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

Spy Kids

cia.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 67 posts

Re: Spy Kids

#41

Post by boomboomsubban »

cempaka wrote: post #13
boomboomsubban wrote: post #6

"Spy Kids" has a trademark and sells video games, I don't see why this isn't trademark infringement. Surely the CIA would be aware, could Disney have approved it? Wouldn't there be notice at the bottom then?

I mean, the CIA helped Walt Disney set up the insane property deals he used to build Disneyworld, so it's not outside the realm of possibility. edit: oh, I misread your comment and thought the CIA page was making some specific references to "spy kids." But now that I've looked, what's there doesn't seem to infringe on anything.

The top banner say "Spy Kids."

They definitely have a relationship, it's whether this is part of it I'm unclear of.

Re: Spy Kids

#42

Post by FirmwareBurner »

keepamovin wrote: post #33
pests wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really don't believe this at all. If it were true what motive would Snowden have to continue engaging publically well after the fact like he has?

Well obviously they would pick someone who had the right ego-bias / personality to act as this savior figure. Someone who wouldn't just do their duty but love it and go beyond it. The selection of the right patsy would be half the problem! Even under the weaker assumption he wasn't like that to begin with, a savvy and ambitious person would ride such a wave of opportunity and "grow into the role" so to speak. But yea…

>But yea, it's well designed, so it's supposed to be "hard to believe".

It's so "well designed" that it makes no sense :) Reminds me of Rick and Morty's heist plot developed by that robot. At the end of the day you can come up with endless conspiracy theories and plots if your imagination is good enough and you watched all the Mission Impossible movies, and then then when people question it you just tell them "it's so well thought out that it's hard to believe" and you win every argument.

Why is it so hard to accept that Snowden really walked out with confidential info and sent it to the press out of his own accord over his own worries of privacy violations he was in charge of? The simplest expatiation is usually the right one, no need to come up with false flag spy plots.

FFS, some teenager working for the Airforce leaked military intelligence on the war in Ukraine on some Discord server just to win an online argument. Do you think that was some false-flag op too? Intelligence blunders happen all the time, it's a wonder we don't get even more leaks.

Re: Spy Kids

#43

Post by keepamovin »

FirmwareBurner wrote: post #42
keepamovin wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well obviously they would pick someone who had the right ego-bias / personality to act as this savior figure. Someone who wouldn't just do their duty but love it and go beyond it. The selection of the right patsy would be half the problem! Even under the weaker assumption he wasn't like that to begin with, a savvy and ambitious person would ride such a wave of opportunity and "grow into the role" so to speak. But yea…

>But yea, it's well designed, so it's supposed to be "hard to believe". It's so "well designed" that it makes no sense :) Reminds me of Rick and Morty's heist plot developed by that robot. At the end of the day you can come up with endless conspiracy theories and plots if your imagination is good enough and you watched all the Mission Impossible movies, and then then when people question it you just tell them "it's s…

So your critique of Snowden being a patsy is: I (the person saying it) am like a robot from some cartoon that sees everything conspiratorially just to win arguments, is that right?

Doesn't it sound like you're being too negative? It does seem more like you're trying to 'win arguments' by calling anything besides an official take a conspiracy theory, and disparaging anyone who says such, so nothing else can be said, right?

Re: Spy Kids

#44

Post by karmakurtisaani »

rdtsc wrote: post #36

Those look like fun activities. The list can be expanded and made a lot more fun: * See if you can make your sibling confess to eating an extra scoop of ice-cream: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_Intelligence_Committee_... * Slip some substances in your parents drinks and see if they'll tell you the password to the bank account so you can buy whatever you want: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MKUltra * Jealous how…

This could be an episode of Today, Now (the morning show of the Onion).

Re: Spy Kids

#45

Post by IIAOPSW »

keepamovin wrote: post #14
codetrotter wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s ok. If you don’t want your kids to be spies in the future, just say some stuff online that the agencies will dislike but which is not illegal to say. Hopefully that will discourage them from recruiting your children in the future. After all, who would want to hire the sons and daughters of a person who raised them with views that run so obviously counter to the opinions of the agencies. Edward Snowden is a hum…

If you discovered that Snowden was actually the patsy for a limited hangout operation designed to protect the sector from declining regulatory and congressional will in a post-911 market...still a hero?

Are you saying the Snowden Leaks were an inside job.

I mean, an inside and upstairs job?

I mean, screw it you know what I mean.

Re: Spy Kids

#46

Post by FirmwareBurner »

keepamovin wrote: post #43
FirmwareBurner wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>But yea, it's well designed, so it's supposed to be "hard to believe". It's so "well designed" that it makes no sense :) Reminds me of Rick and Morty's heist plot developed by that robot. At the end of the day you can come up with endless conspiracy theories and plots if your imagination is good enough and you watched all the Mission Impossible movies, and then then when people question it you just tell them "it's s…

So your critique of Snowden being a patsy is: I (the person saying it) am like a robot from some cartoon that sees everything conspiratorially just to win arguments, is that right? Doesn't it sound like you're being too negative? It does seem more like you're trying to 'win arguments' by calling anything besides an official take a conspiracy theory, and disparaging anyone who says such, so nothing else can be said, r…

No, I didn't call anything besides the official take a conspiracy theory, I only called your take a conspiracy theory because it seemed like hard to believe fantasy written for a show, and your only argument to support it was "it's well designed, so it's supposed to be hard to believe", which is just more fantasy designed to shut up any and all arguments against it, just like your last comment I'm currently replying to.

Re: Spy Kids

#47

Post by FreshStart »

ano88888 wrote: post #4

As a country, it is important that you have smart spies and the way to recruit is to identify potential candidates when they are young and nurture them. But as a parent, it will be your most important responsibility to prevent your kids from falling into this seemingly cool traps and become a spy which will not be a good life for your kids.

Instead work like a slave for a non existing reward. All your superiors spied, intrigued and ultimately defected to their own side or company. Loyalty is for sucker's and I can not understand how somebody can do this lifestyle, especially to his own kid. I can understand how the upper crust can promote the looser lifestyle so there are expendable pieces on the game board. But willingly, knowingly choosing no future for ones kid, while society defects all around you..

Re: Spy Kids

#48

Post by scrum-treats »

Played the Aerial Analysis challenge. There's a bit of overfitting/oversimplification on a couple questions. For instance, how can you be for sure the town is industrial just because you see 5 buildings? Also, who's to say danger isn't lurking at the park masked as celebration? We all remember JFK in Dallas.

Re: Spy Kids

#50

Post by Der_Einzige »

codetrotter wrote: post #7
ano88888 wrote: post #4

As a country, it is important that you have smart spies and the way to recruit is to identify potential candidates when they are young and nurture them. But as a parent, it will be your most important responsibility to prevent your kids from falling into this seemingly cool traps and become a spy which will not be a good life for your kids.

That’s ok. If you don’t want your kids to be spies in the future, just say some stuff online that the agencies will dislike but which is not illegal to say. Hopefully that will discourage them from recruiting your children in the future. After all, who would want to hire the sons and daughters of a person who raised them with views that run so obviously counter to the opinions of the agencies. Edward Snowden is a hum…

Doing that is a great way to get you on a list, and not necessarily the good ones.
Post reply on HN