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

One of the world’s most visited websites that nobody is aware of (2017)

sijmen.ruwhof.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 169 posts

Re: One of the world’s most visited websites that nobody is aware of (2017)

#141

Post by equalunique »

gandhium wrote: post #128
scottlocklin wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ahem. The maker of that documentary is anti-Putin to the extent he supports the theory that Putin blew up some Russian apartment buildings to start a war. Browder, on the other hand, is actively surpressing the documentary; even if none of the things said about him in the documentary are true (in which case you'd think he would sue the guy who made it for libel; a guy who lives in the UK), that's pretty shady.

That filmmaker was anti-Putin and he still lives in Russia? Totally believable.

Pussy Riot is anti-Putin and they are still based in Russia. Same can be said about everyone in Russia who voted against Putin in the most recent election. You don't have to live outside of Russia to be anti-Putin.

Re: One of the world’s most visited websites that nobody is aware of (2017)

#142

Post by cmroanirgo »

1024core wrote: post #121
shakna wrote: post #6

> According to another source, a public address book at locatefamily.com, someone under the name Vladimir S. Nesterenko is living at [REDACTED] in Moscow. Vladimir lives according to Google Streetview it’s an apartment complex far away from the Moscow city center... Really? Someone investigating with journalists, and may be considered a journalists themselves (?), actually publishes the address of someone that they a…

If it's in a WHOIS record, is it really private?

Probably not, but there's a big difference between information being drowned in the midst of other information, and carefully pruned information from that pile and then put into an article whose sole purpose is to draw attention to it.

Regardless, it's a very poor decision made by the author to reveal it in such a way, with maps, etc.

Re: One of the world’s most visited websites that nobody is aware of (2017)

#143

Post by Fins »

orbital-decay wrote: post #93
Fins wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using that piece of rather silly putin's propaganda as a source lowers your credibility greatly.

However, their point stands true: in exUSSR climate, registering a dummy entity through an ignorant proxy is an easy and common way to run a shady business, and sometimes even a legit one. It's entirely unnecessary to bring Magnitsky's deal as an example, but this method is well known and practiced since perestroika. It's safe to assume the person in question was a proxy, and that further investigation is needed.

Oh, that's for sure, it's just that pointing at this particular hit piece is not the most convincing argument. Otherwise, it's entirely correct that business climate in Russia is far from transparent.

Re: One of the world’s most visited websites that nobody is aware of (2017)

#144

Post by scottlocklin »

gandhium wrote: post #128
scottlocklin wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ahem. The maker of that documentary is anti-Putin to the extent he supports the theory that Putin blew up some Russian apartment buildings to start a war. Browder, on the other hand, is actively surpressing the documentary; even if none of the things said about him in the documentary are true (in which case you'd think he would sue the guy who made it for libel; a guy who lives in the UK), that's pretty shady.

That filmmaker was anti-Putin and he still lives in Russia? Totally believable.

He lives in the UK, as I already said. And somehow avoided being sued by Browder who also lives in the UK.

Re: One of the world’s most visited websites that nobody is aware of (2017)

#145

Post by scottlocklin »

ender89 wrote: post #134
scottlocklin wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ahem. The maker of that documentary is anti-Putin to the extent he supports the theory that Putin blew up some Russian apartment buildings to start a war. Browder, on the other hand, is actively surpressing the documentary; even if none of the things said about him in the documentary are true (in which case you'd think he would sue the guy who made it for libel; a guy who lives in the UK), that's pretty shady.

fighting it gives it attention and validity, its the streisand effect. And Julian Assange lives in the UK but was still a tool of the kremlin's propaganda wing. what's your point?

This isn't even an argument; it is partisan quackery.

FWIIW Browder was pro-Putin until Putin stopped letting him get away with tax fraud. Citations available: what do you have?

Re: One of the world’s most visited websites that nobody is aware of (2017)

#146

Post by Fins »

scottlocklin wrote: post #94
Fins wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using that piece of rather silly putin's propaganda as a source lowers your credibility greatly.

Ahem. The maker of that documentary is anti-Putin to the extent he supports the theory that Putin blew up some Russian apartment buildings to start a war. Browder, on the other hand, is actively surpressing the documentary; even if none of the things said about him in the documentary are true (in which case you'd think he would sue the guy who made it for libel; a guy who lives in the UK), that's pretty shady.

His anti-putin credentials have been questioned.

Re: One of the world’s most visited websites that nobody is aware of (2017)

#147

Post by Fins »

rjplatte wrote: post #135
gandhium wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That filmmaker was anti-Putin and he still lives in Russia? Totally believable.

That's not uncommon. Only very high-profile Putin opposers disappear.

Or we do not hear about low-profile ones. Being high profile (Navalny, Khodorkovsky) might be even an insurance policy to keep one at least alive.

Re: One of the world’s most visited websites that nobody is aware of (2017)

#148

Post by aaronmdjones »

listic wrote: post #126

> His platform is full of PDF files that are copied from other sites and re-hosted. This is illegal Isn't 'illegal' a bit strong term for that?

No. An action can be (civilly) illegal without being a crime (i.e. criminally illegal), but it's still illegal nonetheless.

Re: One of the world’s most visited websites that nobody is aware of (2017)

#149

Post by scottlocklin »

ender89 wrote: post #133
scottlocklin wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's extremely likely that this person isn't responsible for the website, or knows anything about it. Criminal or shady activities in Russia (and everywhere else) are often laundered through cutouts. You can find an example of this in "Magnitsky act: behind the scenes" where Bill Browder allegedly laundered his corporate holdings for tax fraud through various handicapped people, and eventually gangsters who were conv…

""Magnitsky act: behind the scenes" where Bill Browder allegedly laundered his corporate holdings for tax fraud through various handicapped people, and eventually gangsters who were conveniently murdered." Look, I'm not saying that's a bullshit documentary, but that's literally the kind of smear campaign Putin would execute to try to get talks of the magnitsky act thrown out. I wouldn't take any of that information a…

My spot checks indicate it was 10/10 on the money, not that this has anything to do with the subject on this thread. Just because some anon on the internet is giving me 'friendly advice' to not take any of the information as factual because Putin might like it (or because it makes Browder sad).... Why are you even bringing this up?

Re: One of the world’s most visited websites that nobody is aware of (2017)

#150

Post by aidenn0 »

aaronmdjones wrote: post #148
listic wrote: post #126

> His platform is full of PDF files that are copied from other sites and re-hosted. This is illegal Isn't 'illegal' a bit strong term for that?

No. An action can be (civilly) illegal without being a crime (i.e. criminally illegal), but it's still illegal nonetheless.

Also, in the US at least, commercial copyright infringement can be criminally illegal.
Post reply on HN