11–15 of 15 posts
Why does facebook and google feel entitled to fight "Russian activity"? What if most of that "Russian" activity is created by CIA/NSA and European SIGINT agencies that we know (from Vault7) stole others fingerprints and can pretend to act as other actors? Should not facebook and google stay neutral on political issues, unless it affects their business? Facebook was actively supporting republicans campaigns in the las…
Why does facebook and google feel entitled to fight "Russian activity"? What if most of that "Russian" activity is created by CIA/NSA and European SIGINT agencies that we know (from Vault7) stole others fingerprints and can pretend to act as other actors? Should not facebook and google stay neutral on political issues, unless it affects their business? Facebook was actively supporting republicans campaigns in the las…
> stole others fingerprints IOCs don't really work that way. It's pretty unlikely that FireEye, et. al. would be fooled by copypasta binaries. But there is an interesting point related to this: US corporations are clearly going to the mat for their host country's intelligence services. Note this in the context of the dozen(s?) of cases of foreign election interference the CIA has been involved in. I don't think there…
I see nothing wrong with this. We have +180 confirmed elections interfered by US agencies. None of them was reported in mainstream media. What's wrong with it being the other way around?
Good for them to make this sort of tool. But what exactly is going to come out of this? How many people, especially the ones who fell for this stuff and went towards Trump, are going to publicly admit that they were bamboozled by the Russians? Almost none. It's a huge slap on the face to realize you were pawn in a global game. So to people that might actually use this service, is it going to change their opinions?
Good for them to make this sort of tool. But what exactly is going to come out of this? How many people, especially the ones who fell for this stuff and went towards Trump, are going to publicly admit that they were bamboozled by the Russians? Almost none. It's a huge slap on the face to realize you were pawn in a global game. So to people that might actually use this service, is it going to change their opinions?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I find it strange that, when arguing that we can't trust businesses to act in a neutral manner, you link to Wikileaks, a pawn of the Russian government.
>Wikileaks, a pawn of the Russian government. An unproven conspiracy theory, with zero evidence to support.
* Wikileaks tweeted that the Panama papers leaks was an attack against the Russian government by George Soros[1].
* Assange was paid by the Russian propaganda arm, RT, to host a show[2].
* Wikileaks turned down leaks about the Russian government[3].
* The hacked DNC emails that Wikileaks leaked were hacked by the Russian government[4].
* Wikileaks tweets that foreign agent Flynn was ousted by US spies[5].
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/07/putin-dismisses...
[2] https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/01/world/europe/wikileaks-ju...
[3] https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/17/wikileaks-turned-down-l...
[4] https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-07-25/cybersecu...