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

221–230 of 241 posts

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

#221

Post by dvfjsdhgfv »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #131
dvfjsdhgfv wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's possible you have a custom, non-standard understanding of the term. According to Merriam Webster, it has 5 meanings, and none of them refers to the government. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nation

Read the news. You see headlines like "US sends two carriers to Persian Gulf". Not "Government of the US", but "US". That is, in external affairs - military and diplomatic and espionage - it is a normal, customary usage to refer to the government of the country by the name of the country. It's used that way, whether you agree or not. Now, the point you're making - that there is a difference between the government and…

> it is a normal, customary usage to refer to the government of the country by the name of the country.

And this is more or less fine. Not just in the news, in normal conversation we do the same. Not just "China is doing this" but also "Chinese are doing this." That's also logically true, because some subset (however big or small) of Chinese is doing this.

However, I object to this particular expression - "China is a hostile nation." I don't know why it's even a point of contention. Maybe when people use the term 'nation' they actually mean 'state'? Because 'nation' by and large refers to people the country consist of.

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

#222

Post by juanani »

oarsinsync wrote: post #86
cameronh90 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe we should play the propaganda game too? Block most services and traffic but selectively allow things through that have propaganda value. Given the amount of suspicious Chinese devices and traffic, you'd imagine we should be doing something though?

> Maybe we should play Who is 'we'? Chances are you live in a country founded in democratic principles. This means after each election, priorities change, based on the politicians that are voted into office. Take the USA as a good example. The priorities of the 2008-2016 administration were undermined by the 2017-2020 administration, and the priorities of the 2017-2020 administration are being undermined by the 2021-…

Our Pentagon certainly doesn't change tactics every new president but hey you got this nice reality going for you where you think one person is in charge of the whole country, I am over here still waiting for a clear picture of Sasquatch. Sucks to see but it's what happens when our voters only get their news from Elite Western MSM. No sarcasm on the elite part, just look at this fairy tale world we got.

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

#223

Post by BobbyJo »

fspeech wrote: post #198
BobbyJo wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

This thread was about the unfairness of asymmetrical market access, not who is worth the most right now. Side note, in all likelihood, ByteDance would be worth a lot more if they were an American company, even if nothing about their business and revenue changed, because there would be less perceived systemic risk. That being said, the capital difference between them and Google in terms of PPP isn't huge because of lower costs in China.

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

#224

Post by FpUser »

AlexCoventry wrote: post #180
pjc50 wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a funny kind of losing. It looks more like "not totally dominant" to me, which may be confused with losing by people who've not experienced that. What has the US really lost ? No territory, no people; there's no stream of refugees to the "winning" Chinese side.

We just got done dealing with four years of leadership by a (possibly unwitting) agent of a foreign power, installed with the help of holes in our IT infrastructure. Our sovereignty and capacity for effective self-governance are severely compromised, at this point. That's more important than loss of territory or people, in the long run.

>"We just got done dealing with four years of leadership by a (possibly unwitting) agent of a foreign power"

Trump was anything but. Your writing just makes no sense.

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

#225

Post by pja »

Udik wrote: post #216
pja wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you really think it's safe to give an honest negative answer when asked your opinion of the CCCP in China? Personally I doubt it, and I imagine that the average Chinese citizen understands this reality very well indeed as they give their positive answers to the nice poll agent with the sincerest smile they can muster. Everyone knows how the game is played.

Do you really think the people involved in this 13 year survey are so stupid they didn't think of the issue you could identify in a good 5 seconds of thinking before writing your comment?

Oh, I’m sure they’ve thought of it. I simply doubt that they’re able to meaningfully counter it.

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

#227

Post by loceng »

solosoyokaze wrote: post #160
loceng wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Replace "China" with "CCP" - and yes, however it's obvious as to why that is - the control systems, the censorship systems, the confirmed genocide [by definition, cultural genocide] of Uighurs, and things like not allowing the UN to go into China to investigate claims directly are a few examples; it's not to say different administrations in the US have been part of bad/unacceptable behaviour as well, however the CCP…

I don't actually think the Chinese government is trustworthy, for all the reasons you state. However, I find the US/MS less trustworthy for us . I've been the target of US propaganda far more often than Chinese propaganda, since I'm a US citizen. Remember Bush/The New York Times falsely claiming that Iraq had WMD? A lesson we shouldn't quickly forget. Especially when the current admin has already initiated illegal mi…

Fully agree with your statements. Baby steps but we're moving again in the right direction.

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

#228

Post by e40 »

mattigames wrote: post #121
e40 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love the world we live in: everyone has an opinion on severely complex matters and proffers it in an absolutely confident way that their opinion is the truth. I don't like China's behavior (toward us and it's own). I don't believe for a minute that I know how to solve the problem, because every solution is bound to have unintended side effects, some which may be worse than the original problem.

Your opinion is also problematic, specially when politicians hold it (which is not uncommon), as in "This problem is way too complex, let's do nothing and pray that it will fix itself"

If I were a politician, which I am not, I would do this:

Gather the experts in the fields (there are likely more than one field at play) and manage their discussion. I would ask them questions and observe how they discuss. If I felt that one or both were not intellectually honest, I would replace them with other people, and repeat.

Once I felt an intellectually honest discussion had reached a conclusion, then I would act (vote, provide legislation, etc).

It is sad to me that we are moving away from a process like this and not toward it.

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

#230

Post by AnimalMuppet »

dvfjsdhgfv wrote: post #221
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Read the news. You see headlines like "US sends two carriers to Persian Gulf". Not "Government of the US", but "US". That is, in external affairs - military and diplomatic and espionage - it is a normal, customary usage to refer to the government of the country by the name of the country. It's used that way, whether you agree or not. Now, the point you're making - that there is a difference between the government and…

> it is a normal, customary usage to refer to the government of the country by the name of the country. And this is more or less fine. Not just in the news, in normal conversation we do the same. Not just "China is doing this" but also "Chinese are doing this." That's also logically true, because some subset (however big or small) of Chinese is doing this. However, I object to this particular expression - "China is a…

> Maybe when people use the term 'nation' they actually mean 'state'?

Yes, they do.

> Because 'nation' by and large refers to people the country consist of.

No, it doesn't. We keep telling you this, over and over and over, and you keep not listening, but I'm going to say it one more time: No, it doesn't. When you're talking about international things - things between countries - "nation" by and large refers to the government, not the people.

Post reply on HN