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

Florida GOP consultant admits he worked with Guccifer 2.0, analyzing hacked data

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–87 of 87 posts

Re: Florida GOP consultant admits he worked with Guccifer 2.0, analyzing hacked data

#81

Post by dang »

hsod wrote: post #79
pdkl95 wrote: post #62

The Russia/"hacked election" meme is amazing. With very little actual evidence , careful use of linguistic framing, and a lot of angry rhetoric on all sides, the public was successfully scared into wasting their time and energy fighting among themselves over hearsay and rumor, instead of addressing any of the numerous actual, known problems that are already known and far more likely to impact the average citizen. If…

With all the stuff that's come out over the past six months, I don't see how you can dismiss it out of hand like this. For anyone reading who is not super engaged with these matters, please know that this is a lot more than just a "meme". Here's a comprehensive timeline if you want to take a deep dive: https://lawfareblog.com/realnews-trump-et-laffaire-russe-res... But I'll just list a simple sequence of three verifi…

> It almost feels like a kind of gaslighting, like you're trying to confuse people and muddy the waters.

Please don't let such insinuations of bad faith creep into your comments on HN.

There is widespread disagreement about this matter (e.g. the GP comment was both upvoted and downvoted, obviously not all by trolls) and those who disagree need to remain civil on HN. That includes (a) responding to the argument and (b) assuming good faith.

Re: Florida GOP consultant admits he worked with Guccifer 2.0, analyzing hacked data

#82

Post by dang »

ItendToDisagree wrote: post #65

1) Russia is not a "European" country. Though it does exert influence in that sphere and has a 'European Russia'. Anecdotally most Russians I've met would bristle at Russia being called a "European" territory. 2) If Manafort, Flynn, Sessions, etc had non-shady dealings with Russia you would think they wouldn't have to be so shady about how they present those dealings. Sessions wouldn't have to explicitly commit perju…

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14424279 and marked it off-topic.

Re: Florida GOP consultant admits he worked with Guccifer 2.0, analyzing hacked data

#83

Post by dang »

RandVal30141 wrote: post #54
baursak wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That is not really a critical look. It is "but Russians wouldn't possibly do that this way" rehashed several times over. You posted this comment 7 minutes after I posted the link. 6 minutes prior to that, you posted another comment in this thread, so I know you haven't immediately started reading the article. Since the article is quite long, I highly doubt that you've read it. And no, none of the presented argument…

>And no, none of the presented arguments there are "but Russians wouldn't possibly do that this way". "“If the guys are really good,” says Chris Finan, CEO of Manifold Technology, “they’re not leaving much evidence or they’re leaving evidence to throw you off the scent entirely.” How plausible is it that Russian intelligence services would fail even to attempt such a fundamental step?" "On the other hand, sloppiness…

Your account has been using primarily (actually exclusively) for political battle. That's an abuse of this site and we ban accounts that do it, regardless of their politics. Especially when they cross into incivility, which you've done repeatedly.

The purpose of HN is to gratify intellectual curiosity, not smite enemies. The lines aren't sharply drawable, of course, and it's understandable if discussion crosses into political topics sometimes—but that's quite different from using the forum as a political or ideological platform. We use the 'primarily' test: if an account is primarily using HN that way, it's abusing the site and we ban it.

Re: Florida GOP consultant admits he worked with Guccifer 2.0, analyzing hacked data

#84

Post by hsod »

dang wrote: post #81
hsod wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With all the stuff that's come out over the past six months, I don't see how you can dismiss it out of hand like this. For anyone reading who is not super engaged with these matters, please know that this is a lot more than just a "meme". Here's a comprehensive timeline if you want to take a deep dive: https://lawfareblog.com/realnews-trump-et-laffaire-russe-res... But I'll just list a simple sequence of three verifi…

> It almost feels like a kind of gaslighting, like you're trying to confuse people and muddy the waters. Please don't let such insinuations of bad faith creep into your comments on HN. There is widespread disagreement about this matter (e.g. the GP comment was both upvoted and downvoted, obviously not all by trolls) and those who disagree need to remain civil on HN. That includes (a) responding to the argument and (b…

sorry, edited

Re: Florida GOP consultant admits he worked with Guccifer 2.0, analyzing hacked data

#85

Post by pdkl95 »

dang wrote: post #80
ItendToDisagree wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your first paragraph sounds like it contains all the markings of a successful psyops campaign to be totally honest. Whisper campaign to erode public trust and increase partisan divide while diverting attention from more important matters. If it WAS interference by any nation state (Russia or not; uncovered or not) it seems to have been pretty successful right?

> all the markings of a successful psyops campaign Internet commenters are much too quick to sling such tropes at others whom they disagree with. Please don't do that here. Insinuations of astroturfing or shillage are not allowed on HN without evidence, and this goes beyond even that.

I could easily be mistaken, but I think that wasn't intended to be an accusation/insinuation?

> ... sounds like it contains ...

I interpreted that as referring to the "Russia/'hacked election' meme" having psyops-ish markings, not my paragraph. That seems to fit with the final comment about it appearing to be "pretty successful".

Re: Florida GOP consultant admits he worked with Guccifer 2.0, analyzing hacked data

#86

Post by RandVal30141 »

dang wrote: post #83
RandVal30141 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>And no, none of the presented arguments there are "but Russians wouldn't possibly do that this way". "“If the guys are really good,” says Chris Finan, CEO of Manifold Technology, “they’re not leaving much evidence or they’re leaving evidence to throw you off the scent entirely.” How plausible is it that Russian intelligence services would fail even to attempt such a fundamental step?" "On the other hand, sloppiness…

Your account has been using primarily (actually exclusively) for political battle. That's an abuse of this site and we ban accounts that do it, regardless of their politics. Especially when they cross into incivility, which you've done repeatedly. The purpose of HN is to gratify intellectual curiosity, not smite enemies. The lines aren't sharply drawable, of course, and it's understandable if discussion crosses into…

" (actually exclusively) "

I guess you didn't check my submission history then. If you want to discuss incivility, trying to frame someone up to meet the metrics for banning seems awful uncivil.

Re: Florida GOP consultant admits he worked with Guccifer 2.0, analyzing hacked data

#87

Post by dang »

RandVal30141 wrote: post #86
dang wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your account has been using primarily (actually exclusively) for political battle. That's an abuse of this site and we ban accounts that do it, regardless of their politics. Especially when they cross into incivility, which you've done repeatedly. The purpose of HN is to gratify intellectual curiosity, not smite enemies. The lines aren't sharply drawable, of course, and it's understandable if discussion crosses into…

" (actually exclusively) " I guess you didn't check my submission history then. If you want to discuss incivility, trying to frame someone up to meet the metrics for banning seems awful uncivil.

Of course I checked it. But that phrase was in parentheses for a reason: it's parenthetical. The main point holds either way.
Post reply on HN