4 ms·

Qui bono? "OK, guys, we'll just hack into these radiation sensors to manipulate the data feed, and make them display highly elevated level of radiation for a f

Qui bono? "OK, guys, we'll just hack into these radiation sensors to manipulate the data feed, and make them display highly elevated level of radiation for a few minutes. Then we'll reset them back to normal... muwuhahahaha [evil laugh]...."

kennyloginz 3y ago
I don’t want to imply that this is what happened here. But that scenario has absolutely happened.
AbrahamParangi 3y ago
And the part where Russian soldiers take the server offline because they know the data is fake and they want to avoid a panic… What? If the Russians are doing it they can just stop If the Ukrainians are doing it the Russians don’t know they’re doing it None of this makes any sense, why would either side care about this? I’m now more inclined to believe it was just a weird sensor issue or for whatever reason the traffic through the area caused the sensors to (accurately or inaccurately) read higher - just because there’s absolutely no clear motive and it would be asinine for any of the actors involved to be doing this.
- qweurisjskgi 3y ago
  It never implies that it was Russia who took the server offline. It says that, if Russia was responsible, it was likely Ukraine instead. There are a couple of different credible explanations at the end, which specifically mention motive.
- catchnear4321 3y ago
  > If the Ukrainians are doing it the Russians don’t know they’re doing it wouldn’t that explain it rather cleanly? aren’t there plenty of asinine actions taken in war? speculation, yes. the cost will likely be downvotes for me. that’s ok. taking your sentence, let’s run with that and show a possibility. ukraine fights asymmetrically. you have seen this with drone boats, drones dropping bombs, drones taking prisoners, soldiers on e-bikes, etc. scrappy. (many americans dig this subconsciously - echoes of the revolutionary war ringing in their ears from centuries ago.) russia seems to fight… dumb. brute force. big stick. not the country, not the people, but the military operation - dumb. crude. if you were a smart, ukranian allied (but maybe not even affiliated) hacker and you wanted to make the russian military look worse, you amp up the damage signals from their march into cez. who cares how plausible, it just needs to be upsetting. russians + radiation. done and done. if you were a dumb russian, upon learning that “you caused this massive radiation spike,” you might want to hide the evidence - the sensor data. because you don’t want to deal with the fallout, no pun intended. if you were a smart ukranian hacker, you might get real quiet now, because oops those modified values aren’t exactly going to blend in. but it doesn’t matter. the dumb russian believed your ruse, and hid your manipulation, thinking it their failure. which might be better than you hoped. the motive can be quite simple. hurt the other side. it doesn’t need to be rational, and the execution can be anything but. which, once all sides are involved, can look more like chaos. or maybe it was nothing of the sort.
G3rn0ti 3y ago
> Qui bono? It’s „cui bono“ because it’s using dative case i.e. „whom is the favor“. Declination of the Latin relative pronoun „qui“ is the following for the masculine genus: qui cuius cui quem quo Sorry for being a grammar nazi.

kennyloginz 3y ago

I don’t want to imply that this is what happened here. But that scenario has absolutely happened.

AbrahamParangi 3y ago

And the part where Russian soldiers take the server offline because they know the data is fake and they want to avoid a panic… What? If the Russians are doing it they can just stop If the Ukrainians are doing it the Russians don’t know they’re doing it None of this makes any sense, why would either side care about this? I’m now more inclined to believe it was just a weird sensor issue or for whatever reason the traffic through the area caused the sensors to (accurately or inaccurately) read higher - just because there’s absolutely no clear motive and it would be asinine for any of the actors involved to be doing this.

qweurisjskgi 3y ago
It never implies that it was Russia who took the server offline. It says that, if Russia was responsible, it was likely Ukraine instead. There are a couple of different credible explanations at the end, which specifically mention motive.
catchnear4321 3y ago
> If the Ukrainians are doing it the Russians don’t know they’re doing it wouldn’t that explain it rather cleanly? aren’t there plenty of asinine actions taken in war? speculation, yes. the cost will likely be downvotes for me. that’s ok. taking your sentence, let’s run with that and show a possibility. ukraine fights asymmetrically. you have seen this with drone boats, drones dropping bombs, drones taking prisoners, soldiers on e-bikes, etc. scrappy. (many americans dig this subconsciously - echoes of the revolutionary war ringing in their ears from centuries ago.) russia seems to fight… dumb. brute force. big stick. not the country, not the people, but the military operation - dumb. crude. if you were a smart, ukranian allied (but maybe not even affiliated) hacker and you wanted to make the russian military look worse, you amp up the damage signals from their march into cez. who cares how plausible, it just needs to be upsetting. russians + radiation. done and done. if you were a dumb russian, upon learning that “you caused this massive radiation spike,” you might want to hide the evidence - the sensor data. because you don’t want to deal with the fallout, no pun intended. if you were a smart ukranian hacker, you might get real quiet now, because oops those modified values aren’t exactly going to blend in. but it doesn’t matter. the dumb russian believed your ruse, and hid your manipulation, thinking it their failure. which might be better than you hoped. the motive can be quite simple. hurt the other side. it doesn’t need to be rational, and the execution can be anything but. which, once all sides are involved, can look more like chaos. or maybe it was nothing of the sort.

G3rn0ti 3y ago

> Qui bono? It’s „cui bono“ because it’s using dative case i.e. „whom is the favor“. Declination of the Latin relative pronoun „qui“ is the following for the masculine genus: qui cuius cui quem quo Sorry for being a grammar nazi.