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

Meta blocks links to hacked JD Vance dossier over election interference concerns

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 35 posts

Re: Meta blocks links to hacked JD Vance dossier over election interference concerns

#11

Post by HKH2 »

Canada wrote: post #8

If it's in the public interest, and it's true, then it's news and should be published regardless of who came up with it or their possible motives are for doing so. The PDF link posted by moneycantbuy in this thread appears to be appropriately redacted, hiding personal information which isn't newsworthy such as his social security number and home address.. but even then, I just tried Googling "JD Vance home" and I get…

> and it's true

That's the problematic part. The factcheckers can just sit on something that doesn't help their cause and then attempt to deal with it years later.

E.g. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-very-fine-people/

Re: Meta blocks links to hacked JD Vance dossier over election interference concerns

#13

Post by aaron695 »

Canada wrote: post #8

If it's in the public interest, and it's true, then it's news and should be published regardless of who came up with it or their possible motives are for doing so. The PDF link posted by moneycantbuy in this thread appears to be appropriately redacted, hiding personal information which isn't newsworthy such as his social security number and home address.. but even then, I just tried Googling "JD Vance home" and I get…

You seem oblivious to what doxing is.

> this all looks like public information.

Yes, doxing is public info.

Can I publish all the names and street addresses and phone numbers in a document of Kamala Harris's extended family to make some newsworthy point about their homes. (rich = she's not one of us / poor = she's not good enough if she can't pull her relatives out of poverty)

> I'm sure anyone could go to the Hamilton County records office

This is a site for hackers, try and learn the difference between data available in search, data available online and data available in the meat world. These are not the same, as a hacker (Startup/Blackhat/curious) this difference matters.

The dossier poisoned itself permanently doxing with the phone number & home address. Kiwi Farms/8chan/4chan are there for people who want to dox. (Kiwi Farms has the unredacted version, Ken Klippenstein redacted his download)

Re: Meta blocks links to hacked JD Vance dossier over election interference concerns

#14

Post by Larrikin »

fleabagmange wrote: post #9
Canada wrote: post #8

If it's in the public interest, and it's true, then it's news and should be published regardless of who came up with it or their possible motives are for doing so. The PDF link posted by moneycantbuy in this thread appears to be appropriately redacted, hiding personal information which isn't newsworthy such as his social security number and home address.. but even then, I just tried Googling "JD Vance home" and I get…

On the other hand this type of censorship occurred in favor of the Biden candidacy in relation to the Hunter Biden laptop scandal. What’s fair is fair, if they censor one set of controversial findings they ought censor the other.

Which office was Hunter Biden running for last cycle?

Re: Meta blocks links to hacked JD Vance dossier over election interference concerns

#15

Post by NullPrefix »

blackeyeblitzar wrote: post #5

I really wish these companies would be consistent about their policies. It feels like they pick and choose when to enforce them, often times seemingly in line with their employees’ or leaders’ biases. For example what constitutes a ‘hacked’ item? The JD Vance dossier? Biden’s daughter’s journal? Trump’s tax returns? Hunter Biden’s laptop? Diplomatic cables from Wikileaks? Why are some of these given a pass and others…

>I really wish these companies would be consistent about their policies

But they are completely consistent. If something helps one particular party/ideology - it's allowed and promoted, if it helps the other side - it's banned. Simple as

Re: Meta blocks links to hacked JD Vance dossier over election interference concerns

#16

Post by throwthrowuknow »

pyuser583 wrote: post #3

I’m not thrilled corporations are so willing to engage in a coverup. Democracy is vulnerable to manipulation. But that’s an essential vulnerability. In the end, it’s the citizenry which is responsible for sober decision making. I understand the impulse to keep “irrelevant” or “manipulative” information away from decision makers, but this impulse is only appropriate when the decision makers are perfunctory. Is that wh…

So what information have you read in the dossier that has helped you with your sober decision making?

Re: Meta blocks links to hacked JD Vance dossier over election interference concerns

#17

Post by Dracophoenix »

aaron695 wrote: post #13
Canada wrote: post #8

If it's in the public interest, and it's true, then it's news and should be published regardless of who came up with it or their possible motives are for doing so. The PDF link posted by moneycantbuy in this thread appears to be appropriately redacted, hiding personal information which isn't newsworthy such as his social security number and home address.. but even then, I just tried Googling "JD Vance home" and I get…

You seem oblivious to what doxing is. > this all looks like public information. Yes, doxing is public info. Can I publish all the names and street addresses and phone numbers in a document of Kamala Harris's extended family to make some newsworthy point about their homes. (rich = she's not one of us / poor = she's not good enough if she can't pull her relatives out of poverty) > I'm sure anyone could go to the Hamilt…

> Can I publish all the names and street addresses and phone numbers in a document of Kamala Harris's extended family to make some newsworthy point about their homes. (rich = she's not one of us / poor = she's not good enough if she can't pull her relatives out of poverty)

Yes. Such a document is or at least was once referred to as a phonebook.

>try and learn the difference between data available in search, data available online and data available in the meat world. These are not the same, as a hacker (Startup/Blackhat/curious) this difference matters.

Citizen and professional journalists regularly record and expose persons of interest going about their daily lives. For decades now, they've obtained this information not through requisitions from city hall, but through online databases like Lexis Nexis or municipal criminal record databases. It's not a crime to publish an inconvenient truth. In fact, when individuals come forward as whistleblowers, they are lionized for their divulgence of the truth.

Re: Meta blocks links to hacked JD Vance dossier over election interference concerns

#18

Post by schiffern »

throwthrowuknow wrote: post #16
pyuser583 wrote: post #3

I’m not thrilled corporations are so willing to engage in a coverup. Democracy is vulnerable to manipulation. But that’s an essential vulnerability. In the end, it’s the citizenry which is responsible for sober decision making. I understand the impulse to keep “irrelevant” or “manipulative” information away from decision makers, but this impulse is only appropriate when the decision makers are perfunctory. Is that wh…

So what information have you read in the dossier that has helped you with your sober decision making?

For one, staunchly opposing corn subsidies isn't too popular with Iowa voters. I see why he wrote under a pseudonym.

http://frumforum.com/entry/norquist-loses-the-ethanol-subsid...

Re: Meta blocks links to hacked JD Vance dossier over election interference concerns

#19

Post by Canada »

HKH2 wrote: post #11
Canada wrote: post #8

If it's in the public interest, and it's true, then it's news and should be published regardless of who came up with it or their possible motives are for doing so. The PDF link posted by moneycantbuy in this thread appears to be appropriately redacted, hiding personal information which isn't newsworthy such as his social security number and home address.. but even then, I just tried Googling "JD Vance home" and I get…

> and it's true That's the problematic part. The factcheckers can just sit on something that doesn't help their cause and then attempt to deal with it years later. E.g. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-very-fine-people/

Yeah, I agree. It's not the place of a social media platform to judge. There's no such thing as unbiased, neutral fact checkers. Readers will have to judge the truth of it for themselves.

I was trying to say that it shouldn't matter if the information came from mainstream news source, a hacker, enemy state or whoever else. My understanding is that meta blocked the dossier solely on the basis of where they believe the information originated.

Post reply on HN