Did Qatar pay a billion dollar ransom? • Hacker News Board

Re: Did Qatar pay a billion dollar ransom?

#21

Post by dsfyu404ed » Tue, Jul 17, 2018, 3:10 PM UTC

josefresco wrote: post #13

sandworm101 wrote: post #9

This is why government by royal families doesn't work. When the state and the family are the same thing, the inevitable family crisis become a national crisis. A billion-dollar ransom that then sparks a trade war? This is a group of families fighting a petty grudge match against a background of slight religious differences, reminiscent of the worst of the Tudors.

petty grudge ... slight religious differences Understatements of the century.

>of the century.

How many more recursive understatements before we hit a base case?

Re: Did Qatar pay a billion dollar ransom?

#22

Post by makapuf » Tue, Jul 17, 2018, 3:15 PM UTC

dsfyu404ed wrote: post #20

kurthr wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it only matters what type of people are in charge. Democracy won't protect your country, only whether those who have taken an oath to defend the rule of law, their country, and their vote, actually do. See recent events. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trump-replaces-natio...

Good systems are resilient to bad leaders. See the Roman Empire or England for example, neither has any shortage of bad emperors/kings and both avoided violent regime changes or subjugation by a foreign power for many hundreds of years (and counting in England's case)

I'll go further and say that if there is a system, it's precisely to be resilient to bad leaders. If leaders can effectively lead, why have a system over them ? e.g. a system that works when everyone acts out of good will is redundant.

Re: Did Qatar pay a billion dollar ransom?

#23

Post by aaron695 » Tue, Jul 17, 2018, 3:17 PM UTC

philip1209 wrote: post #2

> These were obtained by a government hostile to Qatar and passed to the BBC. Israel?

Israel would not work direct with the Post/BBC. It's pretty amature hour to do so.

What about Tunisia, they share the mobile network, friends, but not happy about Qatar funding terrorists.

I think it would be unethical for the Post to have worked with direct enemies of Qatar and not mentioned it.

Their article doesn't say it's an enemy state, unlike the BBC.

UAE have hacked Qatar before (Or outsourced it), but this is different and I can't see UAE working direct with the Post.

Re: Did Qatar pay a billion dollar ransom?

#24

Post by johnchristopher » Tue, Jul 17, 2018, 3:21 PM UTC

peterlk wrote: post #17

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you provide a short summary? I've never heard of it.

It lays out many of the basic principles by which the FBI negotiates with kidnappers. The author writes that the book is meant to first lay out the foundations, and then build on them to give the reader a toolbox (arsenal?) of negotiation strategies. An argument in the book is that these strategies work in business as well - I find this argument compelling. The title of the book is in reference to the fact that you c…

The winner takes it all strategy has short-comings though.

Re: Did Qatar pay a billion dollar ransom?

#25

Post by gricardo99 » Tue, Jul 17, 2018, 3:21 PM UTC

peterlk wrote: post #17

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you provide a short summary? I've never heard of it.

It lays out many of the basic principles by which the FBI negotiates with kidnappers. The author writes that the book is meant to first lay out the foundations, and then build on them to give the reader a toolbox (arsenal?) of negotiation strategies. An argument in the book is that these strategies work in business as well - I find this argument compelling. The title of the book is in reference to the fact that you c…

But I'm vaguely remembering several occasions where hostage negotiators do take less than 100% of their goal. Examples are where they initially secure the release of "weaker" hostages, such as those in need of medical attention, elderly, etc... In those cases, I'm guessing that's an easy win for the negotiators, since I doubt a hostage-taker necessarily wants a hostage that can't readily move, or dies on them unexpectedly, without having gained anything from a release/bargain. (grim topic...)

Re: Did Qatar pay a billion dollar ransom?

#26

Post by paidleaf » Tue, Jul 17, 2018, 3:32 PM UTC

So did they or didn't they? Are they asking the readers? Is this our homework assignment that we are supposed to answer and turn in to the bbc?

Can the news start reporting on facts?

Read the article only to find out that we don't know who the kidnappers are, if and how much they got, how much cash qatar sent to iraq, etc.

Whenever I read articles like this, it leaves me angry and wanting to never read anything from the BBC again. What's even more frustrating is that the BBC is government funded and not dependent on advertisers and they have no reason to clickbait.

Re: Did Qatar pay a billion dollar ransom?

#27

Post by cheez » Tue, Jul 17, 2018, 3:36 PM UTC

paidleaf wrote: post #26

So did they or didn't they? Are they asking the readers? Is this our homework assignment that we are supposed to answer and turn in to the bbc? Can the news start reporting on facts? Read the article only to find out that we don't know who the kidnappers are, if and how much they got, how much cash qatar sent to iraq, etc. Whenever I read articles like this, it leaves me angry and wanting to never read anything from…

It's an interesting story. The only reason the information is out because a government hostile to the parties released the information.

Re: Did Qatar pay a billion dollar ransom?

#28

Post by 21 » Tue, Jul 17, 2018, 3:48 PM UTC

cheez wrote: post #27

paidleaf wrote: post #26

So did they or didn't they? Are they asking the readers? Is this our homework assignment that we are supposed to answer and turn in to the bbc? Can the news start reporting on facts? Read the article only to find out that we don't know who the kidnappers are, if and how much they got, how much cash qatar sent to iraq, etc. Whenever I read articles like this, it leaves me angry and wanting to never read anything from…

It's an interesting story. The only reason the information is out because a government hostile to the parties released the information.

How do you even authenticate the info if it's from a hostile government?

Re: Did Qatar pay a billion dollar ransom?

#29

Post by zck » Tue, Jul 17, 2018, 3:52 PM UTC

gricardo99 wrote: post #25

peterlk wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It lays out many of the basic principles by which the FBI negotiates with kidnappers. The author writes that the book is meant to first lay out the foundations, and then build on them to give the reader a toolbox (arsenal?) of negotiation strategies. An argument in the book is that these strategies work in business as well - I find this argument compelling. The title of the book is in reference to the fact that you c…

But I'm vaguely remembering several occasions where hostage negotiators do take less than 100% of their goal. Examples are where they initially secure the release of "weaker" hostages, such as those in need of medical attention, elderly, etc... In those cases, I'm guessing that's an easy win for the negotiators, since I doubt a hostage-taker necessarily wants a hostage that can't readily move, or dies on them unexpec…

I assume the hostage negotiators aren't saying "ok, release the elderly and go ahead and kill everyone else", but "ok, let's start by releasing two hostages and then I'll get you a pizza" or something like that.

Re: Did Qatar pay a billion dollar ransom?

#30

Post by dasil003 » Tue, Jul 17, 2018, 3:54 PM UTC

makapuf wrote: post #22

dsfyu404ed wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good systems are resilient to bad leaders. See the Roman Empire or England for example, neither has any shortage of bad emperors/kings and both avoided violent regime changes or subjugation by a foreign power for many hundreds of years (and counting in England's case)

I'll go further and say that if there is a system, it's precisely to be resilient to bad leaders. If leaders can effectively lead, why have a system over them ? e.g. a system that works when everyone acts out of good will is redundant.

Well there's also the question of knowledge transfer.