. Don't force a false dichotomy. 3. Economic espionage is a scary threat model. Consider what you know that someone else might find valuable. Few people answer "yes" in respect of political information. Many more answer "yes" in respect of commercial information. That is your blackmail value. Choosing to expand your security cross-section to foreign economic espionage plus domestic political espionage, versus simply the latter, is irrational. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16381401 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16381401
- patentlyUnsafe 9y ago
  The argument is not favoring one versus the other. The argument is that being exposed to any peeping tom is bad, no matter who it is. If no one can't prove to me that there are no peeping toms at all, then a hotel room with a peep hole is still a shitty hotel. But as second class citizens, for all of us, choosing a room with a peep hole is compulsory. Gee, who's fault is that? Sorry. If I have to sleep in a room with a peep hole, it really doesn't matter much to me who does the heavy breathing on the other side of the wall. I'm supposed to pretend it's not there anyway, and so I shall. Can the Chinese arrest me and throw me in jail? No. But, for sure, I could get thrown in jail, based on the contents of an electronic device. Are the people who conspire to imprison me friends? Wait, what are they peeping on us for?
  - JumpCrisscross 9y ago
    > The argument is that being exposed to any peeping tom is bad, no matter who it is This is not the argument I refute. I specifically state what I am refuting: "the Chinese having all my information is better than the Americans." Two things being bad doesn't make them equally bad. Buying a Huawei phone to safeguard against the NSA is akin to leaving one's door open so there is no peephole for peeping Tom to look through. Yes, within a narrow construction, one is correct. But practically speaking, now both the peeping Tom and the person who opened the door can see in.
    - patentlyUnsafe 9y ago
      I want a room without a peeping tom. If that’s not an option, then I sincerely no longer care about my own safety.
- verylittlemeat 9y ago
  >economic espionage is a scary threat model RE: commercial information Can you suggest any good books on what kind of information a "pragmatic" first world government might collect on citizens for blackmail? I'm having a hard time thinking of examples aside from say sexual taboos or things that people find shameful for diverse personal social reasons (e.g. eating habits, media habits and so on). When a citizen isn't engaged in explicitly illegal behavior is it really that easy to threaten someone's life/career in exchange for commercial/political information? The types of social/taboo espionage I mentioned above don't seem broadly applicable enough for a government to really bother with it as a generic model for blackmail.
squeeeeeeeeeee 9y ago
> I'd take these warnings seriously. Between the likes of "Iraq WMDs" or "FISA memo", I don't think I'm going to trust anything the U.S. intelligence and counterintelligence community says, thank you very much.
squeeeeeeeeeee 9y ago
> foreign bots Everyone I disagree with is a "foreign bot". I swear this is the new form of American elitism. The fact that the leftists of the coastal regions apply this kind of thinking to even their countrymen only proves my point further.
verylittlemeat 9y ago
I really don't think it's bots. Being contrarian, anti-US government and skeptical bordering on conspiracy are all strong HN norms. I'm not really saying that to be dismissive but it seems like a shared culture on this site since the fallout of Snowden (right or wrong, I'm just describing how I see things play out here). HN seems to lean more towards the conception of reality where we're playing 9-Dimensional chess vs "attribute things to ignorance not malice."
- 3pt14159 9y ago
  It's hand-wavy for now, but I've generally found that older more connected accounts are much less likely to be conspiratorial about this type of thing. Not attributing cause, just gives me pause sometimes. Take your account for example. Your username doesn't obviously connect you to a real person, you don't have details in your profile, your submission history is a single article of the NYT but then again, your comment history seems real / thoughtful so you're probably a real person operating a single HN account, but when a whole topic is flooded with the same type of thinking and mostly from accounts that haven't been around that long I get a little suspicious. Of course I'm never bothered enough to put in the work to figuring it out.
  - verylittlemeat 9y ago
    I actually have yearly reminders set in my calendar to make new usernames on sites I frequently comment on (with new registered emails, etc). People with deviant opinions value anonymity. People who have to live and work in the US don't want to be associated with anti-US opinions for pragmatic reasons.

emodendroket 9y ago

I doubt foreign bots are flooding this thread.

Tasboo 9y ago
Yeah that would never happen /s. This is one of the most frequented social media sites for tech people. This place is a perfect target for foreign bots.
- emodendroket 9y ago
  I think we have plenty of homegrown distrust of intelligence agencies post-Snowden without needing to import it from abroad.
- golergka 9y ago
  What's much more important, HN is a constant source of reposts. Half of what I see on all other tech sites I see on HN first.

JumpCrisscross 9y ago

> All it's going to do is make it easier to get on Chinese ones too. I'd take these warnings seriously. The Chinese have a long history of stealing IP and disregarding norms Agreed. To those arguing "the Chinese having all my information is better than the Americans," three points: 1. As 3pt14159 says [1], just because the Chinese have access to your phone doesn't make it safer against American law enforcement. 2. Every phone isn't made by American or Chinese firms. Don't force a false dichotomy. 3. Economic espionage is a scary threat model. Consider what you know that someone else might find valuable. Few people answer "yes" in respect of political information. Many more answer "yes" in respect of commercial information. That is your blackmail value. Choosing to expand your security cross-section to foreign economic espionage plus domestic political espionage, versus simply the latter, is irrational. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16381401 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16381401

patentlyUnsafe 9y ago
The argument is not favoring one versus the other. The argument is that being exposed to any peeping tom is bad, no matter who it is. If no one can't prove to me that there are no peeping toms at all, then a hotel room with a peep hole is still a shitty hotel. But as second class citizens, for all of us, choosing a room with a peep hole is compulsory. Gee, who's fault is that? Sorry. If I have to sleep in a room with a peep hole, it really doesn't matter much to me who does the heavy breathing on the other side of the wall. I'm supposed to pretend it's not there anyway, and so I shall. Can the Chinese arrest me and throw me in jail? No. But, for sure, I could get thrown in jail, based on the contents of an electronic device. Are the people who conspire to imprison me friends? Wait, what are they peeping on us for?
- JumpCrisscross 9y ago
  > The argument is that being exposed to any peeping tom is bad, no matter who it is This is not the argument I refute. I specifically state what I am refuting: "the Chinese having all my information is better than the Americans." Two things being bad doesn't make them equally bad. Buying a Huawei phone to safeguard against the NSA is akin to leaving one's door open so there is no peephole for peeping Tom to look through. Yes, within a narrow construction, one is correct. But practically speaking, now both the peeping Tom and the person who opened the door can see in.
  - patentlyUnsafe 9y ago
    I want a room without a peeping tom. If that’s not an option, then I sincerely no longer care about my own safety.
verylittlemeat 9y ago
>economic espionage is a scary threat model RE: commercial information Can you suggest any good books on what kind of information a "pragmatic" first world government might collect on citizens for blackmail? I'm having a hard time thinking of examples aside from say sexual taboos or things that people find shameful for diverse personal social reasons (e.g. eating habits, media habits and so on). When a citizen isn't engaged in explicitly illegal behavior is it really that easy to threaten someone's life/career in exchange for commercial/political information? The types of social/taboo espionage I mentioned above don't seem broadly applicable enough for a government to really bother with it as a generic model for blackmail.

squeeeeeeeeeee 9y ago

> I'd take these warnings seriously. Between the likes of "Iraq WMDs" or "FISA memo", I don't think I'm going to trust anything the U.S. intelligence and counterintelligence community says, thank you very much.

squeeeeeeeeeee 9y ago

> foreign bots Everyone I disagree with is a "foreign bot". I swear this is the new form of American elitism. The fact that the leftists of the coastal regions apply this kind of thinking to even their countrymen only proves my point further.

verylittlemeat 9y ago

I really don't think it's bots. Being contrarian, anti-US government and skeptical bordering on conspiracy are all strong HN norms. I'm not really saying that to be dismissive but it seems like a shared culture on this site since the fallout of Snowden (right or wrong, I'm just describing how I see things play out here). HN seems to lean more towards the conception of reality where we're playing 9-Dimensional chess vs "attribute things to ignorance not malice."

3pt14159 9y ago
It's hand-wavy for now, but I've generally found that older more connected accounts are much less likely to be conspiratorial about this type of thing. Not attributing cause, just gives me pause sometimes. Take your account for example. Your username doesn't obviously connect you to a real person, you don't have details in your profile, your submission history is a single article of the NYT but then again, your comment history seems real / thoughtful so you're probably a real person operating a single HN account, but when a whole topic is flooded with the same type of thinking and mostly from accounts that haven't been around that long I get a little suspicious. Of course I'm never bothered enough to put in the work to figuring it out.
- verylittlemeat 9y ago
  I actually have yearly reminders set in my calendar to make new usernames on sites I frequently comment on (with new registered emails, etc). People with deviant opinions value anonymity. People who have to live and work in the US don't want to be associated with anti-US opinions for pragmatic reasons.