5 ms·

Where is the proof that this was a Chinese hacking group? I certainly don't trust Microsoft to provide it. In fact, it's very concerning that Microsoft seems to

Where is the proof that this was a Chinese hacking group? I certainly don't trust Microsoft to provide it. In fact, it's very concerning that Microsoft seems to be in some quasi-governmental role in this. It's literally a giant security hole in their software, why should we trust what they say? The White House acting as a PR unit for MS (or is it vice versa?) is a serious problem.

loceng 6y ago
How are we to trust you're not a paid Putin or CCP propagandist? Arguably Microsoft has far more credibility than you - my point being there are ways people orient for trusting individuals and organizations. If you think the current White House administration and Microsoft aren't on the more trustworthy side of the trust spectrum, then who in your opinion is more trustworthy?
- solosoyokaze 6y ago
  I think Microsoft and the current White House are on the extreme side of untrustworthy. What has MS ever done that was trustworthy? Their entire existence has been based on abusing a monopoly. The US government is also extremely untrustworthy (c.f. the 20th century). The combination of these two entities pushing the same story is a huge red flag. Who would I trust? I’ll start with someone providing some sort of proof. Which is entirely absent here.
  - elefanten 6y ago
    That's a fantasy burden you've constructed. What would even count as "proof"? Anything that incrementally changes the field of possibility? Or something that definitely proves what happened? Microsoft has done untrustworthy things. They've also build the most successful (esp. in the longer view) commercial computing ecosystem because it hit the right balance between stability/robustness/usability. Many elements of that include proving some minimum burdens of trustworthiness (not to be confused with earning absolute trust). The US government... cf the 20th century? You mean the greatest secular advancements in the human condition in history? And as for the age of "American Empire" (post WW2? Post Cold War?)... are you referring to the relatively most peaceful, humane, self-effacing hegemon that has ever been known the planet (not to be confused with a perfectly peaceful and human hegemon)? This flippant stance combined with absolutely no countervailing context and fantasy burdens of proof... please.
    - prophesi 6y ago
      I mean, it's no secret that Microsoft has a $10 billion contract with the US Government. And it's also no secret that attributing blame to cyber attacks is a hard problem. You can study the tools/exploits used, the files modified, the associated IP addresses, all of which can be easily obfuscated or used to scapegoat. I don't really doubt the allegations, as the motive makes sense, but I'm hoping there will be a good postmortem.
    - FpUser 6y ago
      >"are you referring to the relatively most peaceful, humane, self-effacing hegemon that has ever been known the planet" Millions of bombed, displaced and otherwise sanctioned to oblivion might disagree with this level of modesty and humility.
      - elefanten 6y ago
        The word "relatively" served a purpose in that statement. Can you name a hegemon that was more peaceful and humane? Which European colonial power at its height, which Chinese dynasty, which Mongol khanate would you prefer? Maybe America wouldn't be top of the list but the point is made in distinction to other regimes that achieved remotely similar power differentials.
        FpUser 6y ago
        I am sort of speechless. Am totally put off by the amount of egomaniacal and warmongering posts in this thread. Sorry you honor. I am the nice guy here. I've only raped few thousands. Lemme off.
    - solosoyokaze 6y ago
      > relatively most peaceful, humane, self-effacing hegemon that has ever been known the planet The US murdered massive amounts of people in East Asia and the Middle East during that time period. Napalm, Agent Orange, war crimes... We were as bad as any hegemony. Much worse actually, due to technical superiority. We also have the largest prison population of any country (per capita and in total) due to the "war" on drugs. So yes, I'd say we're near the bottom of the list. Especially if you go back past the 20th century (slavery, genocide).
  - jjcc 6y ago
    It's difficult to find hard proof to support or against the claims. However there are invisible human natures lead people tend to believe one or the other. Here in HN the majority belief is China is evil. The dissidents against the belief will be downvoted. But the world is much bigger than HN. A lot of contents are just not in English. Here's a community that contains minority beliefs but in English. I've pasted in another post. Judge by yourself they are rational people or not. https://www.moonofalabama.org/2021/03/is-china-hacking-random-servers-to-put-itself-into-a-bad-light.html#comments https://www.moonofalabama.org/2021/03/is-china-hacking-rando...
    - loceng 6y ago
      Replace "China" with "CCP" - and yes, however it's obvious as to why that is - the control systems, the censorship systems, the confirmed genocide [by definition, cultural genocide] of Uighurs, and things like not allowing the UN to go into China to investigate claims directly are a few examples; it's not to say different administrations in the US have been part of bad/unacceptable behaviour as well, however the CCP is a different - "permanent" leadership/hierarchy that isn't voted in by the general population, so it's not comparable.
      - solosoyokaze 6y ago
        I don't actually think the Chinese government is trustworthy, for all the reasons you state. However, I find the US/MS less trustworthy for us. I've been the target of US propaganda far more often than Chinese propaganda, since I'm a US citizen. Remember Bush/The New York Times falsely claiming that Iraq had WMD? A lesson we shouldn't quickly forget. Especially when the current admin has already initiated illegal military action. I'm weary of war hawks and the propaganda that supports them.
        loceng 6y ago
        Fully agree with your statements. Baby steps but we're moving again in the right direction.

loceng 6y ago

How are we to trust you're not a paid Putin or CCP propagandist? Arguably Microsoft has far more credibility than you - my point being there are ways people orient for trusting individuals and organizations. If you think the current White House administration and Microsoft aren't on the more trustworthy side of the trust spectrum, then who in your opinion is more trustworthy?

solosoyokaze 6y ago
I think Microsoft and the current White House are on the extreme side of untrustworthy. What has MS ever done that was trustworthy? Their entire existence has been based on abusing a monopoly. The US government is also extremely untrustworthy (c.f. the 20th century). The combination of these two entities pushing the same story is a huge red flag. Who would I trust? I’ll start with someone providing some sort of proof. Which is entirely absent here.
- elefanten 6y ago
  That's a fantasy burden you've constructed. What would even count as "proof"? Anything that incrementally changes the field of possibility? Or something that definitely proves what happened? Microsoft has done untrustworthy things. They've also build the most successful (esp. in the longer view) commercial computing ecosystem because it hit the right balance between stability/robustness/usability. Many elements of that include proving some minimum burdens of trustworthiness (not to be confused with earning absolute trust). The US government... cf the 20th century? You mean the greatest secular advancements in the human condition in history? And as for the age of "American Empire" (post WW2? Post Cold War?)... are you referring to the relatively most peaceful, humane, self-effacing hegemon that has ever been known the planet (not to be confused with a perfectly peaceful and human hegemon)? This flippant stance combined with absolutely no countervailing context and fantasy burdens of proof... please.
  - prophesi 6y ago
    I mean, it's no secret that Microsoft has a $10 billion contract with the US Government. And it's also no secret that attributing blame to cyber attacks is a hard problem. You can study the tools/exploits used, the files modified, the associated IP addresses, all of which can be easily obfuscated or used to scapegoat. I don't really doubt the allegations, as the motive makes sense, but I'm hoping there will be a good postmortem.
  - FpUser 6y ago
    >"are you referring to the relatively most peaceful, humane, self-effacing hegemon that has ever been known the planet" Millions of bombed, displaced and otherwise sanctioned to oblivion might disagree with this level of modesty and humility.
    - elefanten 6y ago
      The word "relatively" served a purpose in that statement. Can you name a hegemon that was more peaceful and humane? Which European colonial power at its height, which Chinese dynasty, which Mongol khanate would you prefer? Maybe America wouldn't be top of the list but the point is made in distinction to other regimes that achieved remotely similar power differentials.
      - FpUser 6y ago
        I am sort of speechless. Am totally put off by the amount of egomaniacal and warmongering posts in this thread. Sorry you honor. I am the nice guy here. I've only raped few thousands. Lemme off.
  - solosoyokaze 6y ago
    > relatively most peaceful, humane, self-effacing hegemon that has ever been known the planet The US murdered massive amounts of people in East Asia and the Middle East during that time period. Napalm, Agent Orange, war crimes... We were as bad as any hegemony. Much worse actually, due to technical superiority. We also have the largest prison population of any country (per capita and in total) due to the "war" on drugs. So yes, I'd say we're near the bottom of the list. Especially if you go back past the 20th century (slavery, genocide).
- jjcc 6y ago
  It's difficult to find hard proof to support or against the claims. However there are invisible human natures lead people tend to believe one or the other. Here in HN the majority belief is China is evil. The dissidents against the belief will be downvoted. But the world is much bigger than HN. A lot of contents are just not in English. Here's a community that contains minority beliefs but in English. I've pasted in another post. Judge by yourself they are rational people or not. https://www.moonofalabama.org/2021/03/is-china-hacking-random-servers-to-put-itself-into-a-bad-light.html#comments https://www.moonofalabama.org/2021/03/is-china-hacking-rando...
  - loceng 6y ago
    Replace "China" with "CCP" - and yes, however it's obvious as to why that is - the control systems, the censorship systems, the confirmed genocide [by definition, cultural genocide] of Uighurs, and things like not allowing the UN to go into China to investigate claims directly are a few examples; it's not to say different administrations in the US have been part of bad/unacceptable behaviour as well, however the CCP is a different - "permanent" leadership/hierarchy that isn't voted in by the general population, so it's not comparable.
    - solosoyokaze 6y ago
      I don't actually think the Chinese government is trustworthy, for all the reasons you state. However, I find the US/MS less trustworthy for us. I've been the target of US propaganda far more often than Chinese propaganda, since I'm a US citizen. Remember Bush/The New York Times falsely claiming that Iraq had WMD? A lesson we shouldn't quickly forget. Especially when the current admin has already initiated illegal military action. I'm weary of war hawks and the propaganda that supports them.
      - loceng 6y ago
        Fully agree with your statements. Baby steps but we're moving again in the right direction.