Live data from Hacker News

U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective

inventati.org

861–870 of 872 posts

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

#861

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So your argument is every single instance of antifa doing something bad was a false flag? Do you have any evidence to support this no-true-Scotsman?

Can you answer the question please?

Sure, I'll play along: It does not make you MAGA. Wearing a MAGA hat is evidence of being MAGA (or to be more accurate, of sharing MAGA beliefs), but it is not conclusive proof. In your hypothetical, the next steps would probably be interviewing your friends and family, and poring over your social media, to determine if you really identified with MAGA, or if it was a false flag deception.

Supposing it was not a false flag, then no, it would not mean MAGA as a whole are serial killers, but it's a gamble if the killings would be attributed to MAGA as a whole. E.g. wikipedia immediately attributes the Charlottesville car attack to white supremacists [1], but doesn't attribute the Prairieland ICE detention center attack to any group [2], nor the Tacoma attack [3], despite perpetrators being associated with BLM, or running explicitly anarchist and Antifa clubs and social media accounts.

This (including the double standard) is how all groups are treated. E.g. when the media says liberals or conservatives banned some books [4], it doesn't mean there must be a central organization of liberals/conservatives, or that liberals/conservatives on average are censorious or pro-free-speech, as any group, loose or tight-knit, official or informal, has internal differences. That's why the news will say "environmentalists glued their hands to the street" or "BLM activists toppled a statue", and not "some individuals did something, but those actions don't represent everyone that shares the beliefs that motivated them".

In fact, this is how you yourself treat groups. Your words: Trump ran as a republican because he thought it would be easier to sway republicans to vote for him because they're sheeple - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49466394

So basically this commenter is projecting, because that is all that far right people do - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49465924

See? No "actually the far right doesn't exist, if I did a Nazi salute and said trans rights, would that make the far right pro-LGBT?", no "they voted for republicans but are they republicans?", no "is the far right in the room with us now?" - you're able to talk about groups just fine! And you can define those groups based on behavior and espoused beliefs!

So since I've been more than kind and seriously answered your question, and re-explained human group categorization that you demonstrably already understood, do me the courtesy of answering my question as well: Why is pretending not to understand basic concepts such a common tactic for the left? Or if you won't speculate for the left as a whole, I'll be happy hearing why you did it. Is it just that you have no better arguments, so you just try to waste time instead, and hope that your opponent, forced to re-define all of language on the spot, will bungle something, and you hope the audience will misinterpret that bumbling as your victory?

[1] The Charlottesville car attack was a white supremacist terrorist attack perpetrated on August 12, 2017, when James Alex Fields Jr. deliberately drove his car into a crowd of people - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlottesville_car_attack

[2] On the evening of July 4, 2025, a civil disturbance and shooting occurred at the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Prairieland Detention Center in Alvarado, Texas, United States, during a protest - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_Prairieland_ICE_detention...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Tacoma_immigration_detent...

[4] https://abcnews.com/US/conservative-liberal-book-bans-differ...

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

#863

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand your comment.

Signal doesn't need traffic analysis because it knows the phone numbers of who is communicating.

Traffic analysis isn’t just to identify the peers but also to find patterns in communication (they are telling each other good morning and good night every day, they communicated before a terrorist attack, …)

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

#864

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you answer the question please?

Sure, I'll play along: It does not make you MAGA. Wearing a MAGA hat is evidence of being MAGA (or to be more accurate, of sharing MAGA beliefs), but it is not conclusive proof . In your hypothetical, the next steps would probably be interviewing your friends and family, and poring over your social media, to determine if you really identified with MAGA, or if it was a false flag deception. Supposing it was not a fals…

I am MAGA by the way and I hate all free expression. I think the government made the right move in sanctioning these groups and I hope they manage to bomb their headquarters soon.

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

#865

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a lot of talking around this in the comment section for some reason: they allegedly provide infrastructure for recognized terrorist organizations such as Hamas and Palestine Action (the group that attacked UK air force bases).

So does WhatsApp

Knowingly and intentionally?

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

#866
post #464

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spraying paint into the jet engine of a military aircraft is not "terrorism". It may be criminal, but it was not in any way a violent crime. Given that it disabled the aircraft, it counts as more than mere vandalism, but calling this an act of terror is outrageous. The logic seems to be that Hamas has committed terrorist attacks against Israel, and is also the government of Palestine, so anyone fighting for the human…

Terrorism is often defined as actions designed to invoke political change. There's no actual requirement for violence for it to be terrorism.

So holding a public debate is terrorism too? That’s a pretty lacking definition.

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

#867

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither. They were part of anti-ISIS/ISIL operations.

In Europe?

Bad argument. If you sabotage military equipment in Europe, obviously you also indirectly lower the military potential of that army somewhere else. The planes in Europe aren’t there to be paperweights, they are either being maintained there for service or are there as a deterrent and need to be reinforced by other planes when damaged.

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

#868
post #587

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PA was armed. > you are not allowed to murder unarmed soldiers, That's also false, you can absolutely kill unarmed combatants so long as they remain combatants. Eg you can bomb an artillery crew even if they don't have sidearms. To be eligible for capture, a combatant must generally surrender. > typically called „arresting“ when a government does it to their own citizens I encourage you to read up on POW camps. There…

An artillery crew is armed with the cannon. POWs don’t have attorneys, but they do have rights. Limiting food and medical aid is a war crime. Of course, everybody routinely violates the rights of POWs, and only the losers ever get prosecuted.

Source that you wouldn’t be allowed to kill unarmed enemy soldiers? Imagine a scouting team doing reconnaissance, surely you’re allowed to attack and kill them?

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

#869
post #716

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, you always send a dummy message the appointed time. If you have a real message, or a network maintenance message, that substitutes for a dummy message. You never send messages other than at the appointed time. Delayed or dropped messages won't matter, since you only send a message at the appointed time. So the network is literally indistinguishable from one where you have sent no messages to all participants and…

Do messages have a visible receiver address of any kind? In that case, you're out of luck. The only way to do make this statistically sound would involve an insane amount of messages, rendering it impossible.

No, of course there isn't a visible receiver address.

You have a list of peers, P1,...,PN, every second, at a specific pre-decided time, slightly fuzzed to avoid timing stuff, you send a message to each of them. If you don't put one in, it's a dummy message chosen at random and encrypted. But if you have a message, you send that at the appointed time.

Consequently, from the outside of the system, from the PoV of someone who does not have the keys, its behaviour is indistinguishable from a system where no one is sending any messagess at all.

Post reply on HN