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

Has There Been a Nuclear Incident in the Arctic?

thedrive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 258 posts

Re: Has There Been a Nuclear Incident in the Arctic?

#141

Post by acqq »

nl wrote: post #119
shard972 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Specifically: I cannot imagine that a quality news site (say the NY Times, Atlantic, or WSJ) would not mention such uncertainty. What about that news article that WaPo published about the guy who found some malware on his laptop and was blown out into this https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/russi... I don't know how you could go from a virus on a laptop to "Russia is hacking into our power grid"…

What about that news article that WaPo published about the guy who found some malware on his laptop and was blown out into this https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/russi... . I don't know how you could go from a virus on a laptop to "Russia is hacking into our power grid" unless you are being intentionally dishonest or have such an agenda that you jump at any scrap to make a story. That was terribl…

If you just read the title, you'll still conclude that the article describes a real event

"Russian operation hacked a Vermont utility, showing risk to U.S. electrical grid security, officials say"

Even if we now know it's a lie.

I'm trying to figure out what would be the proper way to modify the title to show it's wrong and to still provide the readers the insight that the paper claimed something that was debunked?

Re: Has There Been a Nuclear Incident in the Arctic?

#142

Post by metachris »

jnbiche wrote: post #79
hyperdunc wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe the site developer isn't very good. Why don't you send them an email telling them how they can fix it?

So provide them with expert advice for free? Do you think lawyers get this urge?

Never share without a fee then? Not quite the world I want to live in...

Re: Has There Been a Nuclear Incident in the Arctic?

#143

Post by rollthehard6 »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #56
omnius19 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I completely agree. It is one thing to give reasonable criticism of a specific incidence of news media misconduct. It is another thing to blanket condemn every news organization based on inaccurate hypotheticals and personal opinions with no proof. Democracy is in trouble when people lose faith in the media and independent journalism is suppressed. By all means, be a skeptical and informed consumer of the news, but d…

I feel like people have all of a sudden rushed to defend the media now that Trump is attacking it. But I feel like we've lost sight of who is probably chiefly responsible for Trump to begin with: A media framework which rewards views, leading to focus on the most outrageous and entertaining "news" over important information. The media is VERY important, I agree. But I feel we've recently decided to forget how awful t…

Characters like Trump and Farage largely owe their success to 24 hour news channels and their insatiable appetite for soundbites and headlines - those guys are non-stop controversy generators and are, as such the ideal match for rolling news.

Re: Has There Been a Nuclear Incident in the Arctic?

#144

Post by shard972 »

nl wrote: post #119
shard972 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Specifically: I cannot imagine that a quality news site (say the NY Times, Atlantic, or WSJ) would not mention such uncertainty. What about that news article that WaPo published about the guy who found some malware on his laptop and was blown out into this https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/russi... I don't know how you could go from a virus on a laptop to "Russia is hacking into our power grid"…

What about that news article that WaPo published about the guy who found some malware on his laptop and was blown out into this https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/russi... . I don't know how you could go from a virus on a laptop to "Russia is hacking into our power grid" unless you are being intentionally dishonest or have such an agenda that you jump at any scrap to make a story. That was terribl…

It's good they at least put a notice at the top but that doesn't excuse them. This is the kind of stuff Gawker does and was heavily criticized for, running a story without checking the facts because you want to be first or it fits your "narrative".

I'm not sure what else it could be without it being much worse reason.

Re: Has There Been a Nuclear Incident in the Arctic?

#146

Post by csomar »

chris_overseas wrote: post #122

I travelled on a (non-nuclear) icebreaker out from Murmansk back in 2012. On the way out to the open ocean we passed several moored nuclear powered icebreakers and other vessels in various states of decay[0]. It was both fascinating and disturbing to see - many of these had not yet been decommissioned and it seemed to me that they were huge disasters waiting to happen. In Murmansk itself there is a nuclear icebreaker…

How much does it cost for such a trip?

Re: Has There Been a Nuclear Incident in the Arctic?

#147

Post by mhneu »

blazespin wrote: post #51
matt4077 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel this vilification of the media is far overblown. Specifically: I cannot imagine that a quality news site (say the NY Times, Atlantic, or WSJ) would not mention such uncertainty. More easily provable: I challenge you to find a single article of about a disaster that includes unwarranted product recommendations (i. e. not "authorities are asking citizen to stock water and other necessities in preparation for the…

What I wish sometimes is that Chomsky would echo Trump's belief that the media is the enemy, because he's been saying it for decades. He won't, of course.

Absolutely not. Chomsky talks about the agendas that motivate the media.

That is a huge difference from demagoguery about "enemies of the people".

The best way we can fight lies in the media is by educating Americans about how to detect bias in their media sources, encouraging them to read and watch multiple news sources (not just Fox News) and letting them form their own opinions.

Re: Has There Been a Nuclear Incident in the Arctic?

#148

Post by shard972 »

hackuser wrote: post #95
shard972 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Specifically: I cannot imagine that a quality news site (say the NY Times, Atlantic, or WSJ) would not mention such uncertainty. What about that news article that WaPo published about the guy who found some malware on his laptop and was blown out into this https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/russi... I don't know how you could go from a virus on a laptop to "Russia is hacking into our power grid"…

I don't see one mistake as a meaningful sample. Of course the Washington Post makes some mistakes.

I don't see something like this as a simple mistake, to me it's closer to gross negligence. How do you write an entire article like that without anyone asking "hey so, how is this a risk?".

They wrote an entire article about the all the danger that this event shows us except the most basic questions about the hack would have quickly lead you to a realisation that there was absolutely nothing here.

They even pin it on Lazy Bear the "Elite Russian hacking group". How the hell did they did they get that conclusion from malware? Unless they were shooting entire clips from the hip.

Re: Has There Been a Nuclear Incident in the Arctic?

#150

Post by Tepix »

coldtea wrote: post #128
pratyushag2 wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are incredible pictures. What kind of camera did you use to click these?

> What kind of camera did you use to click these? This is an incredible comment. What keyboard did you use to write it? (Camera choice doesn't matter beyond certain ergonomics and certain capabilities (low noise, more room for cropping, shallow DOF, etc, a lot of which depend on the lens as well). Any $300+ DSLR can give you the exact same results, as can a lot of mirrorless with a speedy lens. And for most of the pi…

The role of the camera is generally overrated, however there are certain characteristics that you only get with expensive full frame cameras such as the Canon EOS 5D Mark III he appears to be using:

* very low noise

* very shallow DOF

* long bursts of rapid images

* weather proofing (including cold)

* improved dynamic range

* high resolution (lets you crop the part you are interested in and retain good quality)

There are also other improvements such as better autofocus.

Which means, no a $300 camera will not be good enough for some of these shots.

PS: I use a MFT camera myself and it's good enough for my needs.

Post reply on HN