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

451–460 of 774 posts

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

#451

Post by vlyan »

filoleg wrote: post #366
vlyan wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

8chan's /pol/ wasn't any different than 4chan's. the reason why the 4 is tolerated but the 8 got axed is that 4 is a honeypot and 8 wasn't.

> the reason why the 4 is tolerated but the 8 got axed is that 4 is a honeypot and 8 wasn't That's certainly a take. My personal take is that 4chan actually complies with the US laws, specifically the ones around promptly removing+reporting any illegal content that the US cares about (e.g., terrorism threats/CSAM/etc.), and 8chan doesn't. Out of curiosity, what makes you consider 4chan to be a honeypot, as opposed to…

we've seen several websites that do not break US law get evicted by registrars, ISPs, DDoS protection services, and other Internet landlords. 4chan miraculously survived multiple mass hysteria periods of the past decade without (iirc) any major disruptions. same as Russian 2ch -- miraculously untouched by Russia's rapid North Koreaization even though its /pol/ is overwhelmingly anti-regime.

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

#452

Post by culi »

xyzal wrote: post #210
rvz wrote: post #22

> Our financial strategy relies exclusively on voluntary donations. That is not a sustainable strategy in the long term. Sure after this news they will get lots of donations, but long term it is not something that is realistic. Since they are now "sanctioned" by the US you cannot legally donate to them even if you wanted to...*[0] [0] *Unless you now know why this collective needs crypto more than ever.

> Since they are now "sanctioned" by the US you cannot legally donate to them even if you wanted to...*[0] There are many of us who do not live in the US, so many still can. Just not through paypal.

That's not how US sanctions work. When the US sanctions something, nobody is allowed to donate to them. Basically any country that trades with the US (most) has to follow according to their trade deals. Any bank that wants to be in SWIFT must block any transfers

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

#454

Post by culi »

p-e-w wrote: post #448
culi wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone that politically aligns with them. They say that explicitly: > We support individuals, collectives, communities and groups whose political and social activities fit within this worldview and who share with us some fundamental principles: anti-fascism, anti-racism, anti-sexism, anti-militarism They don't receive any money for this. It's 100% volunteer services.

Then they are an activist group, not an “infrastructure provider” as claimed elsewhere in this thread, and holding them responsible for what their members do with the accounts they give them seems entirely fair.

You want them to be "held accountable" for supporting groups that don't align with the ideology of the US whitehouse.

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

#455

Post by retromario »

slowin wrote: post #216
graemep wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Damaging property for political ends has been part of the definition in the UK, and I think the US, for decades. I would say the case for targetting military equipment is stronger than for damaging most other things. > This is simply armed conflict. Armed conflict by residents and citizens against the state is usually a serious criminal offense everywhere.

> Damaging property for political ends has been part of the definition in the UK, and I think the US, for decades. Does that include property in Gaza, the West Bank or Lebanon? Because if the people who spray painted something are "terrorists", I want to know what the people who wiped Rafah off the face of the earth are called. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rafah

Colinizers?

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

#456

Post by feshbach »

pyth0 wrote: post #361
includenotfound wrote: post #337

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Antifa is a terrorist organization. https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/09/desi... It follows that those hosting them are chased

Antifa is not one organization, that's ridiculous. It would be like claiming that "Anarchists" are a terrorist organization.

[flagged]

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

#457

Post by meowface »

vlyan wrote: post #275
foul wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not unprecedented, but a lot of fools lauded moves like this when these kind of instruments were used with barely a legal net around them against islamic terrorism or cybercrime. I'm not crying for no Al-Qaeda or 8chan, mind you. In this very year UN and ICJ officials have been targeted in a similar fashion though. When the pax americana ends like this, I don't know what else is needed for EU and Asia to raise…

8chan's /pol/ wasn't any different than 4chan's. the reason why the 4 is tolerated but the 8 got axed is that 4 is a honeypot and 8 wasn't.

1. It is extremely likely neither 8chan /pol/ nor 4chan /pol/ were or are honeypots.

2. Untrue. I heavily used both (not as a right-winger; just as a decades-long anonymous imageboard user who sometimes finds it fun to rile people up in /pol/ boards). 8chan's was a lot worse and was shut down for a reason.

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

#458

Post by tptacek »

impossiblefork wrote: post #432
tptacek wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have real operational security concerns, your provider shouldn't know anything about you; should in fact have bilateral shielding between themselves and you to prevent either counterparty from learning stuff. That's how Signal works.

Signal will allow traffic analysis. You send the message to signal, if they wish they can write down to whom they send it on. It is impossible to make a secure system without the continuous transmission of dummy messages to large numbers of users.

Again: in every system there's always some kind of sleuthing you could do to attempt to identify a user. That's not the legal standard. The complaint against A/I is that they knowingly and deliberately assisted the PKK.

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

#459

Post by baobabKoodaa »

culi wrote: post #439
baobabKoodaa wrote: post #430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this case the US State Department is accurately reciting what this organization says about itself openly: https://www.inventati.org/about

> We support individuals, collectives, communities and groups whose political and social activities fit within this worldview and who share with us some fundamental principles: anti-fascism, anti-racism, anti-sexism, anti-militarism. On top of that, one has to share our basic attitude towards money and the capitalistic world: a deep feeling of uneasyness and unrest. I don't see anything wrong with that. They make 0 m…

> I don't see anything wrong with that.

Did I say there was something wrong with that? No. Let me repeat what I said: "In this case the US State Department is accurately reciting what this organization says about itself openly". Do you disagree with this statement?

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

#460

Post by inigyou »

tptacek wrote: post #230
inigyou wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Impossible for a public thing though, noblogs.org will always be traceable to where noblogs.org is hosted because that's how the packets get there. You can maintain much better opsec in a two way communication than a broadcast.

Right, I'm only moved to comment by the implications being drawn on this thread that Signal and WhatsApp are next. Different fact patterns and different legal standards.

Signal and WhatsApp are already required to give your communications to the government.
Post reply on HN