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

Vietnam Deploys Cyber Warriors to Fight ‘Wrongful Views'

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 127 posts

Re: Vietnam Deploys Cyber Warriors to Fight ‘Wrongful Views'

#91

Post by jryle70 »

freeflight wrote: post #58
Para2016 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yea, totally agree with you. I hope Facebook helps the Vietnamese agents track down these people and dispose of them. The law is the law, you know.

Dispose of them? Neither the article nor the report it's based on, say anything at all about arresting people, they are pretty much only shutting down YouTube and Facebook accounts. The same has been happening in the US and plenty of other non-Communist countries, over here we just prefer calling it "War against terror" or "You broke the ToS!".

Of course, dispose is hyperbole. Still, comparing Vietnam to US or other western countries is utterly disingenuous.

Try to go there and live for a few months, see for yourself.

Re: Vietnam Deploys Cyber Warriors to Fight ‘Wrongful Views'

#92

Post by amgin3 »

adventured wrote: post #49
santoriv wrote: post #17

It's an interesting progression - 5 years ago the Vietnamese government was trying to block Facebook (it was pretty easy to get around). Then they gave up on that and allowed everyone on Facebook, and now they are more concerned with dissent so I guess they are going to patrol social media. It's interesting that they have not decided to return to their previous policy of blocking Facebook. They have some pretty stran…

The US has gotten a lot closer to Vietnam in terms of trade relations over the last 5 to 10 years. The US now regards Vietnam as a strategic interest to be aggressively developed. The US will import about $50 billion worth of goods from Vietnam in 2017. That's up from $10 billion a decade ago. That's equal to 25% of Vietnam's entire GDP. It's also almost entirely one way, it's about as pure of a trade deficit as they…

Japan, China, and Korea are all heavily investing in Vietnam as well. In HCMC, Japan is building the first of nine rapid transit metro lines in the city, and in Hanoi China is doing the same.

Re: Vietnam Deploys Cyber Warriors to Fight ‘Wrongful Views'

#93

Post by [deleted] »

unknown_apostle wrote: post #66

So is this really fundamentally different from the plans in EU and Germany? https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/call-appl... It's a dangerous illusion of modernity that you can just pick up a "high quality" newspaper or watch the news and understand what is happening in the world. Or even in your own region. One possible advantage of the total chaos of internet news is that the noise becomes so strong…

[deleted]

Re: Vietnam Deploys Cyber Warriors to Fight ‘Wrongful Views'

#94

Post by yakshaving_jgt »

nailer wrote: post #78
pjc50 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They almost certainly get a lot of reports of hate speech, and it is actually an offence, so having some level of specialist response is probably justified. What's wrong is ignoring any category of crime where there are victims, property or otherwise. London it a multi-ethnic city and in order to stay peacefully that way the more extreme provocateurs of racial and religious hatred need to be silenced. Some background…

Have you considered Diane Abbot may attract abuse (non racial, simply 'people being mean' abuse) due to being repeatedly revealed as being massively incompetent and believing she's a capable alternative for Home Secretary?

I couldn't upvote this enough. It's such a gross diversionary leftist tactic to discard legitimate criticism as prejudicial bigotry.

So, Ms Abbott receives 40% of all online abuse directed at MPs. How many instances of abuse is that? Is it 300,000? Or is it 80 million?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/diane-abbott-i...

Re: Vietnam Deploys Cyber Warriors to Fight ‘Wrongful Views'

#95

Post by jryle70 »

coldtea wrote: post #64
secret_island wrote: post #3

I'm sure they are getting their playbook from their Chinese friends. Even Japan is getting more heavy handed than they were, and in Asia, they are the most liberal of all governments in comparison. Vietnam, Laos, Thailand, all heavy handed as regards the Internet. Russia, China, most of the former Balkan states, Turkey... Brazil, even.

With the pervasive surveillance, paid troll campaigns from all parties, operations to influence media from agencies, millions of fake anti-net-neutrality messages, etc, the US is not some paragon of internet freedom either...

What you said is exactly the signs of internet freedom.

If the government had the monopoly of the media they wouldn't have to have "operations to influence media from agencies".

If anti-net-neutrality of the media there wouldn't be "millions of fake anti-net-neutrality messages".

Do you want to try to set up an anti-corruption FB account in Vietnam and see what happen?

Re: Vietnam Deploys Cyber Warriors to Fight ‘Wrongful Views'

#96

Post by rgbrenner »

nailer wrote: post #77
bovermyer wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wanted to clarify. Are you saying that drowning out reliable journalism with intentional disinformation on social media is a GOOD thing? If so... why?

Who determines reliable journalism? I'm liberal but CNN's had issued a massive amount of retractions for their Russia stories, still has the fake fish feeding article up, the Guardian had to retract their 'unarmed' front page story about the drug dealer with the gun in his car. Making shit up is commonplace, yet media censors inevitably only want to target Breitbart and right sources. It's a plain as day transparent…

Journalists are just people. Reliable journalism occurs when those people try their best to provide accurate information, and when they make a mistake they correct it. That's it. You can't expect perfection from people.

Re: Vietnam Deploys Cyber Warriors to Fight ‘Wrongful Views'

#97

Post by IIIr3228 »

benchaney wrote: post #80
bovermyer wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wanted to clarify. Are you saying that drowning out reliable journalism with intentional disinformation on social media is a GOOD thing? If so... why?

He’s saying there is to reliable journalism, and that shattering the illusion that there is is a good thing.

It's not a good thing. You risk committing a false equivalence. Saying there is no 100% reliable journalism is technically accurate, as all news organizations make mistakes and are subject to biases. But some news is more reliable than others: Reuters is not Breitbart.

Re: Vietnam Deploys Cyber Warriors to Fight ‘Wrongful Views'

#98

Post by orf »

Joeboy wrote: post #89
orf wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The charge seems ok to me, and he was not charged with hate speech. At the end of the day, 12 ordinary people came to the same conclusion, and so he is guilty. It's hardly the "big evil government cracking down on this nice man's (non existent) right to be racist". Perhaps in a one on one situation it wouldn't be a crime, but doing infront of a thousand people is clearly very bad and distressing. Perhaps it's down to…

> 12 ordinary people came to the same conclusion I'm also not in any way outraged by the outcome, but actually this was heard in a magistrates' court so there would be no jury involved. > big evil government Nah, it's kind of down to the whims of the individual judge. The wording of the statutes is pretty broad and vague, and in practice I think you inevitably have to rely on the individuals who comprise the legal sy…

Oh right, my bad, it was indeed a magistrates court. That's not great I agree, and lends a bit too much to an individual's opinion.

Re: Vietnam Deploys Cyber Warriors to Fight ‘Wrongful Views'

#99

Post by laretluval »

rgbrenner wrote: post #96
nailer wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who determines reliable journalism? I'm liberal but CNN's had issued a massive amount of retractions for their Russia stories, still has the fake fish feeding article up, the Guardian had to retract their 'unarmed' front page story about the drug dealer with the gun in his car. Making shit up is commonplace, yet media censors inevitably only want to target Breitbart and right sources. It's a plain as day transparent…

Journalists are just people. Reliable journalism occurs when those people try their best to provide accurate information, and when they make a mistake they correct it. That's it. You can't expect perfection from people.

> when those people try their best to provide accurate information

It is not enough to trust them to do their best. Journalists should be in a structure that strongly incentivizes telling the truth and strongly punishes false information. It is very unclear that US media outlets, almost all of which are highly politicized, have this property.

Re: Vietnam Deploys Cyber Warriors to Fight ‘Wrongful Views'

#100

Post by IIIr3228 »

nailer wrote: post #77
bovermyer wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wanted to clarify. Are you saying that drowning out reliable journalism with intentional disinformation on social media is a GOOD thing? If so... why?

Who determines reliable journalism? I'm liberal but CNN's had issued a massive amount of retractions for their Russia stories, still has the fake fish feeding article up, the Guardian had to retract their 'unarmed' front page story about the drug dealer with the gun in his car. Making shit up is commonplace, yet media censors inevitably only want to target Breitbart and right sources. It's a plain as day transparent…

The Guardian isn't perfect, but you can't seriously compare it to Breitbart, which intentionally distorts facts on a regular basis, and goes out of it's way to sensationalize and offend.

Would the guardian be caught dead printing these? https://www.mediamatters.org/blog/2016/08/17/breitbart-news-...

Or have they peddled lies as big as these ones? https://www.snopes.com/climatology-fraud-global-warming/ https://www.snopes.com/immigrants-california-wildfires/ https://www.snopes.com/planned-parenthood-satanists/

Look, maybe the media has a left bias. And it's plausible that right-leaning sources face more skepticism. That's not fair. But the reason Breitbart gets flack is because they really are that terrible.

Post reply on HN