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

U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective

inventati.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 838 posts

Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective

#391

Post by matheusmoreira »

iamnothere wrote: post #45

Everyone’s missing the big picture here which is that this targeting of infrastructure providers as “terrorists” is unprecedented and concerning: https://decode39.com/16319/autistici-inventati-case-sets-a-n... If a radical group sets up shop on I2P, are I2P users and devs now terrorists? This is a problem. What about Monero users/devs? Veilid? Tox? Signal?

It's a politico-technological arms race. Governments make laws, we make technology that gets around the laws. Governments must increase their tyranny just to maintain the same level of control they had before. The result is either an uncontrollable population, or a totalitarian state.

I always hoped we'd find some sort of equilibrium. A state where governments learn to tolerate some crime because fully policing them would require crossing serious lines. It's becoming increasingly clear though that governments have no limits. There is no cost they are unwilling to pay in the name of maintaining their own power.

Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective

#393

Post by Computer0 »

spullara wrote: post #385
OsrsNeedsf2P wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe help donate then? 13000 Euro is a lot of money to poor people

[flagged]

Capitalism is the single most powerful destroyer of the world the world has ever seen. It remains undefeated.

Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective

#395

Post by einpoklum »

cdrnsf wrote: post #294
einpoklum wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> when no such central organization insists No any such organization exists. It is a movement, and a description one can describe one's self or actions: "anti-fascist". But of course, their logic for sanctioning-by-association would mean that they all - Trump, Bessent, Rubio etc. - with their innumerable contacts with "violent terrorist groups and regimes" everywhere around the world, and just themselves really - sho…

Yes. The president fomented a violent insurrection and then pardoned its participants (who should all still be in prison). He shouldn't be in office and you could similarly sanction his own social media platform, X and any other number of their supporters.

Well, maybe that too, but I meant the Gaza genocide and the slaughter of civilians in Iran, Yemen, on Venezuelan boats etc.

Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective

#396

Post by einpoklum »

includenotfound wrote: post #346
einpoklum wrote: post #274

Links to the actual announcements of sanctions: * https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/sb0616/ * https://www.state.gov/releases/office-of-the-spokesperson/20... And - the list of people that were originally put in this category when G.W. Bush issued this executive order has 29 people/organizations: Usama bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri, Al Qaida, and various affiliated/related organizations. So, yesterday it wa…

[flagged]

> Very far to the left,

Well, a proto-fascist government would consider hosting anti-fascist websites as being "far left".

Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective

#397

Post by SiempreViernes »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #320
giraffe_lady wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think that's a different understanding of the situation than the one that the state currently has? Is it not "legitimate" in the same way to kill terrorists?

I am not an expert on the legalities. My impression is that, if they are terrorists, you kind of have to catch them in the act, or preparing to act, or providing support for actions. An army, in wartime, can be attacked in broader circumstances. Corrections welcome if I am wrong.

The US has murdered around 220 people at sea over the last year for the act of travelling like they are "narco terrorists".

Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective

#398

Post by arrosenberg »

CMay wrote: post #382
adtra wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know where to start. The US supported Saddam after his Iran invasion : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_support_for_Iraq... Maybe read how de Gaulle viewed the US "promoting peace in Europe" or how the British did after the US stole the Suez canal and kicked the British out of the Middle East.

Yes, after Saddam invaded Iran, because Iran was trying to export its revolution to Iraq. We didn't make Iraq attack Iran though. It was just one more war caused by Iran exporting revolution which has happened several times in the Middle East already. It was an opportunity to weaken Iran which is a far worse problem in the Middle East than Iraq was. Iran had fired most of its airforce pilots for not being Islamic rad…

And what lead to Iran exporting Islamic revolution? Possibly something involving Kermit Roosevelt Jr and the CIA?

Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective

#400

Post by cdrnsf »

einpoklum wrote: post #395
cdrnsf wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. The president fomented a violent insurrection and then pardoned its participants (who should all still be in prison). He shouldn't be in office and you could similarly sanction his own social media platform, X and any other number of their supporters.

Well, maybe that too, but I meant the Gaza genocide and the slaughter of civilians in Iran, Yemen, on Venezuelan boats etc.

Or the long tail of bodies that will come out of the USAID cuts.
Post reply on HN