Live data from Hacker News

U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective

inventati.org

491–500 of 773 posts

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

#491
post #473

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well the nazis called themselves socialist. I’m not saying this is that, but names are often chosen to mislead people I don’t think antifa is an kind of organized anything But I can say with certainty that people claiming that title smashes the shit out of property and people for a few years post Floyd where I’ve been in various areas of the west coast Some are probably genuine do-gooders who oppose fascism. Others a…

Sure, there are examples like that in any large enough group. The folks who stormed the capitol on January 6th should still be in jail too. Breaking laws usually yields punishment under said laws (unless you support or in the good graces of the current president). Labelling broad swaths of people who protest your agenda and don't like your masked goons killing and kidnapping people in their communities terrorists is…

[flagged]

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

#492

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?

The picture everyone is missing is voting in November is how this gets resolved. The only way radical authoritarians survive on 30% approval ratings is apathy. Theres no reason to put up with this, the other side of a 70% electorate opposition is prison for the lawless incumbent

> The only way radical authoritarians survive on 30% approval ratings is apathy.

And voter suppression, vote manipulation, or simply force.

I agree with you in that barring the above, there is no logical reason a vast majority of all elections should lean away from MAGA/GOP considering the state of the country.

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

#493

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What sort of logic is this? I use I2P and no one sanctioned me or labeled me a terrorist.

I'd look at the Prairieland Detention Center Case to understand how broadly and aggressively this government is using "terrorism" to go after political opponents. Daniel Rolando Sanchez-Estrada got 30 years in prison for moving a box of magazines related to the protest. He wasn't even at the actual protest. Several people got decades in jail because the FBI successfully convinced a jury that setting off fireworks nea…

> Several people got decades in jail because the FBI successfully convinced a jury that setting off fireworks near a detention center on the 4th of july was actually detonating bombs. And that because one idiot brought a gun and shot it, they are all guilty.

The USG has a somewhat different description of events, and appears to have had video that they showed a jury.

> The defendants dressed in “black bloc”—dark clothing with head and face coverings that concealed their identities—designed to hide each individual’s identity but also to aid and abet those members engaged in illegal acts by making members indistinguishable from one another to law enforcement. Evidence introduced at trial revealed that the defendants brought eleven firearms, body armor, and eleven military-grade first aid kits with tourniquets and other items to treat gunshot wounds to the scene of the attack. [...] After ANTIFA Cell members arrived at the detention facility, they began shooting off and throwing fireworks (explosives) at the facility and vandalizing vehicles and a guard shack on Prairieland property. [...] Witnesses testified that an Alvarado police officer responded to the scene after correctional officers called 911. When the officer began issuing commands to defendant Nathan Baumann, Benjamin Song can be heard on police bodycam video yelling, “get to the rifles!” and then he opened fire on the officers, striking the Alvarado police officer in the neck as the unarmed correctional officers ducked and ran for cover.

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/leader-antifa-cell-members-no...

Note you can see in the pictures they were definitely not just setting off fireworks "near" the detention facility, but from the camera stills its obviously intended as harassment. And "some idiot" didn't bring a gun, they were all part of a group, they brought lots of guns, and he actually shot a police officer during their "protest." Note also that the USG explicitly uses the word "fireworks", contrary to your framing.

Yeah, sorry, if you a) join a group that states it wants to overthrow the USG b) go with a bunch of members to a federal facility as part of a violent protest c) set off fireworks, vandalize everything in reach, and d) shoot a cop, you are all going to prison, and that makes perfect sense.

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

#494
post #473

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, there are examples like that in any large enough group. The folks who stormed the capitol on January 6th should still be in jail too. Breaking laws usually yields punishment under said laws (unless you support or in the good graces of the current president). Labelling broad swaths of people who protest your agenda and don't like your masked goons killing and kidnapping people in their communities terrorists is…

[flagged]

Ah, yes, never mind the hundreds of documented far right MAGA supporters that got video taped during the protest storming the Capitol, being violent towards police and destroying public property without masks and being easily identifiable. They were clearly infiltrated antifa wearing realistic masks to tarnish the reputation of real patriots!

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

#495

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?

I believe there is a double standard here compared to section 230 of the communications act.

Platforms can't be held liable for speech on their platforms for a reason. For full disclosure: I feel ambivalent about that.

I don't know of an equivalent legal protection for I2P-like infrastructure.

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

#496

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.

Well the definition is flawed, or as the British say, the law is an ass. Terrorism is widely understood to be the deployment of military force against civilian populations. Of course states do this all the time, but 'state terrorism' is basically dependent on whether politicians in country A align with country B or not; if they don't, they'll call out state abuses in country B as state terrorism, if not they'll say i…

>any kind of property

"Any kind" is quite the load bearing argument there. Let me remind you Europe is under an ongoing land invasion, which is why fucking with its defensive capabilities is unlikely to solicit much sympathies.

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

#497

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?

I believe there is a double standard here compared to section 230 of the communications act. Platforms can't be held liable for speech on their platforms for a reason. For full disclosure: I feel ambivalent about that. I don't know of an equivalent legal protection for I2P-like infrastructure.

You feel ambivalent about eg. HN not being held liable for some random user signing up and posting, say, a terroristic threat on it? You realise that if platforms/HN were legally punished for that, no website could accept user content, ever, and you are effectively suggesting the end of public communication on the internet?

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

#498

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think it was intended. I think that when you’re bombing thousands of targets, a 0.1-1% targeting error rate leads to dozens of unintended collateral hits (and thousands of civilians dead) — and is among the many reasons wars are horrific.

They hit the correct target. It's that although they could have, they didn’t check to see if it was a school first.

They did — in the targeting database which wasn’t correctly updated with the new analysis.

That’s exactly the sort of bureaucratic mistake which gets exposed via wartime mishaps.

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

#499
post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That wasn't the question you asked. The question you asked was about a couple decades later. When we helped overthrow the previous leader, it was because the fear was that he was establishing communism in Iran. He was unelected, removing the actual elected representatives and undermining the Shah. Of course after removing him, the Shah ended up not being much better, but can't win'em all. The spark that caused the wh…

It really wasn't, but in either case your answer takes us back to the original point being made... > it [the US] is the biggest organizer of violence, arms dealing, murder, corruption and every single one of your leaders has been a scourge inflicted on the world These aren't independent events. Every time we impose our imperial will on other countries, the echoes winds up being worse, with a very, very limited number…

> Every time we impose our imperial will on other countries

The US isn't an empire. Is Germany a US territory? Is Japan a US territory? Is Iraq? No. Is Panama? No. Puerto Rico and Hawaii are happily part of the US. We don't have to use military force or economic leverage to keep them part of the US. If the US government was destroyed, we would recreate it, because it is good.

The US also championed natural rights globally, which recognizes that people have rights that are not derived from any government, but are inherent. Guess which countries reject this? China, North Korea, Russia, Cuba, Vietnam, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Afghanistan, Syria and others.

> We barely win any of them

Winning depends on what you wanted to achieve. We don't need to win, we just need to get what we want. Our military won in Vietnam, but when conflict started again the government voted not to get involved. The Vietnamese love the US and hate China. South Koreans love the US. North Korea's leader loves the US and hates China. Japan loves the US and hates China. Saddam Hussein was killed in Iraq and we established forward bases to use against Iran. Afghanistan hates Iran. Osama bin Laden was killed. European countries and most Middle Eastern and most Asian countries are friendly with the US.

Everyone seems to recognize how Russia, Iran and China align. Our allies are getting stronger, because we're giving them tough love, while Cuba, Venezuela, Russia and Iran are all getting weaker.

You can interpret all of that however you'd like, but it doesn't sound like losing. People can delude themselves all they want and the media can yell from the top of the trees how everything is awful and we're losing and so on, but reality gets a vote. Don't let other people tell you what is real. Figure it out yourself and come to your own conclusions.

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

#500

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which terrorist groups, specifically? And what support are they offering specifically? You say provide tools for communication. Presumably that's every communication platform worldwide - almost undoubtably some sort of terrorist has used each of them.

They provide services to PKK which is a terrorist group, specifically.

Which services, and where is the evidence they do so?
Post reply on HN