Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google tags Wikileaks as a dangerous site

google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 167 posts

Re: Google tags Wikileaks as a dangerous site

#101

Post by nl »

colordrops wrote: post #95

Now it is clear that you are not merely ignorant but actively obfuscating and misinforming. From your company's website: "Mission: to undertake impactful research, development, education and training that delivers outcomes to national security and other data intensive sectors" While I don't doubt that you work on disease modeling, your company's mission statement makes it clear that national security is its main focu…

This feels pretty much like a personal attack. It feels to me like you are losing the argument, so trying to undermine my credibility.

I completely disagree with your assessment that I've made factual errors. At the very least, the replies you are receiving show that there is a fair amount of disagreement on this.

I'd note that you chose not to respond to my points about the link you posted.

But since you've decided to show such an interest in me, check my comment history and you'll see my position on this. Here's a previous comment[1] from 3 years ago (before I started in my current job) where I though that PRISM is actually a reporting system (and that explains why the reporting is pretty confused). I think I was wrong about that comment - it does cover the collection process too. But at the time there was a great deal of confusion - read the thread[2]. The context is important - it was on a story where Google denied any involvement in PRISM.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5910580

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5910297

Re: Google tags Wikileaks as a dangerous site

#102

Post by nl »

imaginenore wrote: post #94
nl wrote: post #47

The biggest downside to the NSA revelations is how quickly people accept conspiracy theories. Wikileaks just released a big email dump. People looked at it with Google Chrome, and it detected malware in the archive. That blacklisted the site it was downloaded from. There is no big "Google is protecting the Democrats and hates Wikileaks". Wikileaks was serving malware, and Google detected it.

So if I email malware with Gmail, should Google label Gmail as dangerous?

No, but if you downloaded it from the Gmail website it would be possible. (Of course Gmail has the same malware detection so it wouldn't happen, but in theory..)

Here's the design document[1]. I think the area you are interested in is "Threat Details Collection".

[1] https://www.chromium.org/developers/design-documents/safebro...

Re: Google tags Wikileaks as a dangerous site

#104

Post by douche »

Natsu wrote: post #92
cLeEOGPw wrote: post #86

HN is a liberal safe space. Of course any article that reflects badly on liberal ideas will be removed. that political-story "gravity" is the same thing as reddit's "modified algorithm" to hide /r/The_Donald. There is an enormous push of a certain agenda from all major corporations in US, neither HN, nor reddit or google is an exception.

In this case, the algorithm is open, so there's no guesswork: http://www.righto.com/2009/06/how-does-newsyc-ranking-work.h... HN has normally been transparent whenever they modify something manually.

I've been noticing a pattern lately where anything that touches on a few different hot-button issues gets blasted away with flags the second it creeps onto the front page. I don't think its the mods having anything to do with it, but it feels a little broken.

Re: Google tags Wikileaks as a dangerous site

#105

Post by mamon »

nl wrote: post #47

The biggest downside to the NSA revelations is how quickly people accept conspiracy theories. Wikileaks just released a big email dump. People looked at it with Google Chrome, and it detected malware in the archive. That blacklisted the site it was downloaded from. There is no big "Google is protecting the Democrats and hates Wikileaks". Wikileaks was serving malware, and Google detected it.

Wikileaks itself is no angel. Have you ever wondered how they get the information they publish? The simple and most probable answer is: Julian Assagne is a Russian agent, working with GRU. That's also the reason why he helped Snowden get assylium in Russia after the whole NSA surveilance thing.

Re: Google tags Wikileaks as a dangerous site

#106

Post by nl »

gkoberger wrote: post #69
nl wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Work with government" means lots of things. The NSA leaks proved that the NSA hacked Google's network infrastructure. That isn't exactly "working with the government". There are other things where Google does work with the US and other governments. I believe they pass Flu Trends data to the CDC for example.... And which government branch do you think that Google is working with here? The #DNCLeaks thing is a anti-Hi…

You can't call something an "anti-Hillary story" if it's an uneditorialized dump of emails. Of course it's mostly Bernie supporters pushing it: the leaks show the DNC worked against Bernie while colluding with Hillary's camp. Hillary and her supporters won't talk about it because it favors them, the DNC won't because they violated bylaws requiring impartiality, and the media won't report because the leak shows they'v…

You can't call something an "anti-Hillary story" if it's an uneditorialized dump of emails. Of course it's mostly Bernie supporters pushing it: the leaks show the DNC worked against Bernie while colluding with Hillary's camp.

I think we mostly agree here? By the "#DNCLeak story" I mean the analysis of the emails as well as the leak itself - that's what is happening under that hashtag.

the media won't report because the leak shows they've been taking orders from the DNC.

The only thing I've seen on this is the "Chuck, this must stop" email. It's pretty clear that was a wish, not an order (otherwise why the follow up call). Anyone who's watched any political drama on TV has seen how often politicians offices call journalists to complain - I don't see much different here?

Also, the media is reporting the leaks, pretty heavily. The NY Times[1] and CNN[2] amongst plenty of others both have major stories.

I think I agree with everything else you say.

(If it matters, I don't think Hillary is a great candidate, and wouldn't class myself as a supporter. I would have liked to see a much broader set of candidates in the Democratic race.)

[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/23/us/politics/dnc-emails-san...

[2] http://edition.cnn.com/2016/07/22/politics/dnc-wikileaks-ema...

Re: Google tags Wikileaks as a dangerous site

#107

Post by jug »

gkoberger wrote: post #49
nl wrote: post #47

The biggest downside to the NSA revelations is how quickly people accept conspiracy theories. Wikileaks just released a big email dump. People looked at it with Google Chrome, and it detected malware in the archive. That blacklisted the site it was downloaded from. There is no big "Google is protecting the Democrats and hates Wikileaks". Wikileaks was serving malware, and Google detected it.

Really? The takeaway I got from the NSA revelations was that it's now completely reasonable to assume that Google/FB/Twitter/etc are working directly with the government or politicians. Twitter removed #DNCLeaks right while it was the top trending topic today. Reddit paid staff has been suspending people who talk about Correct The Record or the DNC leaks. Facebook admitted to filtering certain topics due to political…

I don't think Google are using this as part of a conspiracy. IIRC they have even labelled their own sites, and at some point they blocked The Pirate Bay but cleared it once bad ads were removed.

Re: Google tags Wikileaks as a dangerous site

#108

Post by ihsw »

Natsu wrote: post #71
gkoberger wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? The takeaway I got from the NSA revelations was that it's now completely reasonable to assume that Google/FB/Twitter/etc are working directly with the government or politicians. Twitter removed #DNCLeaks right while it was the top trending topic today. Reddit paid staff has been suspending people who talk about Correct The Record or the DNC leaks. Facebook admitted to filtering certain topics due to political…

And on HN, the stories about it that were on the front page vanished pretty quickly. Of course, I think that might be due to political-story related 'gravity' at work. I didn't see dang or anyone else comment, though, and they normally do if they've done any sort of moderation.

HN mods will remove anything that isn't tangentially related to tech.

In this case, since it's Google, it can stay.

Re: Google tags Wikileaks as a dangerous site

#109

Post by ihsw »

gkoberger wrote: post #49
nl wrote: post #47

The biggest downside to the NSA revelations is how quickly people accept conspiracy theories. Wikileaks just released a big email dump. People looked at it with Google Chrome, and it detected malware in the archive. That blacklisted the site it was downloaded from. There is no big "Google is protecting the Democrats and hates Wikileaks". Wikileaks was serving malware, and Google detected it.

Really? The takeaway I got from the NSA revelations was that it's now completely reasonable to assume that Google/FB/Twitter/etc are working directly with the government or politicians. Twitter removed #DNCLeaks right while it was the top trending topic today. Reddit paid staff has been suspending people who talk about Correct The Record or the DNC leaks. Facebook admitted to filtering certain topics due to political…

> Reddit paid staff has been suspending people who talk about Correct The Record or the DNC leaks.

Only on default subs (which is essentially "the front page" of Reddit, a site which touts itself as "the front page of the internet") is this occurring. There is heated and lengthy discussion on Reddit but limited to pro-Trump and pro-Sanders areas.

Re: Google tags Wikileaks as a dangerous site

#110

Post by DanBC »

ihsw wrote: post #108
Natsu wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And on HN, the stories about it that were on the front page vanished pretty quickly. Of course, I think that might be due to political-story related 'gravity' at work. I didn't see dang or anyone else comment, though, and they normally do if they've done any sort of moderation.

HN mods will remove anything that isn't tangentially related to tech. In this case, since it's Google, it can stay.

That's absolutely untrue.

HN mods (dang especially) frequently talk about how HN is not just for tech.

HN users flag political posts.

Post reply on HN