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

Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

nationalreview.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

981–990 of 1001 posts

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#981

Post by takeda »

russellendicott wrote: post #716
quest88 wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But what should be done about tech enabling the spread of false information?

Can't people do their own research and choose whether or not they believe the contents of a story before they retweet it and lose their own credibility?

The problem here that this "bombshell" article did not provide enough information to do any kind of verification.

The main evidence is a PDF file of a print of an e-mail (without even providing a header information).

- we don't know if it's Hunter's laptop as claimed (kind of odd that somebody bothers with laptop repair (let's be honest, a lot people here probably buy a new one) and then leaves it there?

- we don't know if this is a real e-mail (headers could be used to prove that)

- we don't know that the sender e-mail is an e-mail connected to the person Hunter is accused talking to (the ".ukraine" in e-mail is very odd, who would put their country in an e-mail address, it's long and is not like he has a super common name)

- we don't know Hunter responded to it (since they have his laptop, you would think they would have his e-mails as well)

- we don't know the meeting actually happened

- this story is obviously an October surprise (the time is picked exactly to impact voting, there's also not enough time to prove it is false)

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#982

Post by aboutBen »

netfl0 wrote: post #581
aboutBen wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't confuse Buzzfeed with Buzzfeed News. The former is a full of lists and click-bait. The latter is an award winning news site.

What percentage of their content do you consider award winning?

I don't consider any of their posts "award winning". They have had award winning reporting, including the National Press, the Sydney, and the Online Journalism Awards. They have also had reporting that was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prizes in International Reporting. [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BuzzFeed_News#Awards_and_recog...

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#983

Post by aboutBen »

whywhywhywhy wrote: post #826
aboutBen wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't confuse Buzzfeed with Buzzfeed News. The former is a full of lists and click-bait. The latter is an award winning news site.

What value does an award from journalists awarded to other journalists have?

What value to the Oscars have or the Emmy? Peer-awards mean that your competitors think you've done a good job and recognize that.

But even if you toss out peer-awards, Buzzfeed News has also won the Sydney award, which is awarded by the The Sidney Hillman Foundation, and was founded by the founding president of the Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America, hardly a "journalistic" venture.

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#984

Post by mellow-lake-day »

rendall wrote: post #852
mellow-lake-day wrote: post #783

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>4 years later, however, these remain allegations only As the other user already pointed out this was has been proven. And they also have the exact unit and names of the Russian intelligence officers who did the hacking. Please stop spreading disinformation about this.

An indictment is an accusation, not a conviction "Please stop spreading disinformation about this." Alas, the disinformation is that it has been proven. Absolutely happy to be incorrect, but, again, it is an extraordinary claim, and the evidence for such a destabilizing claim is lacking

How are you going to convict Russian intelligence officers? You think Russia will hand them over?

Again the hard evidence that you are dying to see is classified and would reveal American hacking capabilities. If Putin is not willing to send over his officers who did that hacking, then why should the US government give up the evidence for nothing in return?

Revealing how America identified the Russian hackers would be extremely valuable for Putin and his KGB/GRU operatives. They can use this information to better their hacking operations in the future.

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#985

Post by [deleted] »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #866
jacobolus wrote: post #733

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The part where a sloppily fabricated email was put onto a bogus laptop (probably by foreign intelligence agents), and then “coincidentally” made its way right back to Rudy Giuliani (who was at the time neck deep in the effort to extort a foreign leader into announcing a fake investigation into the same non-scandal, for which the President has already been impeached). Giuliani passed the emails via Steve Bannon (Trump…

None of the things you're describing have any effect on the plausibility of the story because they're all exactly what you would expect to happen either way. If a Trump supporter became aware of this sort of thing, he would bring it to someone like Giuliani, who would bring it to someone like Bannon and so on. Then they would sit on it until now because that's standard procedure in politics, because damaging informat…

[deleted]

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#986

Post by Thorrez »

rendall wrote: post #855
Thorrez wrote: post #755

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 4 years later, however, these remain allegations only, the lack of which drives the idea of a deep state conspiracy in conservative circles There was an indictment by the federal government[1][2]. That's certainly more reliable than a computer repairman finding an email on a hard drive on an abandoned computer. [1] https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/grand-jury-indicts-12-russian... [2] https://www.justice.gov/file/1080…

An indictment is an allegation, as I said. An allegation is not proof If you are indicted for a crime, the prosecutor must prove the allegations If you are inclined to believe the allegation, your bar for proof will be quite low. Perhaps the accusation is enough. For me, a destabilizing accusation like that requires more proof than anonymous CIA sources saying its true. I wish more Americans would put their dislike o…

You said

> unsubstantiated reports from anonymous sources that the DNC emails were hacked by Russia and released through Wikileaks.

A US government report is not anonymous. That's very clear who the source of that report is. It's the US government. I would also hesitate to call is unsubstantiated. There's a lot of substance in the indictment, including specific dates and times of actions, and names of the attackers.

> there is as much hard evidence for one as the other, and both are damaging, destabilizing allegations

No, there is more hard evidence for the DNC hack. If you want more hard evidence, see CrowdStrike's analysis[1], Google Search logs[2][3], ThreatConnect's analysis of email headers[4][5], Secureworks's analysis[6], Fidelis's analysis[7], FireEye's analysis[8].

[1] https://www.crowdstrike.com/blog/bears-midst-intrusion-democ...

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24379210

[3] http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/crime/roger-stone-aff...

[4] https://threatconnect.com/blog/guccifer-2-all-roads-lead-rus...

[5] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16653671

[6] https://www.secureworks.com/research/threat-group-4127-targe...

[7] https://fidelissecurity.com/threatgeek/archive/findings-anal...

[8] https://www.fireeye.com/content/dam/fireeye-www/solutions/pd...

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#987

Post by CyberRabbi »

Raptor22 wrote: post #962
CyberRabbi wrote: post #813

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The answer is trivial if you believe in the protection of civil rights.

I believe in the protection of civil rights, but I also believe in the devastating effects of misinformation. We need to find a way to protect against the latter while affecting very little the former, but we're just not there yet.

What devastating effects of misinformation are you referring to? I see no devastating effects of misinformation at all. Your negative worldview is not a reason to allow the civil rights of others to be violated.

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#988

Post by esarbe »

CaoCao wrote: post #881
bipson wrote: post #849

Earlier quoted context omitted.

not GP, but most immigration systems violate human rights all the time by treating people as if they were people without these rights - or not people at all. Most of the time the legal leeway is based upon them not being citizens (yet). What is the path to immigration in your country? It begins with a legal dilemma: E.g. asylum is a human right, but how to determine who is eligible? In a timely manner that is. Especi…

"asylum is a human right" "determine who is eligible" Well, if it's a human right, then everyone. But it's not, which is why you have this twisted logic. There is no right to freely cross borders.

Of course there's a right to freely cross borders. Borders are just imaginary lines on a map.

Just as any bird has the "right" to go wherever it wants and any other animal hat the right to go wherever it wants, I have the natural right to go wherever I want.

I'm a free human. As I'm born on this planet, it's my right to go wherever I want to go on this planet.

That governments want to take away that right of mine, that liberty, is just one example of how governments are using the tyranny of power to force people to their will.

That governments are just the thugs with the best weapons is just Realpolitik. This still doesn't invalidate my right to freely cross borders. I never signed away these rights.

Though I might be stupid to try to exercise it.

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#989

Post by bipson »

CaoCao wrote: post #881
bipson wrote: post #849

Earlier quoted context omitted.

not GP, but most immigration systems violate human rights all the time by treating people as if they were people without these rights - or not people at all. Most of the time the legal leeway is based upon them not being citizens (yet). What is the path to immigration in your country? It begins with a legal dilemma: E.g. asylum is a human right, but how to determine who is eligible? In a timely manner that is. Especi…

"asylum is a human right" "determine who is eligible" Well, if it's a human right, then everyone. But it's not, which is why you have this twisted logic. There is no right to freely cross borders.

Then there is no twisted logic.

Asylum is a human right https://ijrcenter.org/refugee-law/ https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/ Article 14

Re: Facebook, Twitter block the NY Post from posting

#990

Post by russellendicott »

takeda wrote: post #981
russellendicott wrote: post #716

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't people do their own research and choose whether or not they believe the contents of a story before they retweet it and lose their own credibility?

The problem here that this "bombshell" article did not provide enough information to do any kind of verification. The main evidence is a PDF file of a print of an e-mail (without even providing a header information). - we don't know if it's Hunter's laptop as claimed (kind of odd that somebody bothers with laptop repair (let's be honest, a lot people here probably buy a new one) and then leaves it there? - we don't k…

I agree with all of your points but why is it Twitter or Facebook's responsibility to check all of those things for every article posted to their platform? Why is the onus not on you as the reader to do your own fact checking?
Post reply on HN