4 ms·

CIA Erased the World Factbook with No Warning

55 points by Gaishan 8mo ago

emsign 8mo ago
Thanks, Trump.
belter 8mo ago
The war on facts has entered phase two. Facts must now submit five years of social media history for verification. Next one to go is going to be this one: https://www.cia.gov/resources/cia-maps/ https://www.cia.gov/resources/cia-maps/
Bender 8mo ago
What are people so passionate about the removal of this book and why did the CIA ever create it in the fist place? This seems out of scope to me. CIA could open source it then suggest someone with expertise in this topic take it over and get back on mission. It appears this person made an attempt at taking it over [1]. [1] - https://appecta.github.io/cia-worldfactbook/ https://appecta.github.io/cia-worldfactbook/
- hshdhdhj4444 8mo ago
  It was a key primary source for many forms of data. There are very few other sources, barring Wikipedia which isn’t a primary source, that maintain a regularly updated “fact sheet” about various countries. It was also an authoritative source for many discussions especially if you were having the conversation within the U.S. or a friendly allied country. It was well maintained and I never came across any errors despite having used it heavily. Finally it is about as consistent as possible. So, for example, if I go to Wikipedia for a certain piece of information, such as population, etc. how Wikipedia defines the population or even the boundaries of certain nations (and therefore the population) wouldn’t necessarily be consistent across countries. With this it would usually be consistent. You may disagree with the definitions but it would largely be consistent or at the very least it would be useful because this is how the CIA largely defined it, so you still have a consistent authority if not methodology.
mohragk 8mo ago
why is nobody talking about his?
- rationalist 8mo ago
  It's relatively-old news and they have... This place existed a long time before you created your account an hour ago. https://hn.algolia.com/?q=factbook https://hn.algolia.com/?q=factbook
K0balt 8mo ago
All part of the crusade to reduce USA relevance and soft power. Sad to see, but understandable from the point of view of BRICS bros. They’re having a moment, to be sure.
ChrisArchitect 8mo ago
Discussion last week: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46891794 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46891794 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46899808 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46899808

55 points by Gaishan 8mo ago

Thanks, Trump.

The war on facts has entered phase two. Facts must now submit five years of social media history for verification. Next one to go is going to be this one: https://www.cia.gov/resources/cia-maps/ https://www.cia.gov/resources/cia-maps/

Bender 8mo ago

What are people so passionate about the removal of this book and why did the CIA ever create it in the fist place? This seems out of scope to me. CIA could open source it then suggest someone with expertise in this topic take it over and get back on mission. It appears this person made an attempt at taking it over [1]. [1] - https://appecta.github.io/cia-worldfactbook/ https://appecta.github.io/cia-worldfactbook/

hshdhdhj4444 8mo ago
It was a key primary source for many forms of data. There are very few other sources, barring Wikipedia which isn’t a primary source, that maintain a regularly updated “fact sheet” about various countries. It was also an authoritative source for many discussions especially if you were having the conversation within the U.S. or a friendly allied country. It was well maintained and I never came across any errors despite having used it heavily. Finally it is about as consistent as possible. So, for example, if I go to Wikipedia for a certain piece of information, such as population, etc. how Wikipedia defines the population or even the boundaries of certain nations (and therefore the population) wouldn’t necessarily be consistent across countries. With this it would usually be consistent. You may disagree with the definitions but it would largely be consistent or at the very least it would be useful because this is how the CIA largely defined it, so you still have a consistent authority if not methodology.

mohragk 8mo ago

why is nobody talking about his?

rationalist 8mo ago
It's relatively-old news and they have... This place existed a long time before you created your account an hour ago. https://hn.algolia.com/?q=factbook https://hn.algolia.com/?q=factbook

K0balt 8mo ago

All part of the crusade to reduce USA relevance and soft power. Sad to see, but understandable from the point of view of BRICS bros. They’re having a moment, to be sure.

ChrisArchitect 8mo ago

Discussion last week: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46891794 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46891794 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46899808 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46899808