notveryrational

7 ms·

1.
by notveryrational 8y ago
China's situation is entirely different. 1: The Asia Pacific is "hitting the knee on the curve" and modernizing its economy. Also, it's the most populous region on earth. It's why economic forecasters call the 2000-
2.
by notveryrational 8y ago
> If there wasn't a legal risk, why would the Guardian have complied? They were at gunpoint. If there was merely a legal risk, it would have been sorted out by the courts and with lawyers. Example: Pentagon Papers, NYT. This was a n
3.
by notveryrational 8y ago
American documents were leaked to journalists and that was a legally gray problem in the UK? Don't be silly. Imagine if some Saudi documents were leaked to journalists and the American government walked into the Times and forced them t
4.
by notveryrational 8y ago
This conversation on HN can essentially be boiled down to "law versus ethics". Those supporting censorship make basic references to it being okay because it is legal. Those opposed to censorship make basic references to it being w
5.
by notveryrational 8y ago
This has actually already been determined. For instance, businesses are required to serve all colors regardless of sexual orientation, color, religion, etc. It's a regressive part of this epoch of human history that the opposite is tru
6.
by notveryrational 8y ago
The HN readership has its own fascistic tendencies, including a large portion of its membership that defends censorship, surveillance and propaganda. Increasingly, that's representative of the US population writ large.
7.
by notveryrational 8y ago
Because the UK government has a censorship program that prevented journalists from reporting on source material relevant to the interests of their citizens.
8.
by notveryrational 8y ago
When well-defined rules include "content that the government wants to suppress because it criticized them" the rules provide censorship via moderation. In this case, Facebook - presuming what they did was "follow the rules&qu
9.
by notveryrational 8y ago
No person is claiming that "moderation is censorship". Merely, this specific act of moderation was an implementation of censorship. Moderation and censorship are two different things that are not mutually exclusive.
10.
by notveryrational 8y ago
Something can be both moderation and censorship at the same time. You are presenting a false dichotomy.
11.
by notveryrational 8y ago
In no way was there an attempt to transfer risk. Facebook was a community platform where I could reach out to the people I knew and loved - my friends and family. That's the only reason I made Facebook posts. Regarding moderation - do
12.
by notveryrational 8y ago
Having been censored multiple times by tech firms, I fall squarely into one camp. During the Snowden Disclosures, I took to Facebook with the documents getting published and started to do my own summaries. Facebook implemented a policy in w
13.
by notveryrational 8y ago
Was talking here about the regulatory requirements for mortgages to be accepted in the first place as well as the rather lax regulatory regime (in practice) that was in effect at the time. Yes, Glass-Steagall's removal of the separatio
14.
by notveryrational 8y ago
Let me clarify here that I did not intend to communicate that "everything everywhere was completely 100% good except for the bad US mortgage packaging". This was my miscommunication and I own it. There were (and are) lots of probl
15.
by notveryrational 8y ago
Are we interpreting the bailout of a global US-created financial crisis "saving the world" now? Here's what happened: - The international market, particularly the Asian market, burst. - Investment went into the tech industry,
16.
by notveryrational 8y ago
Absolutely. If your system is doing "all the right security stuff" and then nobody knows about it - sure, you're secure - but nobody knows that or how you are secure. And that's a very significant problem both to a burea
17.
by notveryrational 8y ago
Real security is almost all technical and implementation. There's a very significant danger to security that policies be some kind of front line of defense, or be implemented over sound engineering practices. In almost every work env
18.
by notveryrational 8y ago
HN is for technical conversation, which includes being impressed and commenting on the state of the art. Seriously encourage reading about capabilities, especially the operations security maturity. The level of research and development is t
19.
by notveryrational 8y ago
Sorry for the opaque comment. Was gushing over the cool exploits of the "Inception Group" or "RedOctober APT" - believed but not proven to be Russian espionage. https://www.symantec.com/blogs/threat-
20.
by notveryrational 8y ago
Russia's cyber military is James Bond level cool. There are speculations (nobody can prove it) that they set up their own TOR using onion-like proxies, with a custom crypto protocol, over Shodan-discovered endpoints, through a clever u
21.
by notveryrational 8y ago
China does not do that. You've abused terminology in order to try to make the argument fit, post factum. But at least your argument has a strong thesis.
22.
by notveryrational 8y ago
> It's less aggressive than China in terms of being used to control the lives of the entire population of the country, though. I'm not sure that's true. NSA and other US domestic surveillance capabilities feed the informat
23.
by notveryrational 8y ago
US: Drone assassination program, kills based off metadata score. Global rendition and torture program. Largest prison population on the planet, exhibiting UN criticized torture, forced sterilization. China: Has no drone assassination progra
24.
Global surveillance awareness/interest over time(trends.google.com)
2 points by notveryrational 8y ago|0 comments
25.
by notveryrational 8y ago
I prefer not to confuse "a level of international influence" with global information domination.
26.
by notveryrational 8y ago
The American surveillance state feeds a global assassination and propaganda program, and seeks total information domination. The Chinese program is about homeland security and domestic stability. I am completely and entirely correct.
27.
by notveryrational 8y ago
Waaay more interested in the American surveillance state, which is global, penetrating, the best funded, attached to a global propaganda system, and sits in the hands of the world's premiere superpower. I'm also a citizen there. T
28.
by notveryrational 8y ago
And Facebook partnered with CIA to mass surveil and propagandize billions of people. It's an evil company with evil partnerships. Turns out it's obligated by law to work with CIA and only obligated by market opportunities to work
29.
by notveryrational 8y ago
I doubt it scrambles backticks. In its example on the webpage it just creates a keywork scrambler. The grammar is intact with most of the lexing.
30.
by notveryrational 8y ago
Aren't the biggest recent successes of whistleblowing websites the publication of the the Pentagon papers, HBGary Federal leaks, embassy cables, collateral damage material/videos and US global surveillance program? To my knowledg

More ›