8 ms·

> Some kind of directed energy weapon from an enemy state. Suppose you are a nation-state, hostile to the USA, that has developed a directed energy weapon. Do

by piaste 2y ago

> Some kind of directed energy weapon from an enemy state. Suppose you are a nation-state, hostile to the USA, that has developed a directed energy weapon. Do you test it: A) on your own citizens (whether willing, deceived, or coerced), B) on citizens of some remote, poor, and/or war-torn country that is unlikely to retaliate against you, or C) on diplomatic personnel from the country with the greatest military and intelligence resources by far, and with a proven history of bombing or invading other countries on both true and false premises? I had never heard of Havana syndrome before, and I have nothing to comment either way on whether the physical symptoms are real and/or have a common cause. But the idea that an enemy state is using a secret weapon prototype to... randomly give headaches to American diplomats? Is bizarre, to say the least.

schiffern 2y ago
>Do you test it Who's saying it's a test? Your premise assumes they haven't already done A and B, and after successful testing moved on to C.
- piaste 2y ago
  Then the scenario becomes: "Sir, the results are in: this weapon causes mild headaches and sleep difficulties lasting a few months." "Excellent! Deploy it against American embassies immediately. Surely this will absolutely cripple their espionage efforts." The idea that it's a side-effect of directed- energy _surveillance_ seems a vastly more sensible hypothesis in every way.
  - e40 2y ago
    Some of the people had mich more severe symptoms than what you describe, but that would undermine your snark.
    - newaccount74 2y ago
      I also suffer from irregular, unexplained headaches. Someone must be microwaving my apartment complex.
  - Natsu 2y ago
    My problem with it being any kind of energy weapon is that we should have been able to detect something. If not initially, then afterwards.
    - ungreased0675 2y ago
      If it was being looked for. Don’t think the necessary electromagnetic spectrum analysis equipment (and people) are very common.
      - mrguyorama 2y ago
        >Don’t think the necessary electromagnetic spectrum analysis equipment (and people) are very common. You don't think people are actively monitoring the electromagnetic spectrum, in a US embassy? Why in the world do you think that?
      - rcxdude 2y ago
        In general, no. In an embassy? Hell yes.
      - wildzzz 2y ago
        Technical Surveillance Countermeasures (TSCM) is a lucrative business and it's not hard or that expensive to setup equipment that can monitor the spectrum 24/7.
- myhf 2y ago
  this is hacker news, we test in production
- a0123 2y ago
  A wonder weapon that makes the enemy feel hangover. Damn, I don't know who financed it but they need to get their money back.
  - Spooky23 2y ago
    You lack knowledge and imagination. The Russians have done stuff like burying passive microphones inside of building materials. The notion that they would direct something at those devices to activate them is neither fantastical or foolish to investigate.
    - amy-petrik-214 2y ago
      I mean the ruskies cooked up this guy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thing_(listening_device) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thing_(listening_device) Invented by THE theremin. Yes, the instrument, theremin, the wacky one where handwaves and suck around some metal stick make funky horror movie noises, there was a Dr. theremin who invented that, and also this. Anyway, it was a "passive radio device" (given as a "gift") whereby if radio waves are projected onto the device it shall convolute said waves with sound waves of the room and then back-project a signal of radio waves with voice data overlayed, which can be read. Fancy at that sounds it is trivially low tech and simple. Very analog.
  - frankharv 2y ago
    More likely equipment on the roof is causing this. They don't tell you what equipment is on the roof.
zoklet-enjoyer 2y ago
Why do you think it's a prototype? Why don't you consider that it possibly malfunctioned or the user was inexperienced?
- piaste 2y ago
  See my reply to schiffern above.
0xbadcafebee 2y ago
Rational thought goes out the window when people hear a good story. When someone a long time ago (Victorian era? somebody correct me) started circulating a story people from ancient times up until the 19th century drank a lot of wine and beer because they didn't know how to find clean water, an amazing number of people repeated it as if it were a fact. Despite the fact that there was no evidence to support it (other than the people repeating the story), there was evidence against it (many ancient writers describe the use of clean water and how/where to find it), and it made no sense (if they couldn't find clean water, why didn't they all just die when they didn't have wine and beer? what about the billions of uneducated rural people today that get along fine without treated water and don't drink wine or beer?). When we hear a good story, we want to believe it, so we don't think too hard about it.
- jncfhnb 2y ago
  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aqua_vitae https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aqua_vitae https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_beer https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_beer It is very much a well documented thing. You’re incorrectly reasoning that since it wasn’t the only strategy ubiquitous everywhere and all the time that it just not have been real
  - dannyobrien 2y ago
    could you point to the specific part of those Wikipedia entries that says that very large quantities of these drinks were taken because of the difficulty of finding clean water? Or were you making another point here?
    - christianqchung 2y ago
      It's not in there, I just read the articles. Maybe the point is about how low alcohol beer was commonly drunken, though I'm not sure how that relevant either.
      - ahoka 2y ago
paganel 2y ago
Supposedly this “weapon” had been put in place by the Russians who had used the Cubans as a proxy, maybe if not the Russians then the Chinese, either way, one of these two big nuclear powers that had almost nothing to fear from the Americans. Or so I gathered by reading “between the lines” when this story first broke out.
jt2190 2y ago
Suppose you’re a nation-state and have gathered wind that an enemy state has developed an eavesdropping technology that uses directed energy. Do you: A) allow the enemy state to use it, letting them think you don’t know it exists B) publicly accuse the enemy of having the technology, thus jeopardizing the intelligence assets who revealed its existence to you as the enemy goes on the hunt for the spies who leaked the info C) make up a story about how a bunch diplomatic personnel got sick in a way that’s consistent with some kind of directed high energy source, causing your enemy to stop using the device and recheck everything because they thought it would not be detected, but apparently it was. They don’t suspect an internal “leak”, which keeps your spies safer.
- tptacek 2y ago
  A.
  - ithkuil 2y ago
    And indeed there is historical precedent for A (e.g. enigma). Is there any precedent for choosing C?
    - tptacek 2y ago
      It's not C.
- yesco 2y ago
  What in the world would be the strategic advantages of C? This would be like loudly shitting your pants so you have an excuse to leave a party early without making the host feel bad. With over 1000 people involved, this whole Havana syndrome thing has disrupted the United States diplomatic efforts on an international scale, the constant rotation of embassy diplomats over this has had real world impact, even if non-obvious. While elaborate conspiracies are nothing new to the intelligence community, I think this would go beyond elaborate and into the realm of insane.
  - amy-petrik-214 2y ago
anon84873628 2y ago
This logic is good as a first approximation but completely breaks down in situations like this. In geopolitics there are simply so many unknown variables that it is completely inscrutable from the outside. Plus, state actors do seemingly dumb and irrational things all the time. Also, maybe the FUD caused was a desirable outcome in its own right.
tapcheck 2y ago
> A) on your own citizens (whether willing, deceived, or coerced) It’s A. Testing of surveillance among other things. Source: me and my friends stuck in here
lupusreal 2y ago
If they did A or B before C, you wouldn't know about it.
tim333 2y ago
Well the nation state we are talking about here is Russia. They are known to do things like invade countries, hack US systems and emails and on. Their behaviour seems weird to me but they have form. It's quite likely Unit 29155 of the Russian GRU, who did the Skipal poisonings and blew up an arms dump in Finland. I think they saw Albert Averyanov, the son of the brigade commander mucking about with equipment in a van outside one of the attacks. (some Guardian stuff https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/01/havana-syndrome-linked-to-russian-unit-media-investigation-suggests https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/01/havana-syndrom...)
op27 2y ago
Patents for such microwave-type weapons do exist: https://patents.google.com/patent/RU2526478C2/en https://patents.google.com/patent/RU2526478C2/en Method and Device of Microwave Electromagnetic Impact at Trespasser https://patents.google.com/patent/US7841989B2/en https://patents.google.com/patent/US7841989B2/en Electromagnetic Personnel Interdiction Control Method and System https://patents.google.com/patent/CN106643287A/en https://patents.google.com/patent/CN106643287A/en Method and System for Eliminating Fighting Strength of Opposing Combatant Using Electromagnetic Wave http://www.gbppr.net/mil/havana http://www.gbppr.net/mil/havana You can use the microwave auditory effect with a modulation at the resonant frequency of the target's skull to "induce pain."
mu53 2y ago
I think the weapon is tested and understood. The value is in disruption. Headaches are not just headaches, but also intimidation and harassment. When there is a person working a case important to a state actor, if that person is delayed a week due to a health problem, that case is delayed a week. If they develop permanent health issues and have to leave, the case starts from zero with a new investigator. The technology is unprecedented and doesn't provoke retaliation because the US either can't prove it happened or won't declassify documents to show the technology exists. All the other, more conventional methods can be easily traced and retaliated The agent that was allegedly targetted has a similar opinion to this. This is the 60 minutes episode where they talk about it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COWTBEl1rRc&pp=ygURNjAgbWludXRlcyBoYXZhbmE%3D https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COWTBEl1rRc&pp=ygURNjAgbWlud...
autoexec 2y ago
> Suppose you are a nation-state, hostile to the USA, that has developed a directed energy weapon. Why assume a hostile nation-state and not just USA doing more testing on its own people. It's just something we do.

by piaste 2y ago

schiffern 2y ago

>Do you test it Who's saying it's a test? Your premise assumes they haven't already done A and B, and after successful testing moved on to C.

piaste 2y ago
Then the scenario becomes: "Sir, the results are in: this weapon causes mild headaches and sleep difficulties lasting a few months." "Excellent! Deploy it against American embassies immediately. Surely this will absolutely cripple their espionage efforts." The idea that it's a side-effect of directed- energy _surveillance_ seems a vastly more sensible hypothesis in every way.
- e40 2y ago
  Some of the people had mich more severe symptoms than what you describe, but that would undermine your snark.
  - newaccount74 2y ago
    I also suffer from irregular, unexplained headaches. Someone must be microwaving my apartment complex.
- Natsu 2y ago
  My problem with it being any kind of energy weapon is that we should have been able to detect something. If not initially, then afterwards.
  - ungreased0675 2y ago
    If it was being looked for. Don’t think the necessary electromagnetic spectrum analysis equipment (and people) are very common.
    - mrguyorama 2y ago
      >Don’t think the necessary electromagnetic spectrum analysis equipment (and people) are very common. You don't think people are actively monitoring the electromagnetic spectrum, in a US embassy? Why in the world do you think that?
    - rcxdude 2y ago
      In general, no. In an embassy? Hell yes.
    - wildzzz 2y ago
      Technical Surveillance Countermeasures (TSCM) is a lucrative business and it's not hard or that expensive to setup equipment that can monitor the spectrum 24/7.
myhf 2y ago
this is hacker news, we test in production
a0123 2y ago
A wonder weapon that makes the enemy feel hangover. Damn, I don't know who financed it but they need to get their money back.
- Spooky23 2y ago
  You lack knowledge and imagination. The Russians have done stuff like burying passive microphones inside of building materials. The notion that they would direct something at those devices to activate them is neither fantastical or foolish to investigate.
  - amy-petrik-214 2y ago
    I mean the ruskies cooked up this guy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thing_(listening_device) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thing_(listening_device) Invented by THE theremin. Yes, the instrument, theremin, the wacky one where handwaves and suck around some metal stick make funky horror movie noises, there was a Dr. theremin who invented that, and also this. Anyway, it was a "passive radio device" (given as a "gift") whereby if radio waves are projected onto the device it shall convolute said waves with sound waves of the room and then back-project a signal of radio waves with voice data overlayed, which can be read. Fancy at that sounds it is trivially low tech and simple. Very analog.
- frankharv 2y ago
  More likely equipment on the roof is causing this. They don't tell you what equipment is on the roof.

zoklet-enjoyer 2y ago

Why do you think it's a prototype? Why don't you consider that it possibly malfunctioned or the user was inexperienced?

piaste 2y ago
See my reply to schiffern above.

0xbadcafebee 2y ago

Rational thought goes out the window when people hear a good story. When someone a long time ago (Victorian era? somebody correct me) started circulating a story people from ancient times up until the 19th century drank a lot of wine and beer because they didn't know how to find clean water, an amazing number of people repeated it as if it were a fact. Despite the fact that there was no evidence to support it (other than the people repeating the story), there was evidence against it (many ancient writers describe the use of clean water and how/where to find it), and it made no sense (if they couldn't find clean water, why didn't they all just die when they didn't have wine and beer? what about the billions of uneducated rural people today that get along fine without treated water and don't drink wine or beer?). When we hear a good story, we want to believe it, so we don't think too hard about it.

jncfhnb 2y ago
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aqua_vitae https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aqua_vitae https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_beer https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_beer It is very much a well documented thing. You’re incorrectly reasoning that since it wasn’t the only strategy ubiquitous everywhere and all the time that it just not have been real
- dannyobrien 2y ago
  could you point to the specific part of those Wikipedia entries that says that very large quantities of these drinks were taken because of the difficulty of finding clean water? Or were you making another point here?
  - christianqchung 2y ago
    It's not in there, I just read the articles. Maybe the point is about how low alcohol beer was commonly drunken, though I'm not sure how that relevant either.
    - ahoka 2y ago

paganel 2y ago

Supposedly this “weapon” had been put in place by the Russians who had used the Cubans as a proxy, maybe if not the Russians then the Chinese, either way, one of these two big nuclear powers that had almost nothing to fear from the Americans. Or so I gathered by reading “between the lines” when this story first broke out.

jt2190 2y ago

Suppose you’re a nation-state and have gathered wind that an enemy state has developed an eavesdropping technology that uses directed energy. Do you: A) allow the enemy state to use it, letting them think you don’t know it exists B) publicly accuse the enemy of having the technology, thus jeopardizing the intelligence assets who revealed its existence to you as the enemy goes on the hunt for the spies who leaked the info C) make up a story about how a bunch diplomatic personnel got sick in a way that’s consistent with some kind of directed high energy source, causing your enemy to stop using the device and recheck everything because they thought it would not be detected, but apparently it was. They don’t suspect an internal “leak”, which keeps your spies safer.

tptacek 2y ago
A.
- ithkuil 2y ago
  And indeed there is historical precedent for A (e.g. enigma). Is there any precedent for choosing C?
  - tptacek 2y ago
    It's not C.
yesco 2y ago
What in the world would be the strategic advantages of C? This would be like loudly shitting your pants so you have an excuse to leave a party early without making the host feel bad. With over 1000 people involved, this whole Havana syndrome thing has disrupted the United States diplomatic efforts on an international scale, the constant rotation of embassy diplomats over this has had real world impact, even if non-obvious. While elaborate conspiracies are nothing new to the intelligence community, I think this would go beyond elaborate and into the realm of insane.
- amy-petrik-214 2y ago

anon84873628 2y ago

This logic is good as a first approximation but completely breaks down in situations like this. In geopolitics there are simply so many unknown variables that it is completely inscrutable from the outside. Plus, state actors do seemingly dumb and irrational things all the time. Also, maybe the FUD caused was a desirable outcome in its own right.

tapcheck 2y ago

> A) on your own citizens (whether willing, deceived, or coerced) It’s A. Testing of surveillance among other things. Source: me and my friends stuck in here

lupusreal 2y ago

If they did A or B before C, you wouldn't know about it.

tim333 2y ago

Well the nation state we are talking about here is Russia. They are known to do things like invade countries, hack US systems and emails and on. Their behaviour seems weird to me but they have form. It's quite likely Unit 29155 of the Russian GRU, who did the Skipal poisonings and blew up an arms dump in Finland. I think they saw Albert Averyanov, the son of the brigade commander mucking about with equipment in a van outside one of the attacks. (some Guardian stuff https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/01/havana-syndrome-linked-to-russian-unit-media-investigation-suggests https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/01/havana-syndrom...)

op27 2y ago

Patents for such microwave-type weapons do exist: https://patents.google.com/patent/RU2526478C2/en https://patents.google.com/patent/RU2526478C2/en Method and Device of Microwave Electromagnetic Impact at Trespasser https://patents.google.com/patent/US7841989B2/en https://patents.google.com/patent/US7841989B2/en Electromagnetic Personnel Interdiction Control Method and System https://patents.google.com/patent/CN106643287A/en https://patents.google.com/patent/CN106643287A/en Method and System for Eliminating Fighting Strength of Opposing Combatant Using Electromagnetic Wave http://www.gbppr.net/mil/havana http://www.gbppr.net/mil/havana You can use the microwave auditory effect with a modulation at the resonant frequency of the target's skull to "induce pain."

mu53 2y ago

I think the weapon is tested and understood. The value is in disruption. Headaches are not just headaches, but also intimidation and harassment. When there is a person working a case important to a state actor, if that person is delayed a week due to a health problem, that case is delayed a week. If they develop permanent health issues and have to leave, the case starts from zero with a new investigator. The technology is unprecedented and doesn't provoke retaliation because the US either can't prove it happened or won't declassify documents to show the technology exists. All the other, more conventional methods can be easily traced and retaliated The agent that was allegedly targetted has a similar opinion to this. This is the 60 minutes episode where they talk about it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COWTBEl1rRc&pp=ygURNjAgbWludXRlcyBoYXZhbmE%3D https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COWTBEl1rRc&pp=ygURNjAgbWlud...

autoexec 2y ago

> Suppose you are a nation-state, hostile to the USA, that has developed a directed energy weapon. Why assume a hostile nation-state and not just USA doing more testing on its own people. It's just something we do.