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

DHS Issues BOD Banning Kaspersky from Federal Government

dhs.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–115 of 115 posts

Re: DHS Issues BOD Banning Kaspersky from Federal Government

#111

Post by peterwwillis »

lawnchair_larry wrote: post #106
peterwwillis wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Former Russian spies work for Kaspersky (Kaspersky has admitted this), they are based in Moscow, and their founder was trained by the KGB and worked for Russian military intelligence.

Not true. Euegene attended a KGB sponsored college. Also, military service was mandatory, and his military service was not related to intelligence.

"At the age of 16, Kaspersky entered a five-year program with The Technical Faculty of the KGB Higher School, which prepared intelligence officers for the Russian military and KGB. After graduating college, Kaspersky served the Soviet military intelligence service as a software engineer." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_Kaspersky

Re: DHS Issues BOD Banning Kaspersky from Federal Government

#112

Post by edmccard »

ams6110 wrote: post #89
QAPereo wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay. In that case I question what motivated your initial comment correcting your parent? Correcting a commonly abused saying, and thereby slightly reducing the volume of bullshit if only imperceptibly. I have to wonder why you seem so interested in commenting mostly on the comments of others.

Sometimes these things are peeves. I have a peeve about using "they" as a gender-neutral singular pronoun, but admit it doesn't have much effect on expressiveness. In general, though, I feel that the more precisely we use language, the more expressive it can be. Begging the question is different from raising the question. If we allow that conflation, it then becomes more difficult or requires more words to express wh…

>If we allow that conflation, it then becomes more difficult or requires more words to express what "begging the question" really is.

By analogy with Huffman coding, the meanings that are used less often should require more words to express than the more commonly-used meanings. And if you really want to express the meaning "assuming the premise", then you could just say "assuming the premise", instead of insisting on the "precision" of using a 16th-century mistranslation of petitio principii.

Re: DHS Issues BOD Banning Kaspersky from Federal Government

#113

Post by grzm »

QAPereo wrote: post #110
grzm wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Damn! ( Just when I thought I was out…. ) Honest question deserves an honest answer. Very similar motivation. I'm very interested in figuring out how to promote productive, constructive discussions in general and online in particular. The deep polarization that seems to have increased and been exacerbated by the internet is an issue that I think desperately needs to be solved. HN is a community that values constructi…

I have to agree with that, although I'm not so aware of the polarization or other dynamics here yet, I can certainly admire your aims and methods. Good luck spreading civility and discourse, although I'd encourage you to assume the best intentions in others as you go.

Thanks. I appreciate it. The polarization I refer to is more apparent in political threads here and in US society at large, not specific to HN. To be clear, my assumption at the start was as I described in my second comment: I did assume that you were sincerely trying to help. Your response was what made me question that that was the case, but I suspect your response was colored by the snark that I allowed to slip into my initial comment. I generally strive to keep that at bay because it's so rarely helpful in conversation, and it was a lack of discipline on my part that I didn't keep in in check here as well.

Would you mind sharing with me how you would have written my initial comment, (given what you know of my intention) that would have had the most positive effect on you? I'll take my answer off the air. Thanks again for your time and attention here. It's a rare opportunity and I do appreciate it.

Re: DHS Issues BOD Banning Kaspersky from Federal Government

#114

Post by barrkel »

banku_brougham wrote: post #98
barrkel wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because Russia is a domestic political issue in the US - it's been anointed as the McGuffin in the battle between the two main parties over the presidency.

The 'anoint' 'McGuffin' combo metaphor doesn't work, and the clash undermines your point.

Thanks for your literary criticism :)

I rather do think that political inclinations are religions in the US, however, but the wars are largely phony and forced - hence McGuffin. I'm sorry it upset you.

Re: DHS Issues BOD Banning Kaspersky from Federal Government

#115

Post by lawnchair_larry »

peterwwillis wrote: post #111
lawnchair_larry wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not true. Euegene attended a KGB sponsored college. Also, military service was mandatory, and his military service was not related to intelligence.

"At the age of 16, Kaspersky entered a five-year program with The Technical Faculty of the KGB Higher School, which prepared intelligence officers for the Russian military and KGB. After graduating college, Kaspersky served the Soviet military intelligence service as a software engineer." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_Kaspersky

https://eugene.kaspersky.com/2015/03/20/a-practical-guide-to...

"For the record: I never worked for Russian military intelligence. As I mentioned above, I worked as a software engineer at the Ministry of Defense."

Post reply on HN