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

She Tweeted Against the Mexican Cartels. They Tweeted Her Murder

thedailybeast.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 218 posts

Re: She Tweeted Against the Mexican Cartels. They Tweeted Her Murder

#151

Post by hueving »

mjfl wrote: post #117
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And much of the blame lies with you and I for not shouldering some of the risk and uniting with her to be a stronger large force against the murderers. Someone who can prevent their own misfortune by taking known steps yet doesn't take them is exhibiting behavior deserving of criticism. Finding someone else to blame doesn't change that, so what point are you trying to make by finding even more people to blame?

>Someone who can prevent their own misfortune by taking known steps yet doesn't take them is exhibiting behavior deserving of criticism. It is infuriating to me that you would suggest that it is this woman's fault for being murdered. So she's supposed to have a working knowledge of crypto despite being a working woman (in a non-computer related field) in a 2nd world country OR just shut up about rampant murder and ki…

There is no such thing as a 2nd world country.

Re: She Tweeted Against the Mexican Cartels. They Tweeted Her Murder

#152

Post by [deleted] »

handle_bars wrote: post #144
rurounijones wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Person A takes drugs, person A is affected. Person A kills Person B, person B is affected.

This has got to be the most naive reasoning I've seen. We totally live in a deterministic world where 1 action affects only 1 person, and everything else is isolated from one another.

[deleted]

Re: She Tweeted Against the Mexican Cartels. They Tweeted Her Murder

#153

Post by stephenhuey »

vacri wrote: post #109
lazaroclapp wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have quite an amount of oil. But that oil will continue to be sold to the U.S. (and others) regardless of what happens with the cartels or to the people of Mexico (Short of a revolution, I suppose). In fact, in recent years, reforms have been passed to make it easier for foreign companies to get involved in oil extraction in Mexico. Given that, there is very little incentive to send an occupation force in order to…

Has that ever turned out well in recent memory? Yes - UN peacekeepers do have a positive effect. They just don't hit the news much because they're not dramatically beating their chests about it and bragging about how big their guns are. They're not perfect, but they're certainly better than just leaving things be. Have a poke around here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_United_Nations_peac...

I just visited Rwanda and Bosnia a couple months ago, and I heard stories about the UN failing miserably in both places only a couple of decades ago. A guide in Sarajevo even said the UN would sometimes accidentally return captured Bosnian civilians to the Serbian army on the hillside. With "friends" as competent as that, Mexico would probably be better off without UN soldiers.

Re: She Tweeted Against the Mexican Cartels. They Tweeted Her Murder

#154

Post by Dylan16807 »

handle_bars wrote: post #144
rurounijones wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Person A takes drugs, person A is affected. Person A kills Person B, person B is affected.

This has got to be the most naive reasoning I've seen. We totally live in a deterministic world where 1 action affects only 1 person, and everything else is isolated from one another.

Congratulations, you figured out that a simplification of an argument is a simplification.

If you would like answers about the details you can search google or ask.

If you want to sound smart for figuring out that there are details, it's not going to happen.

Re: She Tweeted Against the Mexican Cartels. They Tweeted Her Murder

#155

Post by dingaling »

Crito wrote: post #103
selimthegrim wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the funniest shit I've ever heard in my life. The CIA that can't run human intelligence worth shit from Amman to Kabul? The CIA that took 10 years to find Bin Laden after being led around by the nose by the ISI (_nath dalna_, as they say in Urdu/Hindi)?

Mother of all selection biases. We only know their failures. Their victories, by definition, are unknown to us. In what possible scenario could we ever hope to learn the full extent of their crimes? Intelligence agencies burn their records when they are threatened. The Stasi had to destroy paper records, which they failed to do rapidly enough to prevent the public from physically seizing them. The CIA watched this ha…

> The CIA watched this happen. They learned from those mistakes.

They didn't only watch; in the chaos they also broke-into Stasi offices and made off with sackloads of documents.

Re: She Tweeted Against the Mexican Cartels. They Tweeted Her Murder

#156

Post by AnthonyMouse »

hueving wrote: post #151
mjfl wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Someone who can prevent their own misfortune by taking known steps yet doesn't take them is exhibiting behavior deserving of criticism. It is infuriating to me that you would suggest that it is this woman's fault for being murdered. So she's supposed to have a working knowledge of crypto despite being a working woman (in a non-computer related field) in a 2nd world country OR just shut up about rampant murder and ki…

There is no such thing as a 2nd world country.

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

Re: She Tweeted Against the Mexican Cartels. They Tweeted Her Murder

#157

Post by dang »

logn wrote: post #89
monochr wrote: post #14

This is why we need not only password locks and full encryption but panic passwords and hidden logins on every piece of electronics we own. That no mobile OS offers these yet is pathetic. When twitter and facebook don't let you connect anonymously from tor, this is what the result is. If you have a major website that is used by dissidents and journalists in countries such as Mexico or Iran and you don't have a plain…

HN also makes it hard to connect from Tor... "Prove you're legit" and the captcha never lets you through, even after solving it right. This is a common problem with Cloudflare sites. Cloudflare is an enormous security hole as it is and it's making it worse by actively working against Tor and making SSL certs largely untrustable (if they weren't already).

Are you sure you're up to date on that? Captcha for new account creation on HN is either mostly turned off or completely so, and last I tested it, Google had made RECAPTCHA doable by humans again.

HN's restrictions on Tor IPs are only for brand new accounts. That's because of past abuses by trolls. Even then, we routinely override the restriction for accounts that are obviously legit. Anyone who sees a case of this (i.e. legit noob comments that are dead) should email us. In most cases we fix them immediately.

Re: She Tweeted Against the Mexican Cartels. They Tweeted Her Murder

#158

Post by deciplex »

shkkmo wrote: post #135
deciplex wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If drugs are legalized tomorrow, what do you think would happen? If I were the cartels, I would continue selling my product, this time legal (similar to how companies are outsourcing to China..drug companies will outsource to Mexico). My power would continue or increase, because I could just buy off any cop and/or government official and the violence would continue (ruling by fear). So, why don't farmers do this? T…

As someone who has dealt with people for whom medical marijuana has saved lives and eased suffering, it is not a 'Trojan Horse'. It may be a step along a longer path. Even if it is the only step we end up taking along that path, it will still have been worthwhile step to take.

I certainly don't mean to say that marijuana for medical purposes is bullshit, but the OP is correct that, in many cases, it is just a cover for someone who is not sick to get their hands on some legal weed. My point is that, even if that's the case, if it serves the purpose of demonstrating that marijuana is benign and even beneficial in some cases, then it's worth whatever 'dishonesty' he's taking issue with.

Re: She Tweeted Against the Mexican Cartels. They Tweeted Her Murder

#159

Post by Natsu »

shkkmo wrote: post #127
Natsu wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody is forcing their customers to give them money (save possibly the cartels themselves, I'm not sure). They could go with out or go to a country where it's legal, among other options.

...because that's how addictive drugs work? Drug addicts make rational choices and have lots of money to spend on planning international trips?

They had a choice the first time, at least, even if you claim it took that away after. It seems odd to blame one group of people for 3rd degree consequences when ignoring the rest.

That seems to be an unpopular statement, but it's still true.

Re: She Tweeted Against the Mexican Cartels. They Tweeted Her Murder

#160

Post by AnthonyMouse »

fleitz wrote: post #115
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Fix the corruption..and you fix the cartel issue. You have the cause and effect inverted. Everyone has a price. The reason there is so much corruption in Mexico is that we've made corruption so profitable. > If I were the cartels, I would continue selling my product, this time legal (similar to how companies are outsourcing to China..drug companies will outsource to Mexico). My power would continue or increase, bec…

So we're shutting down Starbucks, Coca-Cola, Altria, and Anheuser Busch? It seems as a society we have other thoughts on what the sensible thing to do with drugs is, namely, let users of it use it as long as they don't harm others. Using drugs and being high in public is as common as coffee on the morning commute, to paraphrase Coca-Cola, getting high in public is the real thing.

> It seems as a society we have other thoughts on what the sensible thing to do with drugs is, namely, let users of it use it as long as they don't harm others.

Drug users do harm others. People crash their vehicles into pedestrians or put psychoactive or harmful substances into the air without the consent of others or commit robbery for money to buy drugs. Alcohol and cigarettes belong in exactly the same category.

Blanket prohibitions just don't work to prevent the harm. It only leads to the rise of organized crime. But permitting the substances while discouraging their use is quite effective -- as has been demonstrated in the recent past with the reduction in cigarette smoking in the US.

This is also why there is never any objection to caffeine. People drinking coffee has essentially zero capacity for harm to third parties.

Post reply on HN