Wikileaks, rightly or wrongly, has essentially been declared an enemy of USA. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-cia-wikileaks/cia-chief-c... I do not blame Coinbase
[deleted]
Coinbase blocks WikiLeaks Shop
61–70 of 90 posts
Re: Coinbase blocks WikiLeaks Shop
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't worry guys, the DNC said so, so it must be true!
"It is time to call out WikiLeaks for what it really is – a non-state hostile intelligence service often abetted by state actors like Russia. In January of this year, our Intelligence Community determined that Russian military intelligence—the GRU—had used WikiLeaks to release data of US victims that the GRU had obtained through cyber operations against the Democratic National Committee. And the report also found tha…
> He is in the absolutely perfect position to say otherwise
Let's explore that claim:
Mike Pompeo had three general options, regardless of the truth:
1) State that he has no such evidence. In this case he'd draw the ire of the dems, probably the ire of various dem/republican pundits, and certainly the ire of members of the intelligence community who had already stated a clear link exists.
2) Say nothing. This is a decent short term tactic but would open him up to being vulnerable in future hearings since he has no stated position.
3) Claim that evidence exists. This puts him safely in the company of republican/dem pundits, rest of intelligence community, etc.
We don't know the truth because we don't have the evidence. But I don't think we can say with certainty that Mike Pompeo was in the "perfect position" to reveal the truth. It's equally likely he was in the perfect position to go along with a narrative that was both popular and unsupported by factual evidence.
Re: Coinbase blocks WikiLeaks Shop
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. It was just such a common occurrence that I could not come to a different conclusion. If you need many examples, look for Reddit threads that talk about Coinbase created right after Bitcoin dips.
Alternative Hanlon's razor hypothesis: the system gets an abnormal amount of traffic during large price swings and they can't cope with the demand.
I don’t buy it.
Any serious software engineer knows about the CAP theorem.
Re: Coinbase blocks WikiLeaks Shop
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
But it is good to know what is coinbase's moral compass.
Coinbase has been fishy from the start... For example, I placed buy orders for some Bitcoins when they dropped sharply years ago (Coinbase just started at that time) and they canceled those orders after I placed them. Now what they do is that they bring the servers down when it happens. They did the same with Bitcoin Cash, or maybe worst... (see stories about when they first introduced bitcoin cash)
Nice addition to my already decently long list of why Coinbase isn't worth dealing with. Thanks.
Re: Coinbase blocks WikiLeaks Shop
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
But it's still important to be aware of the bias in a source. Supposed I'm biased against you and I report that you hacked into Bob's computer and I have evidence to prove it. I paint that to make you look like some kind of cyber villain and neglect to report the important fact that Bob asked you to do it. If the reader knows about my bias towards you then they know to take my reporting with a grain of salt because e…
you mean like this map ( http://wilkins.law.harvard.edu/projects/2017-08_mediacloud/G... ) created by a harvard study? You are right of course, it is important to know the bias of sources which is why so many fact checking sites popped up after 2016. Before then I would always go wikipedia for unbiased information. Sadly we live in a time where the majority of news papers has a clear and sometimes publicly stated pol…
It's impossible to eliminate bias. Even if it's not political bias some people just naturally agree more with one side of an issue or are more interested in certain subjects. But that doesn't mean that bias is irrelevant.
In my opinion, having followed WikiLeaks over the years, I think it's safe to say that they have an anti-western intelligence/military bias. That doesn't mean that what they publish is untrue. It just means that I'm skeptical about their motives and sources when they release something and I make it a point to try and find a good counter-balance to their take on the issue. Because they probably only presented a tiny portion of the truth that fit their agenda.
Re: Coinbase blocks WikiLeaks Shop
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
But it is good to know what is coinbase's moral compass.
Coinbase has been fishy from the start... For example, I placed buy orders for some Bitcoins when they dropped sharply years ago (Coinbase just started at that time) and they canceled those orders after I placed them. Now what they do is that they bring the servers down when it happens. They did the same with Bitcoin Cash, or maybe worst... (see stories about when they first introduced bitcoin cash)
I'm no fan of Coinbase so don't mistaken me for a shill but I've also heard of countless cases of the opposite case (e.g. order gets declined and the coin drops drastically post order, resulting in a "gain" for the person whose order got declined).
It seems reasonable that these are genuine mistakes. It seems ludicrous for Coinbase to implement order cancellation so that they can do some risk-free hedging when something like that is ripe for some serious whistleblowing.
Re: Coinbase blocks WikiLeaks Shop
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even if Satan himself proved he was real and aided Wikileaks by publishing true information, I'd be all for it. What's being suggested is that they selectively publish true information by not publishing certain things that don't suit a particular agenda. This accusation is being asserted without evidence, and can therefore be dismissed without evidence.
It's also a ridiculous argument since Wikileaks does not have a monopoly on leaking secrets. Any whistleblowers who were censored by Wikileaks can not only find another channel to release their original documents, but also have another piece of important news about a provable systematic bias in Wikileaks'publishing patterns.
Supposing that the GRU hacked the DNC and RNC, but only gave WikiLeaks the DNC stuff, the RNC stuff would not see the light of day. Now maybe that exculpates Wikileaks, since they didn't have the RNC stuff to leak. Maybe it implicates them- if they knew the info was from Russia, and knew that Russia was trying to damage Clinton, and coordinated with the GRU to maximally damage her. Both things could be true.
On the third hand, Assange spent time suggesting that the information definitely didn't come from Russia, and suggesting it might have been Seth Rich. But information came out the shows that he was talking with Guccifer 2.0, who was widely suspected (at the time!) to be GRU and if he wasn't, was meant to be a Romanian hacker, not a DNC whistleblower. So there's at least tenuous evidence that Assange was willing to both work with Russian intelligence and rope in an entirely unrelated death to muddy the waters on where the info came from.
Re: Coinbase blocks WikiLeaks Shop
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
Oh my god, you can't possibly be that sheltered.
I must hang with a different crowd that doesn't add a specific # of parentheses to send dog-whistle messages. You should ask yourself, was the tweet wrong? Did the people who it referenced all have their names surrounded by ((( and )))? That would in fact be bizarre.
The echoes meme comes from a neonazi podcast who would play an echo sound effect behind every single mention of a Jewish sounding name. When people on Twitter put the (()) around their own names, they are intentionally marking themselves as Jewish so as to raise a middle finger to the neonazis who started the meme. So if someone references "people with (()) around their name", they're talking about Jews. That's who puts (()) around their own names on Twitter.
Re: Coinbase blocks WikiLeaks Shop
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
"It is time to call out WikiLeaks for what it really is – a non-state hostile intelligence service often abetted by state actors like Russia. In January of this year, our Intelligence Community determined that Russian military intelligence—the GRU—had used WikiLeaks to release data of US victims that the GRU had obtained through cyber operations against the Democratic National Committee. And the report also found tha…
> He is in the absolutely perfect position to say otherwise Let's explore that claim: Mike Pompeo had three general options, regardless of the truth: 1) State that he has no such evidence. In this case he'd draw the ire of the dems, probably the ire of various dem/republican pundits, and certainly the ire of members of the intelligence community who had already stated a clear link exists. 2) Say nothing. This is a de…
Literally nobody else in the Trump administration minds drawing Democratic ire. If he was afraid of Democratic anger, he would be the only guy in the administration who does. Pompeo cheerleaded the Benghazi inquest when he was in Congress!
"Triggering the libs" is approximately 30% of the Trump administration's modus operandi. I don't see much evidence that Pompeo is an exception.
If he is, then Trump's goal of draining the swamp has been thwarted by his own appointee. So... why did Trump appoint him to be Secretary of State? He's obviously been coopted by the Dems, blinded to the truth, and willing to go along with Deep State shenanigans. But Trump trusts him to talk to Kim Jong Un. That seems like terrible judgment. The only resolution to this is that Trump himself has been compromised by the Deep State, or is too stupid to realize that his own guys are.
Either that or he's telling the truth as he understands it.
Re: Coinbase blocks WikiLeaks Shop
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
"It is time to call out WikiLeaks for what it really is – a non-state hostile intelligence service often abetted by state actors like Russia. In January of this year, our Intelligence Community determined that Russian military intelligence—the GRU—had used WikiLeaks to release data of US victims that the GRU had obtained through cyber operations against the Democratic National Committee. And the report also found tha…
Do you recall what precipitated the invasion of Iraq?
There was no report signed off by the CIA, DNI, and DHS that concluded with high confidence that the Iraq government had WMDs. The WMD intelligence, such as it was, came from raw reports pulled directly from the lower levels of the CIA bypassing the ordinary processes. The report on Russian hacking pulled from conclusions drawn by the entire US intelligence community.
Also, did you read the Mueller indictment of a dozen Russian hackers? It goes into some detail on the kinds of information that the IC has about it.
The thing is- the IC makes mistakes. But a single disaster of a conclusion like the WMD debacle cannot be used to discredit every single subsequent conclusion, otherwise we could never prosecute anyone on terror charges ever again. Pointing at the WMD fuckup and using that to disprove every conclusion you don't like means you aren't actually engaging in the substance. If tomorrow they conclude something you agree with and I don't, will you take me seriously when I say "but Iraq tho"? Probably not.