5 ms·

How is Hunter Biden not the victim of this crime? Even if you believe the laptop story, his data was stolen. But you're right. Blue Leaks, if they share hacke

How is Hunter Biden not the victim of this crime? Even if you believe the laptop story, his data was stolen. But you're right. Blue Leaks, if they share hacked personal data on Twitter, should absolutely be banned under the same policy.

boomboomsubban 6y ago
They were. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/twitter-has-permanently-banned-the-group-that-published-the-blueleaks-police-files-obtained-by-hackers/ar-BB15UOjJ https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/twitter-has-perman...
- Natsu 6y ago
  They don't seem to be doing a very good job of it given that it took me just a few moments to find the material on an account named blue_leaks ...
  - boomboomsubban 6y ago
    That account seems to post news stories about the leaks, which is not a violation of the guidelines. The group that published the leaks had their account banned and links to their site blocked.
Natsu 6y ago
> Even if you believe the laptop story, his data was stolen. They allegedly have a contractual right to the laptop due to non-payment. It's a damn good reason not to take your PC there for repairs, though.
- mike00632 6y ago
  I hope you realize how unlikely the laptop story is to be true.
  - Natsu 6y ago
    I can understand why it feels "too perfect" for an October surprise, sure, but then how did they get the pictures of Hunter sleeping with a meth pipe? I ran them through the tools on hackerfactor.com and I see no obvious fakery. I've heard rumors that Hunter was allegedly hacked to get them, but I have yet to see media reports of this from prior to this story breaking. If you can provide some, please do! Right now, my take is that, at best, this is an elaborate cover story for releasing real dirt and at worst, it's legit, like the time Hunter returned a rental car with a crack pipe in it. We'll need to dig into it further, though, I want to see if the emails have DKIM validation with a body hash parameter, etc.
    - newacct583 6y ago
      > We'll need to dig into it further, though Fundamentally, the reason this got banned and then ignored is that that need is SUPPOSED to be supplied by the journalists doing the research, not random conspiracy nerds on the internet. > I've heard rumors that Hunter was allegedly hacked to get them, but I have yet to see media reports of this Exactly! Which is the level of rigor you should expect to see from your sources. Which makes it doubly frustrating that you seem not to be applying that same logic to the original story. FWIW: I'll bet you anything that no headers ever appear for those emails anywhere (at least none from western domains -- I'll admit to the possibility that the Kremlin could forge a DKIM signature for a Burisma address). They're almost certainly forgeries, which is why they're being distributed in the crazy obfuscated way they are.
      - Natsu 6y ago
        Well, let's just say that there aren't many journalists I trust to validate a DKIM signature and even then it matters whether there's a body hash in it or not. The last time this came up, I know that I personally pulled the DKIM key to check and I never saw any journalist doing that, though several did repeat Donna Brazille's claim that the email was fabricated--something proven directly false by the body hash parameter on the email claimed to be fake. Oh, and the relevant DKIM key in that case came from Hillary's DNS server, I know because I pulled it myself. Maybe the Kremlin hacked that, but that would implicate a lot more reporting than just Donna's claims. So yes, I do want to see more journalism regarding this, but it also needs sufficient rigor. I don't just believe any random person who claims XYZ, whether or not I tend to agree with them, I want to see verifiable facts. And yeah, those are in pretty short supply. I've seen tons of anonymous rumors, various forms of citogenesis, etc. far more often than I've seen things that can be subjected to some kind of objective fact finding process.

boomboomsubban 6y ago

They were. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/twitter-has-permanently-banned-the-group-that-published-the-blueleaks-police-files-obtained-by-hackers/ar-BB15UOjJ https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/twitter-has-perman...

Natsu 6y ago
They don't seem to be doing a very good job of it given that it took me just a few moments to find the material on an account named blue_leaks ...
- boomboomsubban 6y ago
  That account seems to post news stories about the leaks, which is not a violation of the guidelines. The group that published the leaks had their account banned and links to their site blocked.

Natsu 6y ago

> Even if you believe the laptop story, his data was stolen. They allegedly have a contractual right to the laptop due to non-payment. It's a damn good reason not to take your PC there for repairs, though.

mike00632 6y ago
I hope you realize how unlikely the laptop story is to be true.
- Natsu 6y ago
  I can understand why it feels "too perfect" for an October surprise, sure, but then how did they get the pictures of Hunter sleeping with a meth pipe? I ran them through the tools on hackerfactor.com and I see no obvious fakery. I've heard rumors that Hunter was allegedly hacked to get them, but I have yet to see media reports of this from prior to this story breaking. If you can provide some, please do! Right now, my take is that, at best, this is an elaborate cover story for releasing real dirt and at worst, it's legit, like the time Hunter returned a rental car with a crack pipe in it. We'll need to dig into it further, though, I want to see if the emails have DKIM validation with a body hash parameter, etc.
  - newacct583 6y ago
    > We'll need to dig into it further, though Fundamentally, the reason this got banned and then ignored is that that need is SUPPOSED to be supplied by the journalists doing the research, not random conspiracy nerds on the internet. > I've heard rumors that Hunter was allegedly hacked to get them, but I have yet to see media reports of this Exactly! Which is the level of rigor you should expect to see from your sources. Which makes it doubly frustrating that you seem not to be applying that same logic to the original story. FWIW: I'll bet you anything that no headers ever appear for those emails anywhere (at least none from western domains -- I'll admit to the possibility that the Kremlin could forge a DKIM signature for a Burisma address). They're almost certainly forgeries, which is why they're being distributed in the crazy obfuscated way they are.
    - Natsu 6y ago
      Well, let's just say that there aren't many journalists I trust to validate a DKIM signature and even then it matters whether there's a body hash in it or not. The last time this came up, I know that I personally pulled the DKIM key to check and I never saw any journalist doing that, though several did repeat Donna Brazille's claim that the email was fabricated--something proven directly false by the body hash parameter on the email claimed to be fake. Oh, and the relevant DKIM key in that case came from Hillary's DNS server, I know because I pulled it myself. Maybe the Kremlin hacked that, but that would implicate a lot more reporting than just Donna's claims. So yes, I do want to see more journalism regarding this, but it also needs sufficient rigor. I don't just believe any random person who claims XYZ, whether or not I tend to agree with them, I want to see verifiable facts. And yeah, those are in pretty short supply. I've seen tons of anonymous rumors, various forms of citogenesis, etc. far more often than I've seen things that can be subjected to some kind of objective fact finding process.