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

Chinese hacking spree hit an ‘astronomical’ number of victims

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 241 posts

Re: Chinese hacking spree hit an ‘astronomical’ number of victims

#191

Post by fspeech »

rsj_hn wrote: post #148
KirillPanov wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> China owns more than 1 trillion of US debt. ... they may start massively selling US debt, which would impact USD and the US economy. We just printed four trillion dollars out of thin air and the sky didn't fall. What makes you think that printing one quarter of that amount in order to sterilize a dump of treasuries will cause the sky to fall?

This reveals great confusion about how assets are priced and how treasuries are issued. All of these treasuries are sold to primary dealers and the secondary market transactions are of little interest to any macro variable. Some treasuries are held by China in its Federal Reserve account. Should China sell the treasuries to another buyer, they will be transferred to a different account in the same bank. The nationali…

Dumping treasuries is figurative. The real action for China is to stop running a trade surplus and start importing and consuming more physical goods. This is widely claimed as a really desirable situation. It will be interesting to see if that is actually the case when it happens. I have a feeling that it will be something more akin to the proverbial 叶公好龙.

Re: Chinese hacking spree hit an ‘astronomical’ number of victims

#192

Post by sirpunch »

karaterobot wrote: post #178

Is there an English language website that tracks (ostensibly) state-sponsored hacks throughout the globe? I hear about Western targets getting hacked by Russian and Chinese actors, but other than big things like stuxnet, I almost never hear about what's going on in the other direction. Or about attacks that have nothing to do with the U.S. one way or the other.

> ".. Or about attacks that have nothing to do with the U.S. one way or the other."

Some recent ones that e remember seeing in the news:

https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2021-03-01/chines...

https://www.livemint.com/news/india/chinese-hackers-targeted...

Re: Chinese hacking spree hit an ‘astronomical’ number of victims

#193

Post by BobbyJo »

dragonwriter wrote: post #115
BobbyJo wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's called Douyin in China.

Isn't Douyin a separate service offered by ByteDance directly (or a separate subsidiary from TikTok), not a local name for TikTok, which is offered by the company of the same name which is a subsidiary of ByteDance?

Is there enough of a difference for that to matter?

If Facebook created a similar sibsidiary social network for China, and called it '脸书' would China care about the distinction?

Re: Chinese hacking spree hit an ‘astronomical’ number of victims

#194

Post by fspeech »

BobbyJo wrote: post #193
dragonwriter wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't Douyin a separate service offered by ByteDance directly (or a separate subsidiary from TikTok), not a local name for TikTok, which is offered by the company of the same name which is a subsidiary of ByteDance?

Is there enough of a difference for that to matter? If Facebook created a similar sibsidiary social network for China, and called it '脸书' would China care about the distinction?

The original post I replied to was implying economy of scale because he based his claim on competitive advantages coming with a larger addressable market. However if the market is actually divided (firewalled really), with no sharing of brand recogniton, content creation, marketing, infrastructure, customer service etc, where does the economy of scale come from? Even source codes are now developed separately. There is some sharing of business model and basic technology, but is that truly formidable? There is certainly no network effect (between TikTok and Douyin) which would have been the most significant barrier.

Re: Chinese hacking spree hit an ‘astronomical’ number of victims

#195

Post by cambalache »

narism wrote: post #135
cambalache wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Nothing quite so dramatic. The US political system is rife with bribery/bribery-adjacent (ex: lobbying) activity and they are saying both sides have been influenced by this. For examples, see the 1996 Clinton campaign finance investigations and donations to Jeb Bush’s Super PAC. There is likely a lot more out there that we don’t know about hidden through donations funneled through non-profits.

Probably you are answering to a different comment, otherwise it makes absolutely no sense. In no shape, way or form have communists managed the internal or external American policy in the last 40 years, if ever.

Re: Chinese hacking spree hit an ‘astronomical’ number of victims

#196

Post by BobbyJo »

fspeech wrote: post #194
BobbyJo wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there enough of a difference for that to matter? If Facebook created a similar sibsidiary social network for China, and called it '脸书' would China care about the distinction?

The original post I replied to was implying economy of scale because he based his claim on competitive advantages coming with a larger addressable market. However if the market is actually divided (firewalled really), with no sharing of brand recogniton, content creation, marketing, infrastructure, customer service etc, where does the economy of scale come from? Even source codes are now developed separately. There i…

Well, the economies of scale come from capital concentration. Since the money all flows through the parent, they have capital to use to improve their likely hood of success. Not just financial capital, but human capital too.

Re: Chinese hacking spree hit an ‘astronomical’ number of victims

#197

Post by hayst4ck »

bllguo wrote: post #189
kortilla wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> hatred for the Chinese The equivocation of hatred for the Chinese and hatred for it’s government is itself Chinese government propaganda. Any time criticism comes up of the actions of their government, the deflection method is to say it’s just hatred for the Chinese. This is done to prevent the Chinese people from realizing that people in the West are on their side and they are not their government.

funny that you say this as we are witnessing an uptick in anti-Asian hate crimes. you can't seriously think that nobody conflates the two? and people in the West assuming they know best is as much of a problem as anything else. you're not on their side, you're speaking as if you're above them

> you're not on their side, you're speaking as if you're above them

This is a common sentiment with American conservatives. They think liberal people look down upon them from their ivory towers. Honestly, they do. Your average conservative is malnourished with a fox news media diet and isn't educated enough to critically think about their own positions, you can't even engage in a rational conversation with most of them. The GOP at large is a bad faith party who rules for power and dominance, not for the improvement of peoples lives. Rhetoric is their weapon not reason.

While liberals are not in favor of white supremacy, religion, or "easy fixes" they do favor policy that would benefit the average conservative person. In the sense that liberals want to see conservative peoples lives meaningfully improve, liberals are on the side of conservatives. In the sense that liberals want to preserve conservative culture and reinforce their world views, liberals are clearly not on the side of conservatives.

China has it's own Han supremacy problem (just like America has a white supremacy problem), and while the west is not interested in supporting Han supremacy, I think the average [educated] westerner does want to see the average chinese persons life improve, just not at the cost of Taiwanese lives, Uigher lives, Tibetan lives, or Hong Konger lives, and not at the cost of our own prosperity.

Re: Chinese hacking spree hit an ‘astronomical’ number of victims

#198

Post by fspeech »

BobbyJo wrote: post #196
fspeech wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The original post I replied to was implying economy of scale because he based his claim on competitive advantages coming with a larger addressable market. However if the market is actually divided (firewalled really), with no sharing of brand recogniton, content creation, marketing, infrastructure, customer service etc, where does the economy of scale come from? Even source codes are now developed separately. There i…

Well, the economies of scale come from capital concentration. Since the money all flows through the parent, they have capital to use to improve their likely hood of success. Not just financial capital, but human capital too.

Google and Facebook have more access to capital, financial or human, than any of their competitors. If anything they are at a strong competitive advantage in this respect.

Re: Chinese hacking spree hit an ‘astronomical’ number of victims

#199

Post by elipsey »

chrisjharris wrote: post #171
nbardy wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US never believed this, the politicians told this story so they could get richer off trade deals and cheap labor. Anyone who was critically thinking saw this coming a long way out.

You might be right, you might be wrong, but it would be nice if you could acknowledge that any argument about what people were thinking (rather than doing) is a shaky one and hard to state with any certainty. Bad outcomes can arise as easily from ill-conceived idealism as bad intent.

This. It's a pernicious temptation to infer motive, or make hostile generalizations about groups we disagree with, but this makes it impossible to cooperate or engage in good faith debate.

Re: Chinese hacking spree hit an ‘astronomical’ number of victims

#200

Post by rorykoehler »

r00fus wrote: post #99
rorykoehler wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China needs a new political system before we can talk about anyone being their allies. The CCP have made it clear they are only interested in total power.

How likely is that to happen?

More likely than it seems imo. Seeing the huge amount of discontent and dissent during the initial covid outbreak in Wuhan points towards the system being very fragile with no pressure release (such as democratic elections) in place. This can only go on so long before it implodes.
Post reply on HN