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

The Clean Network – United States Department of State

state.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 412 posts

Re: The Clean Network – United States Department of State

#191

Post by segfaultbuserr »

ISL wrote: post #80

I have the same feeling about this as I did the announcement of the "Department of Homeland Security". The name sounded Soviet in origin, with only the exchange of "Homeland" in place of "Motherland". It reminded me of things my family had taught me didn't happen in the United States. "We call on all freedom-loving nations and companies to join the Clean Network." is a sentence straight out of an authoritarian playbo…

> The name sounded Soviet in origin, with only the exchange of "Homeland" in place of "Motherland". It reminded me of things my family had taught me didn't happen in the United States.

Back in 2014, China launched a crackdown on illegal online content, it was named "净网行动", which literally translates to "Clean Network Campaign/Action". The targets were illegal materials, mainly materials officially considered obscene, but also included unwanted cultural and political materials considered harmful. Since then, the name became a codename for most government crackdowns, and can be referred to in a satirical manner by the people. Naturally, after Michael Pompeo announced The Clean Network Campaign in the United States, it has immediately became a meme in China, comparisons were also made by the international press like the BBC in their Chinese editions. Now, if you search this keyword in Chinese, it's extremely amusing that you'll see news reports on both governments.

Re: The Clean Network – United States Department of State

#192

Post by thesuitonym »

Spooky23 wrote: post #114
kayson wrote: post #16

Has anyone published the evidence of Huawei being an "arm of the PRC surveillance state"? I've seen a lot of claims and a lot of out-of-court-settled lawsuits, but nothing really showing that they're using their devices or software infrastructure for surveillance.

Back in 1982, the CIA is alleged to have modified some computers that ultimately blew up a gas pipeline. Spies to spy things. It's safe to assume that everyone with the power to do so is exploiting any advantage that they have.

Not only is it safe to assume such, it's unsafe to assume they aren't.

Re: The Clean Network – United States Department of State

#193

Post by radium3d »

24gttghh wrote: post #140
zrail wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The key this year is to _personally drop off your ballot_ at an official drop point rather than mailing it in. USPS can and will deprioritize mail in ballots for the fall elections.

I do this anyways. Why would I pay postage to have something brought to a distribution center 20 miles away, wait a few days, then brought back to my town to get delivered to town hall when I can literally walk there and drop it off for free?

I drop mine off at the neighbor's house up the street too. It's a short walk, nice time to go outside and the times I go it's only one or two other people there.

I just prefer to be vote by mail so I can fill it out at home without being rushed.

Re: The Clean Network – United States Department of State

#194

Post by monoideism »

supernova87a wrote: post #110

This really comes off as a hastily prepared political dig against China, when there are in addition so many other actors and countries trying to take advantage of poor security. The JPEGed giant logo at the top doesn't help... Other observations: -- "Remove untrusted applications from US mobile app stores": so, this would call for even tighter control by Apple, Google, over its app distribution and monopolies? -- Cle…

> What unusual attack do they get access to by owning or manufacturing the equipment?

It is incredibly easy to add almost undetectable backdoors to hardware, particularly inside ICs. Here's one particularly clever attack described by security researchers at U of Michigan, but there are many:

https://www.wired.com/2016/06/demonically-clever-backdoor-hi...

Re: The Clean Network – United States Department of State

#195

Post by coliveira »

coldcode wrote: post #30

If they weren't serious about this claptrap it would be downright hilarious. "Clean" means nothing, other than "Approved by us" which of course can mean anything they want, including shutting down anything they disagree with even internally, and changing day by day. In practicality there isn't much they can do legally to make any of this actually exist.

> there isn't much they can do legally to make any of this actually exist.

Please, let's stop the whole thing of "he doesn't have the power to do this". Maybe he cannot do everything, but the last four years have proved that he can do pretty much everything he wants with a few minor problems with justice that he will also disregard. Think about mass imprisonment of immigrants, travel bans, attacking protestors in major cities with unidentified military units, diverting money fro the military to build a wall against congress wishes, not allowing his co-conspirators to testify in Congress, affirm he will not accept the election results, etc. All of these things supposedly were not legal. But he doesn't care about the constitution, and the constitution only has any power if the government is willing to uphold it.

Re: The Clean Network – United States Department of State

#196

Post by qznc »

kube-system wrote: post #147
Loughla wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is 100% the answer, and one thing I've never understood about many, many aspects of American life. If you want people to act a certain way, you incentivize that thing, not punish the opposite of the thing. You want people to stop doing drugs? Make programs designed to support them during the withdrawal process, provide counseling and other necessary supports, and make it free. You want people off of welfare? Pro…

Most people aren't philosophers or social scientists, and their understanding of criminal science is based on their personal experiences with crime and punishment or their casual suppositions. This is why a trusted and high quality education is essential for a strong democracy.

Some disagree about that:

> Generally the better educated are more prone to irrational political opinions and political hysteria than the worse educated far from power. Why? In the field of political opinion they are more driven by fashion, a gang mentality, and the desire to pose about moral and political questions all of which exacerbate cognitive biases, encourage groupthink, and reduce accuracy. Those on average incomes are less likely to express political views to send signals; political views are much less important for signalling to one’s immediate in-group when you are on 20k a year.

https://dominiccummings.com/2017/01/09/on-the-referendum-21-...

Re: The Clean Network – United States Department of State

#197

Post by nemothekid »

dekhn wrote: post #146
enraged_camel wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't argue in bad faith, and actually read the links provided. The issue here is that the current Postmaster General fired the administrators who were pushing back against the "optimizations" he is making and wants to make to USPS policies. The final goal is to privatize USPS, which has been a Republican dream since the Reagan era.

Yes, I read all articles about the USPS the day they are published across a wide range of journals. However, I'm simply looking for a direct, factual claim that supports that these firings were directly intended to slow down mail delivery so as to cause problems during the forthcoming election. So far all the claims I've seen are indirect; further, the PG has explicitly said they are prepared to handle mail-in votes…

>However, I'm simply looking for a direct, factual claim that supports that these firings were directly intended to slow down mail delivery so as to cause problems during the forthcoming election. So far all the claims I've seen are indirect

You realize that this is an absolutely inane thing to ask right? The direct implication is that Trump is slowing down the USPS in order the guarantee his re-election - are you looking for a quote from Trump himself that he's doing this, because I doubt we will ever see one until it's too late.

Re: The Clean Network – United States Department of State

#198

Post by cardamomo »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #186
cardamomo wrote: post #173

If you're not already familiar with the history of labeling immigrants (particularly non-European immigrants) as unclean or dirty, I'd urge you to read up. This article seems to be a good start: https://journals.openedition.org/transtexts/1011 In short, calling this a "clean" network continues a long history of racist and xenophobic language in the U.S.

Step 1: immigrants who are viewed negatively are described in negative terms. Step 2: describing anything in negative terms is racist?

No. First of all, attitudes toward Chinese and other immigrants to the U.S. in the 20th century were formed, in part, by the language that was used by those in power. That Chinese immigrants were "dirty" was not fact, it was a racist stereotype.

Second, I do not contend that describing anything in negative terms is racist. I am linking the specific history of describing Chinese immigrants as dirty with the Clean Network's choice of names. It behooves us not to think of it as a benign coincidence but rather an intentional act to signal the Trump administration's commitment to xenophobia.

Re: The Clean Network – United States Department of State

#199

Post by zepto »

pulse7 wrote: post #189

So the country whose national security and intelligence agencies have gathered the largest database of sensitive information in the world is proposing to "safeguard sensitive information from aggressive intrusions by malign actors"... If U.S. is some kind of role model / example for other countries to follow (in terms of freedoms, democracy, prosperity, etc) then other countries will also gather sensitive information…

We actually don’t know that the US has gathered the largest database of sensitive information.

Only that it used to gather a lot before Snowden.

Re: The Clean Network – United States Department of State

#200

Post by beepboopbeep »

This particular administration has gone out of its way to gaslight everyone and thing it possibly can. It is to the point that everything they do is consider suspicious and/or a lie at face value. That they have the gall to name this "The Clean Network" and encourage the allies they have been bludgeoning for the past 4 years to join it is both laughable and insulting.
Post reply on HN