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

Wayback Machine points to pro-Russia rebels in downing of MH17

csmonitor.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 113 posts

Re: Wayback Machine points to pro-Russia rebels in downing of MH17

#91

Post by unclebucknasty »

awalton wrote: post #88
dredmorbius wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting how the right to be forgotten seems so desirable Sorry, but this is a complete mischaracterization of the right. I've been having the same conversation with Yonatan Zunger on G+, he tried cracking a similar joke there. https://plus.google.com/u/0/+YonatanZunger/posts/856eZ9hWtm3 It's a flagrantly specious argument. Compelling public right to know in an international incident, attack on the public, by…

> That passes any reasonable grounds for denying an RTBF request. That passes your definition of reasonable grounds. The problem is that there doesn't exist an established "reasonable grounds" in this area, period. There is no legal test as to what is "reasonable." It's left up to the likes of Google to decide what records society keeps on who. And that's absolutely flabberghasting. Within a month of this "right" bei…

>Within a month of this "right" being instated, evil people were already using it to cover their tracks, and that's a Fact that cannot be ignored.

Perhaps it cannot be ignored, but what should we do with that fact?

The problem with the line of reasoning is that, if left unqualified, it can be carried as far as justification for totalitarianism.

So, perhaps until a reasonable standard can be established, I wonder if ignoring that fact is our least bad option. If evil people continue to take advantage, then perhaps that would provide the incentive to quickly get us to court-testing, precedent, and the establishment of a standard. And it may be the only approach that errs on the side of rights preservation in general.

Re: Wayback Machine points to pro-Russia rebels in downing of MH17

#92

Post by jqm »

klearvue wrote: post #10

I was following the news from the conflict in Ukraine and when the plane got downed, pro-Russia rebels were celebrating all over the internet (thinking that they'd downed a Ukrainian supply plane). When it became obvious the plane was civilian, the celebratory posts and videos started to disappear with blazing speeds.

"posts from pro-Russian rebels...on the internet..."

You maybe mean posts ostensibly from pro-Russian rebels appearing on the internet?

Re: Wayback Machine points to pro-Russia rebels in downing of MH17

#93

Post by jqm »

hugh4life wrote: post #86

I don't want to get into the politics, but I wonder about the algorithm the Wayback Machine uses to decide what to cache and if intel agencies manipulate it so the WM can be used for PR purposes. "It is possible that the WM website could have been spoofed somehow to create these records, but it would not be easily done. To do so would either require hacking WM and creating the new records within its system, or spoofi…

Their explanation seemed a bit too quick. And did I miss something or is there a reason the actual account couldn't possibly have been hacked or spoofed before being stored on wayback?

No, I don't think it would really be that hard for an actor the size of... well, some of the parties involved in this debacle.

The rebels probably accidentally shot the plane down. Most likely explanation. But, if someone tries to make hay with this event however, for example using it in public speeches to justify further military aid, advisers or intervention... I'm going to begin wondering about that.

Re: Wayback Machine points to pro-Russia rebels in downing of MH17

#94

Post by dredmorbius »

awalton wrote: post #88
dredmorbius wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting how the right to be forgotten seems so desirable Sorry, but this is a complete mischaracterization of the right. I've been having the same conversation with Yonatan Zunger on G+, he tried cracking a similar joke there. https://plus.google.com/u/0/+YonatanZunger/posts/856eZ9hWtm3 It's a flagrantly specious argument. Compelling public right to know in an international incident, attack on the public, by…

> That passes any reasonable grounds for denying an RTBF request. That passes your definition of reasonable grounds. The problem is that there doesn't exist an established "reasonable grounds" in this area, period. There is no legal test as to what is "reasonable." It's left up to the likes of Google to decide what records society keeps on who. And that's absolutely flabberghasting. Within a month of this "right" bei…

No, not mine. The EU court's.

The right is not absolute (see below).

Google does not have to make a final decision but may decide on request. It can also pass that decision on to the court. For individuals with limited resources, a request to a search engine is more reasonable than having to litigate every instance. There is no sanction on the search engine for passing on the decision.

Max Huijgen's description from the links above:

A case-by-case assessment is needed considering the type of information in question, its sensitivity for the individual’s private life and the interest of the public in having access to that information.

Or if you prefer the EU court's own fact sheet:

"On the “Right to be Forgotten” : Individuals have the right - under certain conditions - to ask search engines to remove links with personal information about them. This applies where the information is inaccurate, inadequate, irrelevant or excessive for the purposes of the data processing (para 93 of the ruling). The court found that in this particular case the interference with a person’s right to data protection could not be justified merely by the economic interest of the search engine. At the same time, the Court explicitly clarified that the right to be forgotten is not absolute but will always need to be balanced against other fundamental rights, such as the freedom of expression and of the media (para 85 of the ruling). A case-by-case assessment is needed considering the type of information in question, its sensitivity for the individual’s private life and the interest of the public in having access to that information. The role the person requesting the deletion plays in public life might also be relevant."

http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/files/factsheets...

Yes, people were attempting to use the ruling beyond its scope. Google's Chief Legal Officer, David Drummond said: "We think it went too far, and didn't consider adequately the impact on free expression, which is absolutely a human right."

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2345055/googles-sch...

And:

"Only two months in our process is still very much a work in progress. It’s why we incorrectly removed links to some articles last week (they’ve since been reinstated). But the good news is that the ongoing, active debate that’s happening will inform the development of our principles, policies and practices – in particular about how to balance one person’s right to privacy with another’s right to know."

http://searchengineland.com/google-speaks-right-forgotten-19...

There's a tremendous amount of disinformation on this ruling. Frankly, you're part of it.

Re: Wayback Machine points to pro-Russia rebels in downing of MH17

#95

Post by dredmorbius »

kghose wrote: post #72
dredmorbius wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting how the right to be forgotten seems so desirable Sorry, but this is a complete mischaracterization of the right. I've been having the same conversation with Yonatan Zunger on G+, he tried cracking a similar joke there. https://plus.google.com/u/0/+YonatanZunger/posts/856eZ9hWtm3 It's a flagrantly specious argument. Compelling public right to know in an international incident, attack on the public, by…

Who decides?

Here you go:

Factsheet on the "€œRight to be Forgotten"€ ruling (C-131/12)

http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/files/factsheets...

Re: Wayback Machine points to pro-Russia rebels in downing of MH17

#96

Post by dredmorbius »

trhway wrote: post #71
gwern wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's interesting how the right to be forgotten seems so desirable, yet when something like this happens it's great that no one can cover up their tracks. Now the pro-Russian separists are trying to delete all sorts of info. Are war crimes what 'right to be forgotten' is all about?

However horrific the civilian plane's shooting down is, i don't think accidental shoot down would qualify as a war crime. If anything, the celebratory message about supposed successful shooting down of one more military cargo plane confirms that the rebels, it it were rebels' missile, were intending to shoot at an enemy military target . Wrt. the right [more precisely lack of it] to be forgotten and war crimes : http…

"wantonly destroying cities, towns, villages, or any object not warranted by military necessity" is a war crime.

A plane would be such an object.

"murdering, mistreating, or deporting civilian residents of an occupied territory to slave labor camps" is a war crime.

Passengers of an aircraft traversing an occupied territory could be construed as civilian residents.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crime

"Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population, before or during the war..." is a crime against humanity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimes_against_humanity

Re: Wayback Machine points to pro-Russia rebels in downing of MH17

#97

Post by dredmorbius »

szierk wrote: post #77
austenallred wrote: post #5

It's interesting how the right to be forgotten seems so desirable, yet when something like this happens it's great that no one can cover up their tracks. Now the pro-Russian separists are trying to delete all sorts of info. We have this tweet about them getting a bunch of anti-aircraft missiles ( http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:NF6E5FC... ), showing off their new toys ( https://twitter.com/grassw…

It's apples and oranges. The right to be forgotten usually doesn't refer to things adults unanonymously post to social networking sites and similar forums.

There's an explicit exception for a compelling public interest in the information as well.

Re: Wayback Machine points to pro-Russia rebels in downing of MH17

#99

Post by wglb »

greglindahl wrote: post #14
quantized wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's on topic with the Wayback Machine involvement.

Yes, and I'm glad that I was allowed to change the title of the article to indicate the reason why this is relevant to HN. Edit2: and now the title got reverted to the article title, which obscures what's interesting to HN readers. Oh well, inflexible policy in action. EDIT: Given the poor quality of the discussion, I now regret posting this link. Very little discussion of the Wayback machine and how this is a new an…

I found this to be the most interesting posts on the subject.

Re: Wayback Machine points to pro-Russia rebels in downing of MH17

#100

Post by kjs3 »

adobriyan wrote: post #63
cobrausn wrote: post #26

Worth noting: Two days ago, an actual AN-26 cargo plane was shot down [1]. At the time, Ukraine assumed it had to be a Russian missile, because they did not think the rebels had the ability to shoot anything above a ceiling of about 2.5 kilometers. This seems to be confirming that the rebels are the ones doing the shooting. The intelligence agencies of the world are having a busy day, I'm sure. [1] http://www.nytimes…

This is just brilliant. AN-26 shooting, allegedly by rebels, proofs that malaysian boeing was shot by rebels. By that logic UA did this because it shot down russian civil plane in 2001, admitting it after months.

I was wondering how long it would be before one of you showed up...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterhimler/2014/05/06/russias-m...

Post reply on HN