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

Russian spies detained in The Hague were planning cyber break-in at Swiss lab

dutchnews.nl

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–148 of 148 posts

Re: Russian spies detained in The Hague were planning cyber break-in at Swiss lab

#141

Post by guilhas »

dragonwriter wrote: post #135
guilhas wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't mean CIA/NSA doesn't influence it. You can clearly see the same narrative across all mainstream media. And commentators with different opinions being shutdown.

> That doesn't mean CIA/NSA doesn't influence it. You can clearly see the same narrative across all mainstream media. A simple explanation for that is that facts exist and impact the coverage presented by media outlets that make some effort to do what their overt role is. I mean, alternatively, you could suspect,as you imply, that all non-fringe media that aren't state run propaganda arms of US rivals are, in fact, U…

I just agree we are better informed watching news from both countries when it involves them. Be it state owned or not.

"Hillary is going to win the election!" Was certainly propaganda.

I don't have any theory, but you can see they all somehow sing to the same tune, including UK and EU. They want to give their approved opinions instead of reporting reality. With the exception of the ocasional independent journalist.

Re: Russian spies detained in The Hague were planning cyber break-in at Swiss lab

#142

Post by krapp »

guilhas wrote: post #141
dragonwriter wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That doesn't mean CIA/NSA doesn't influence it. You can clearly see the same narrative across all mainstream media. A simple explanation for that is that facts exist and impact the coverage presented by media outlets that make some effort to do what their overt role is. I mean, alternatively, you could suspect,as you imply, that all non-fringe media that aren't state run propaganda arms of US rivals are, in fact, U…

I just agree we are better informed watching news from both countries when it involves them. Be it state owned or not. "Hillary is going to win the election!" Was certainly propaganda. I don't have any theory, but you can see they all somehow sing to the same tune, including UK and EU. They want to give their approved opinions instead of reporting reality. With the exception of the ocasional independent journalist.

>"Hillary is going to win the election!" Was certainly propaganda.

An opinion that one of two candidates would win the election was "certainly propaganda?"

Re: Russian spies detained in The Hague were planning cyber break-in at Swiss lab

#143

Post by antpls »

guilhas wrote: post #141
dragonwriter wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That doesn't mean CIA/NSA doesn't influence it. You can clearly see the same narrative across all mainstream media. A simple explanation for that is that facts exist and impact the coverage presented by media outlets that make some effort to do what their overt role is. I mean, alternatively, you could suspect,as you imply, that all non-fringe media that aren't state run propaganda arms of US rivals are, in fact, U…

I just agree we are better informed watching news from both countries when it involves them. Be it state owned or not. "Hillary is going to win the election!" Was certainly propaganda. I don't have any theory, but you can see they all somehow sing to the same tune, including UK and EU. They want to give their approved opinions instead of reporting reality. With the exception of the ocasional independent journalist.

> I just agree we are better informed watching news from both countries when it involves them. Be it state owned or not.

This.

I wasn't necessarily meaning that TASS or Reuters were scripted or censored by CIA/Kremlin. However we can pragmatically assert both agencies have biases (cultural, political, financial, etc).

For example, according to Russia, the British government released almost no data about the toxic nerve agent case, no specific proof was made public. Other governments (France, US) said they support the UK.

Now that did lead to more sanctions on Russia, and the expulsion of Russian diplomats, but from an external observer point of view, it isn't rigorous at all. IMHO, many more reports and documents should be made public, especially about the methods used to conclude that the Russian government is the source of the attack.

Would the general public arrive to the same conclusions than the governments?

I'm 27 years old, I didn't live during the ex-URSS or the Cold War. All I see is 2 camps accusing each other and escalating without serious proof, and people are supposed to say nothing about it? To me, the days when we systematically accused the Russian government of all the shady stuff are supposed to be gone, and we are supposed to use rigorous tribunal procedure before sanctioning an entity, especially if it means deteriorating international relations

Re: Russian spies detained in The Hague were planning cyber break-in at Swiss lab

#144

Post by DyslexicAtheist »

huhtenberg wrote: post #10
DyslexicAtheist wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

would you have a link please?

https://www.tagesanzeiger.ch/panorama/russische-spione-auf-d... It's the second link from the first paragraph of the HN's submission.

thank you!

Re: Russian spies detained in The Hague were planning cyber break-in at Swiss lab

#145

Post by guilhas »

krapp wrote: post #142
guilhas wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just agree we are better informed watching news from both countries when it involves them. Be it state owned or not. "Hillary is going to win the election!" Was certainly propaganda. I don't have any theory, but you can see they all somehow sing to the same tune, including UK and EU. They want to give their approved opinions instead of reporting reality. With the exception of the ocasional independent journalist.

>"Hillary is going to win the election!" Was certainly propaganda. An opinion that one of two candidates would win the election was "certainly propaganda?"

Ok. What I meat was: "All mainstream media claiming Hillary was certainly the election winner. And some pointing statistics like 95%." was propaganda.

Re: Russian spies detained in The Hague were planning cyber break-in at Swiss lab

#146

Post by dragonwriter »

guilhas wrote: post #145
krapp wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"Hillary is going to win the election!" Was certainly propaganda. An opinion that one of two candidates would win the election was "certainly propaganda?"

Ok. What I meat was: "All mainstream media claiming Hillary was certainly the election winner. And some pointing statistics like 95%." was propaganda.

No, the predictors making that prediction weren't doing propaganda, and most mainstream outlets didn't make that (or any other prediction), though many reported the fact of the existence of one or more of the predictions that were made.

Those making the 95% prediction were using statistical models established for that purpose before the identity of the candidates or what those models would show were known. They quite arguably are bad models as they assumed state level deviations from polling results are independent where history suggests that, in fact, they are strongly correlated (a fact pointed out by Nate Silver prior to the election, in explaining why 538 had a much lower projection of Clinton's probability of victory.) But choosing a bad model isn't propaganda.

Re: Russian spies detained in The Hague were planning cyber break-in at Swiss lab

#147

Post by guilhas »

dragonwriter wrote: post #146
guilhas wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok. What I meat was: "All mainstream media claiming Hillary was certainly the election winner. And some pointing statistics like 95%." was propaganda.

No, the predictors making that prediction weren't doing propaganda, and most mainstream outlets didn't make that (or any other prediction), though many reported the fact of the existence of one or more of the predictions that were made. Those making the 95% prediction were using statistical models established for that purpose before the identity of the candidates or what those models would show were known. They quite…

Nice excuses. What I heard was the media, and the "experts", did a bad job.

A poll, your favorite. Let's hope they used a good model. https://news.gallup.com/poll/197090/majority-voters-think-me...

Re: Russian spies detained in The Hague were planning cyber break-in at Swiss lab

#148

Post by megous »

azangru wrote: post #89
megous wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder what threats Russia faces from the west?

I wonder as well. But for one reason or other they tend to regard eastward NATO expansion as a threat. :shrug:

It's probably the good old distraction technique. As long as there's an external enemy, the internal enemies of the people (corrupt government) is spared some pressure. Also military needs to be fed (both litarally at soldier level and metaphorically the corrupt officials, and arms suppliers), so unless you have some "enemy", it's hard to justify all the large training and expenditures.

I'm sure awarding contracts is also good way to siphon out some public money for Kremlin's cronies.

Post reply on HN