5 ms·

I feel this is somehow an attack on free speech but I can't articulate how

spacebanana7 2y ago
It seems Kaspersky can’t write a book or newspaper column with the contents of its source code and sell it in the US. Without press freedom you don’t have free speech.
- google234123 2y ago
  You believe a tech company can actually act freely under the Russian government? With thr FSB…
  - fuoqi 2y ago
    The problem is that the company in question can act freely from the US government. Should I remind you what triggered this animosity toward Kaspersky in the first place? https://www.wired.com/story/nsa-leak-kaspersky-labs/ https://www.wired.com/story/nsa-leak-kaspersky-labs/
    - google234123 2y ago
      The US is currently indirectly at war with Russia... I don't understand why you think it makes sense to let someone you are basically at war with operate on your computers
- cowthulhu 2y ago
  Is that a method anyone has ever used to distribute paid, multi-GB software (or ever will for that matter)? I’m pretty sure Kaspersky is fully closed source anyways. This argument seems really roundabout and ineffective.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - deutschepost 2y ago
    The original code for PGP was distributed that way. Which was also banned in the US. But yeah, it is a pretty bad comparison.
    - charonn0 2y ago
      When was PGP banned in the US?
      - deutschepost 2y ago
        My bad. It was export restricted and they were prosecuted for it. That’s the reason they had to publish it by book.
      - surfingdino 2y ago
        It wasn't, its export was controlled https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy
  - spacebanana7 2y ago
    Most commercial books and newspapers are effectively 'source available', which is closer to closed source than open source.
  - RobotToaster 2y ago
    Just print the hex dump, would probably be quite large unless you used microfiche.
mdhb 2y ago
Probably something to do with not really understanding the concept properly I’m guessing.
rabite 2y ago
Eugene Kapersky is a Russian state asset and literally refuses to use the word "war" in regards to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Banning foreign agents from a hostile regime in a time of war is not an attack on free speech. Kapersky is free to speak -- and he has, through public statements from his company. He is not free to do business with the Western world while living in a sanctioned country. The number of times I've seen HN posters rejoice that people are not allowed to even communicate their political ideas because they are x-ist (it's a private company, bigot!) is too many to count. But the minute there's an actual genocidal war being waged by one of the most wicked nations on earth, people are very concerned about the Constitutional right to commercially sell antivirus software from the enemy's borders. Absurd.
- Dalewyn 2y ago
  >Eugene Kapersky is a Russian state asset and literally refuses to use the word "war" in regards to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. To be fair, western third parties like Japan refer to the conflict as the "Invasion of Ukraine" (ウクライナ侵攻, ukuraina shinkou) and such. Personally, I don't view this as a war because there was no formal declaration(s) of war to be seen anywhere before nor after the fact. War is an act of diplomacy, but what Russia has been doing is anything but.
  - StefanBatory 2y ago
    I guess Russian troops genociding Ukrainians are just tourists, then.
    - creshal 2y ago
      Russian tourists are a rather rowdy bunch, but murdering children while in uniform is a bit much even for them.
      - racional 2y ago
        True of most armies -- even the worst we can think of. The architects of war know this, of course. That's why most the killing is usually done at a distance, out of sight and out of mind. See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariupol_theatre_airstrike https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariupol_theatre_airstrike Which was done (and, judging by the choice of ordinance, signed off on at the highest levels) not despite the fact that they knew there were children present at the carefully selected target; but because of it.
ramblerman 2y ago
I think you just perfectly described how people engage in politics today.
TiredOfLife 2y ago
That can happen after a heavy head trauma. You should seek medical help.

It seems Kaspersky can’t write a book or newspaper column with the contents of its source code and sell it in the US. Without press freedom you don’t have free speech.

google234123 2y ago
You believe a tech company can actually act freely under the Russian government? With thr FSB…
- fuoqi 2y ago
  The problem is that the company in question can act freely from the US government. Should I remind you what triggered this animosity toward Kaspersky in the first place? https://www.wired.com/story/nsa-leak-kaspersky-labs/ https://www.wired.com/story/nsa-leak-kaspersky-labs/
  - google234123 2y ago
    The US is currently indirectly at war with Russia... I don't understand why you think it makes sense to let someone you are basically at war with operate on your computers
cowthulhu 2y ago
Is that a method anyone has ever used to distribute paid, multi-GB software (or ever will for that matter)? I’m pretty sure Kaspersky is fully closed source anyways. This argument seems really roundabout and ineffective.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- deutschepost 2y ago
  The original code for PGP was distributed that way. Which was also banned in the US. But yeah, it is a pretty bad comparison.
  - charonn0 2y ago
    When was PGP banned in the US?
    - deutschepost 2y ago
      My bad. It was export restricted and they were prosecuted for it. That’s the reason they had to publish it by book.
    - surfingdino 2y ago
      It wasn't, its export was controlled https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy
- spacebanana7 2y ago
  Most commercial books and newspapers are effectively 'source available', which is closer to closed source than open source.
- RobotToaster 2y ago
  Just print the hex dump, would probably be quite large unless you used microfiche.

mdhb 2y ago

Probably something to do with not really understanding the concept properly I’m guessing.

rabite 2y ago

Eugene Kapersky is a Russian state asset and literally refuses to use the word "war" in regards to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Banning foreign agents from a hostile regime in a time of war is not an attack on free speech. Kapersky is free to speak -- and he has, through public statements from his company. He is not free to do business with the Western world while living in a sanctioned country. The number of times I've seen HN posters rejoice that people are not allowed to even communicate their political ideas because they are x-ist (it's a private company, bigot!) is too many to count. But the minute there's an actual genocidal war being waged by one of the most wicked nations on earth, people are very concerned about the Constitutional right to commercially sell antivirus software from the enemy's borders. Absurd.

Dalewyn 2y ago
>Eugene Kapersky is a Russian state asset and literally refuses to use the word "war" in regards to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. To be fair, western third parties like Japan refer to the conflict as the "Invasion of Ukraine" (ウクライナ侵攻, ukuraina shinkou) and such. Personally, I don't view this as a war because there was no formal declaration(s) of war to be seen anywhere before nor after the fact. War is an act of diplomacy, but what Russia has been doing is anything but.
- StefanBatory 2y ago
  I guess Russian troops genociding Ukrainians are just tourists, then.
  - creshal 2y ago
    Russian tourists are a rather rowdy bunch, but murdering children while in uniform is a bit much even for them.
    - racional 2y ago
      True of most armies -- even the worst we can think of. The architects of war know this, of course. That's why most the killing is usually done at a distance, out of sight and out of mind. See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariupol_theatre_airstrike https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mariupol_theatre_airstrike Which was done (and, judging by the choice of ordinance, signed off on at the highest levels) not despite the fact that they knew there were children present at the carefully selected target; but because of it.

ramblerman 2y ago

I think you just perfectly described how people engage in politics today.

TiredOfLife 2y ago

That can happen after a heavy head trauma. You should seek medical help.