Live data from Hacker News

The Swedish Kings of Cyberwar

nybooks.com

91–94 of 94 posts

Re: The Swedish Kings of Cyberwar

#91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The west hasnt invaded anyone or shot down any airliners though has it?

We've been invading random places in the middle east for decades. We're invading some right now.

In the context of Russia and aggression, who is more aggressive, the West or Russia? I said Russia was invading and attacking, the west isn't.

Re: The Swedish Kings of Cyberwar

#92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We've been invading random places in the middle east for decades. We're invading some right now.

In the context of Russia and aggression, who is more aggressive, the West or Russia? I said Russia was invading and attacking, the west isn't.

but the west is doing that

Re: The Swedish Kings of Cyberwar

#93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They have? I must've missed the announcement stating this about what Snowden told the world. Care to expand on it?

Pretty much everybody in Silicon Valley knows how wrong Snowden was about PRISM. Unlike The Guardian, The New York Times interviewed actual engineers and got the story correct from the very beginning. Here is a competent explanation of how Snowden didn't understand that DITU is an FBI department and not a bulk collection system on internet companies' networks: https://medium.com/@alecmuffett/how-to-talk-about-prism-a…

> Pretty much everybody in Silicon Valley

Really? Do you have the numbers to back that up?

Re: The Swedish Kings of Cyberwar

#94
post #3

Interesting read for a variety of reasons. As a countryman of Sweden, I think it's sad that we've been playing lapdog throughout history. Germany during WW2, and now the US. The article refers to much less publicized occurances, but there's also lesser stories (but important signaling) like the piratebay court cases farce. Is Russia up next as our masters, when they want to secure their fiber pipeline? It's in cases…

I don't quite understand this lapdog argument. For obvious geopolitical reasons, Russia is an existential threat to Sweden (and Finland, where I'm from, as well as many others of its neighbours) and seeking support from other major powers - the USA, and European integration - is quite natural because USA is not an existential threat to Sweden specifically. (EU is perhaps a little bit more so, particularly with some of the highly idealistic policies it has been up to).

In WW2, what should Sweden have done? Looking from the place that lies between you and Russia, I think the Swedish policy was the wisest it can adopt and it succeeded very well: keep out of the war, keep up the defenses, do not antagonize anyone enough to test those defenses. And I appreciate the support Sweden gave to my country which was actually at war against the clear threat to Sweden, USSR, and and the endgame, against the has-been threat of Germany during Lapland war.

Post reply on HN