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

981–990 of 1001 posts

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

#981

Post by alistproducer2 »

smsm42 wrote: post #966
alistproducer2 wrote: post #691

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with your assessment. HRC represents the "devil you know" to many people vs. "the one you don't" (Trump). A lot of how people feel is fueled by our hyperbolic, news-as-entertainment industry, but not all of it. It's not irrational paranoia to believe your government operates as a separate entity, one that is not subject to the rule of law. From the Iraq war, to torture, to retroactively legal bulk collection,…

Nobody gives anybody ability to destroy humanity, no need for histrionics. We don't have elections for God or Emperor, just President, whose powers are large but limited. This is what the whole idea of limited government with independent branches is about. The same idea the current President is working so hard to destroy.

While there is a chain of command that could potentially stop a rogue president from unilaterally ordering a nuclear strike, at the end of the day the POTUS has an immense power in his ability to order a nuclear strike.

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

#982

Post by wildmusings »

FireBeyond wrote: post #562
wildmusings wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unlikely, there are clearly moves being made today against Russian-backed and allegedly Russian-backed propaganda outfits. RT just had its bank accounts frozen in the UK as well. Also, have you ever heard of LTE?

It's "unlikely"? No, you're right, clearly the most obvious motive is conspiracy. Also, other people have reported, and it's pretty common in a lot of embassies, not just the Ecuadorian, that cell phones are either actively jammed or the embassy is built as a Faraday cage. I had no cell service in the US embassy in Sydney, despite being in the middle of a capital city within 10 ft of a window.

And of course, I was right: https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/788369924175441920

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

#983

Post by freehunter »

pavlov wrote: post #556
freehunter wrote: post #542

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The general idea is Trump will be so negative that everyone will swing so far away from that brand of politics that even Hillary Clinton will be toxic to support. That everyone will wake up and see that xenophobia isn't a joke, our foreign policy isn't as productive as it could be, and that we've been wrong all along. If Clinton gets elected, nothing will change. If Trump gets elected, the hope is that it will dip ne…

"We've been wrong all along" -- does a nation ever just wake up like that, except perhaps Japan after Hiroshima? The Weimar Republic was broken in many ways, and many Germans essentially voted against it in the 1933 elections... That example of "creative destruction of a democracy using its own tools" didn't work out great.

Australia had a mass shooting with 35 people dead in the mid 90s and basically the very next day they all handed over their guns and went almost completely gun-free.

One example of a nation deciding overnight that the way they've done things in the past was not the way they wanted to continue.

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

#984

Post by smsm42 »

alistproducer2 wrote: post #981
smsm42 wrote: post #966

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody gives anybody ability to destroy humanity, no need for histrionics. We don't have elections for God or Emperor, just President, whose powers are large but limited. This is what the whole idea of limited government with independent branches is about. The same idea the current President is working so hard to destroy.

While there is a chain of command that could potentially stop a rogue president from unilaterally ordering a nuclear strike, at the end of the day the POTUS has an immense power in his ability to order a nuclear strike.

This whole nuclear strike thing is a canard, nobody is going to nuclear strike anybody. Yes, there's a chain of command, and also Trump is not some Hollywood supervillain. He is a real estate developer, a conman and a blowhard, not a Doctor Evil. So we need to stop discussing Hollywood scenarios and start discussing real issues the country is facing.

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

#985

Post by smsm42 »

mentalpiracy wrote: post #810
smsm42 wrote: post #646

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That depends on what is damaging. Is evidence of collusion and cooperation between DNC, media (including sending articles for approval, leaking supposedly secret interview questions and creating content at the request of the campaign, to be published as independently created) and Clinton campaign to get Clinton elected damaging? It might be if you value free press and honest election process, or it might be OK for yo…

Slightly orthogonal to your #5: are you in a current job role where you ever bring up the topic of your customers or your clients in casual discussion? Do you ever refer to either group in less-than-stellar terms? For my part, I do both. I have bitched and kvetched at times about my clients being cripplingly needy, aggressively brain dead, and the like. I certainly wouldn't say it to their faces, and it doesn't mean…

I would never ever use such language in work email. You are always one wrong click away from everything being sent to your clients or to the whole wide world. There's a "New York Times principle" applicable to work emails - don't write anything you couldn't deal with if it were on the front page of the New York Times.

Now, if I were talking one on one with peers over beers, that's a different matter. There is much more freedom and it would allow some things said which are not meant to be heard by anybody not in the audience.

> People everywhere bitch about the outsiders they have to deal with in language that would never be used in business proper.

This is not exactly business - those are people that pretend to be champions of those "needy latinos" and represent them. It's a higher bar than just business transaction - I would have no problem doing business with a person I disagree with on everything and who maybe secretly hates me, as long as the business end is fine I'm fine. But I probably prefer to choose somebody else to represent me and speak for me.

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

#986

Post by shireboy »

xenadu02 wrote: post #685
shireboy wrote: post #592

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As long as you hold Michael Moore to the same standard.

> As long as you hold Michael Moore to the same standard. I know you're trying to be dismissive with your glib comment but let me tell you: I do hold him to the same standard and I find him to be a jackass. That doesn't change the fact that James O'Keefe is a convicted criminal (attempted to wiretap Sen. Mary Landrieu's office). It also doesn't change the fact that he heavily edited the ACORN video to skew the story,…

Glib maybe, but I'm really glad to hear there are people who are equally discerning of Moore. I know plenty of people who aren't.

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

#988

Post by FireBeyond »

wildmusings wrote: post #982
FireBeyond wrote: post #562

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's "unlikely"? No, you're right, clearly the most obvious motive is conspiracy. Also, other people have reported, and it's pretty common in a lot of embassies, not just the Ecuadorian, that cell phones are either actively jammed or the embassy is built as a Faraday cage. I had no cell service in the US embassy in Sydney, despite being in the middle of a capital city within 10 ft of a window.

And of course, I was right: https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/788369924175441920

I'm not sure how this "proves" you were right.

"Wikileaks says Wikileaks was stopped from posting, according to what people told Wikileaks".

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

#989

Post by zamalek »

jonwachob91 wrote: post #467
zamalek wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Demonstrate their power to kill at will and their willingness to do so. As history has shown, you cut off the head of one state problem and then you have six problems. Be it Osama, Ulbricht or Assange. Two of those three problems could have been solved permanently by other means (decriminilization and thorough transparency, respectively). Dogma seems to rule our rulers. Silencing Assange, by whatever means they cho…

Are you honestly suggesting that UBL, Ulbricht, and Assange deserve to be treated the same way? Cause killing THOUSANDS of innocent citizens around the world is the same as leaking state secrets. I'll refrain from commenting ill about Ulbricht on this site...

> Are you honestly suggesting that UBL, Ulbricht, and Assange deserve to be treated the same way?

I specifically used language that steered clear of that incinuation. "State problem", not "problem in general." "As history has shown." I was referring only to the similarities regarding the outcome of offing the leaders of those respective communities, as well as how state leadership simply refuses to reflect on their past actions.

I really struggle to find how you drew that conclusion out of what I wrote. There was nothing concerning that subject, never mind a suggestion - in fact it was quite the opposite:

* Ulbricht would have had no market, if drug abuse was treated as a health problem and not a criminal problem.

* Assange would have had nothing to leak, if the state wasn't make shady deals.

* I can't think of any effective solution to terrorism. Making a demonstration is all we have.

"two of those three problems."

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

#990

Post by SamBam »

shard972 wrote: post #950
SamBam wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow. Screenshot? (For those not aware, (((echo parenthesis))) are an anti-semitic symbol used by white supremacists to highlight people who are Jewish.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_parentheses Edit: Wow, here it is: http://www.dailydot.com/layer8/wikileaks-echoes-tweet-anti-s... Most of our critics have 3 (((brackets around their names))) & have black-rim glasses. i.e. most of our critics are Jewish. Presuma…

> (For those not aware, (((echo parenthesis))) are an anti-semitic symbol used by white supremacists to highlight people who are Jewish. Then why do I see self proclaimed jews on twitter with the walls? I though it was a joke.... Considering it's... twitter.

Because they're reclaiming it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple_parentheses#Response
Post reply on HN