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

Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

621–630 of 1001 posts

Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'

#621

Post by saint_fiasco »

airesQ wrote: post #601
saint_fiasco wrote: post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It says pre-commitment so it looks like a dead man switch. If something really bad happens to Assange and someone releases documents about Kerry/Ecuador/FCO we can look at the hashes and see if they match. That way we know it's not some fake leak by an opportunist.

If that is assassination-insurance should those bytestrings be keys to decrypt files that are already in the wild? Anyhow, I find the tweets very interesting. But I lack the context to know what they mean. Were those tweeted before the blackout? After? The UK FOC thing is particularly interesting. This might sound silly, but perhaps somebody at MI5 was not happy the possibility of Foreign Office correspondence being…

They were tweeted just before announcing the blackout. My guess is that when the blackout happened they tweeted the pre-comitment as soon as they could just in case.

They are not the keys because nothing that terrible happened yet. All they say is that they have files on those topics, and if someone in the future releases keys to some files, and those decrypted files' signature is as it says on the tweet, then they must come from Wikileaks, since they posted that signature.

Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'

#622

Post by roywiggins »

monocasa wrote: post #606
FireBeyond wrote: post #532

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Consequences of his own making. Don't make it out to be something forced upon him against his will.

Couldn't you make the same argument for nearly everyone who's jailed?

It's more like hiding in a friend's attic to avoid being arrested and claiming you're being imprisoned.

Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'

#623

Post by [deleted] »

tlb wrote: post #599
anthony_romeo wrote: post #237

We're in the middle of some crazy propaganda war right now, and it's been this way for quite a while. It became completely transparent when the Podesta e-mails were released mere minutes after Trump's videos regarding possible sexual assault were released. Ever since the DNC leaks and the subsequent accusations against Russia, it became clear to me that, at some point, the attempts to tarnish Wikileaks's name was to…

Wikileaks's foundational theory was there were bad organizations and good organizations, and random leaks would impose a 'secrecy tax' on the bad ones, forcing them to take extreme opsec measures which would make them less effective, and this would gradually bend the moral arc of the universe towards goodness. But be may be seeing another outcome: the greatest tax is on the organizations where its supporters care abo…

[deleted]

Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'

#624

Post by yarou »

Mikeb85 wrote: post #525
the_duke wrote: post #483

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every politician has public and private positions. That's just how politics works. The view the plebs demands often don't align with either the politicians vision for the country, what's possible near or long term, or the people you are indebted to (donors, etc). In many cases it's acceptable and even advisable, in my opinion. A head of state has insight into facts and knowledge of others about realities and facts th…

> But if you have the choice between that and Trump, I cannot imagine how you could choose the latter. Status quo vs. something different. The status quo is that Obama/Hillary have destabilised countless countries, and are sabre rattling against Russia, possibly leading to an eventual nuclear war. By contrast, Trump is promising less wars, less interventionism, and otherwise is a relative wildcard with a penchant tow…

You are very astute, I only wish that my fellow countrymen would wake up to the truth.

I truly believe Trump is a populist reformer, trying to help the Everyman.

But keep in mind that even though the Populares were nominally "for the people", they only used them for their own ends. They were very much as political as the Optimates.

It's a sad state of affairs when a relative madman looks like a saner alternative to a truly sick and twisted authoritarian war-hawk.

But perhaps a madman is needed to tear down this malfunctioning and corrupt system where a few elites benefit at the expense of the common man.

It wouldn't surprise me if this election is the last one we'll ever have.

Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'

#625

Post by bazillion »

sytelus wrote: post #583
anthony_romeo wrote: post #237

We're in the middle of some crazy propaganda war right now, and it's been this way for quite a while. It became completely transparent when the Podesta e-mails were released mere minutes after Trump's videos regarding possible sexual assault were released. Ever since the DNC leaks and the subsequent accusations against Russia, it became clear to me that, at some point, the attempts to tarnish Wikileaks's name was to…

Is there something really damaging in Wikileak emails? Even on Fox News they are not able to mention anything that is at the level of Trump tapes. Sure, there is some amusing stuff and quipes by aggressive campaign staff about opponents but nothing that can points to big corruption directly on Clinton's part. The media coverage is unexpectedly very low but I can see why media will want to put these rather boring emai…

Here's a summary of most of what has been found in the emails so far:

https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/57vefh/podesta_...

Some of the things found were:

1. The Goldman Sachs speeches, showing that Hillary has a "public and private position", is still against gay marriage, wants open borders, wants to enact gun bans, and wants to establish a hemispheric common market.

2. John Podesta (Hillary's campaign chair) giving a list of "needy latinos" to call.

3. The DNC planning fake Trump assault scandals

4. Clinton Campaign Discusses Which Emails To "Hold" Hours After Subpoena

...all among many, many other things. We still have another 10k Podesta emails to go.

Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'

#626

Post by gotchange »

AvenueIngres wrote: post #363
anthony_romeo wrote: post #237

We're in the middle of some crazy propaganda war right now, and it's been this way for quite a while. It became completely transparent when the Podesta e-mails were released mere minutes after Trump's videos regarding possible sexual assault were released. Ever since the DNC leaks and the subsequent accusations against Russia, it became clear to me that, at some point, the attempts to tarnish Wikileaks's name was to…

Directly related to what you are saying, DNC consultants and execs caught on tape explaining how they plant fake Trump supporters at rallies to disrupt them or get negative media coverage. It is pretty interesting from: 1/ a partisan PoV, 2/ a methodological PoV; you are right there is a war for information that is being waged. [1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IuJGHuIkzY

How's this thing incriminating or considered wrongdoing?

This is like in football (soccer) where it's against the rules to grab your opponent inside the box when they're taking a free kick on your goal but everyone is doing it anyway, it becomes pointless to complain and moan about it. The same goes for hand-checking in basketball and I'm sure you could find analogies in American football as well.

Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'

#627

Post by cbr »

whamlastxmas wrote: post #520
mtberatwork wrote: post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure I entirely buy this, Charity Watch gives the Clinton Foundation high marks. [1] You might be able to make some arguments for crossing some ethical lines, but to say they have done "countless extremely illegal and unethical things" is pushing the conspiratorial line. [1] https://www.charitywatch.org/ratings-and-metrics/bill-hillar...

That website is frankly misleading. Their classifications of "overhead" are ridiculous. Look at the actual filing from the Clinton Foundation itself: https://www.clintonfoundation.org/sites/default/files/clinto... Page 18 and 19. Out of a budget of $217 million, they spent $34 million on direct program expenditures. That's about 16%, not 88% as your link would lead us to believe. Additionally, what is this money spen…

If you read Dylan Matthews' investigation [1] a major takeaway is that the foundation's impact comes primarily from influencing corporations and governments. For example, to make AIDS drugs cheaper they convinced the manufacturers to accept much lower prices in exchange for much larger volume, and they convinced governments to make very large orders.

If the foundation were trying to fight AIDS by directly funding the distribution of treatments the numbers in the report would be pretty bad, but that's not the picture here.

[1] http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/9/22/12893444/cl...

Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'

#628

Post by AvenueIngres »

FireBeyond wrote: post #584
puppetmaster3 wrote: post #264

14 Wikileaks associates are also cut off from the internet: https://twitter.com/danrolle/status/788019208453890048

I love the double standards on that thread: "This happened! Why? We said so! Gospel truth!" Interfering with the election? "Why? Because they said so? Fool!"

I know man this is crazy, people are considering persecuted OpenGov activists as more trustworthy and credible than the fricking US Government i.e the most ethical institution in the free world.

By the way, did you hear the news? CIA has proof that the Ecuadorian embassy in the UK is hiding WMDs in their basement. What a world!

Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'

#629

Post by [deleted] »

zzleeper wrote: post #611
tptacek wrote: post #602

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People keep saying that. It is the single most common rebuttal given to this argument. But I can't understand how it makes any sense at all. It's a two-person race. It's zero-sum. To materially oppose one candidate is to materially support the other. That is, i assume, why Trump's campaign keeps claiming they coordinate directly with Assange through an intermediary. Can someone (calmly) explain why anyone should take…

I think Assange doesn't care that much who is elected, as long as it's not Hillary (because of the things she did against him and the things she promised to do). In this case his only choice is Trump, but it could have been others.

[deleted]

Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'

#630

Post by mikeash »

FireBeyond wrote: post #586
mikeash wrote: post #565

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I meant in this particular case it would be weird, because it would mean that the perpetrators are somehow blocking mobile data but neglected to block SMS.

Right, and there are ways you can consider the validity of either method, but to block SMS would mean blocking voice. Perhaps a temporary data hiccup might be a more realistic solution (or simulation, if malicious) versus "Call cannot be connected".

I think a state actor could filter at will, since they could MITM the connection and pass stuff through selectively. Not that I can see why they would bother. Although I can't see why they would take this action at all, which is why I don't believe the story in the first place.
Post reply on HN