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

America's cyber defenses are being dismantled from the inside

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–218 of 218 posts

Re: America's cyber defenses are being dismantled from the inside

#211

Post by exceptione »

_heimdall wrote: post #154
watwut wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am confused about what UN has to do with America shutting down services whose primary goal was to protect American infrastructure, government and companies. Some UN nations are quite happy about this, because it will make it easier to access what they want in US.

Only that the earlier comments raised that if the program was important it should be run by the UN rather than the US.

Maybe it was the US that wanted it under their own control, and could enforce that via the soft-power it had. :)

Anyways, I have to agree with the others: this is not the real issue. If you wanted to change the governance on that point, you can transition these things orderly.

Like Doge, the messaging is to hide the real intentions. It doesn't take much effort to see that the actions do not really match with the messages, but if the media would not even do that bit of analysis and would not bring the disconnect front and center, then yeah, it is a winning strategy.

Re: America's cyber defenses are being dismantled from the inside

#212

Post by whynotmaybe »

EGreg wrote: post #163
EGreg wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Paul's teaching is plainly at odds with Jesus' teachings, and people do a lot of acrobatics to try to reconcile the two. Jesus: 25 Therefore I say unto you, Be not anxious for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than the food, and the body than the raiment? 26 Behold the birds of the heaven, that they sow not, neither do they reap, no…

I could go on. The point is this ... Paul and Luke wrote the majority of the New Testament. But their authority is circular. Jesus never taught Paul. Jesus' teachings were for Jews and he told them to follow the law. Paul said seemingly the opposite. Paul got his religion from his own visions. Paul argued with the very people Jesus did set up to run the Church. And from his letters, he doesn't seem to have related wh…

> Today, after the Council of Niceae by Constantine 3 centuries after the events, nearly all Christian denominations follow Pauline doctrine. But where is his authority from? How is he any different from, say, Mohammad?

All religions based on books have discrepancies within themselves that allow people to pick whatever they want and adapt it to their personal wants and actions.

Some flavours want people to interpret the scriptures themselves, while other flavours only allow some specific scholars to interpret it and you must follow blindly.

By design, religions have a de facto tendency to control people's behaviours and beliefs and fill the gaps wherever they are.

Cultural contexts shifts can't be addressed quickly as their traditions are rooted in centuries of small interpretations that can't be undone.

I guess that's why so many people have a tendency to leave religion, just by seeing how much of the past can they carry before it starts weighing them down more than it lifts them up.

For the bible, the simple definition of righteous needs interpretation :

James 2:24 : You see that a person is considered righteous by what they do and not by faith alone.

Ephesians 2:8-9 : For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast.

Everything surrounding Paul could be described as the first interpretation and it's often easier to follow an existing idea than make your own.

Re: America's cyber defenses are being dismantled from the inside

#213

Post by mrguyorama »

yieldcrv wrote: post #198
mrguyorama wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The pittance we pay to support things that benefit all humanity have never prevented us from investing in the US. You don't need to put the federal government in a wood chipper to make the US better, and in fact you often need the federal government to make the US better, like with social security, food stamps, medicaid, the interstate, railroads, most of our infrastructure, the internet, microchips, etc. In fact, if…

> We can EASILY afford 3k F35s, 13 aircraft carriers, AND healthcare I'm aware but there is no consensus for that, or addressing the budget, all while our infrastructure crumbles at the same time. Now there is at least an attempt to address our budget. Regarding foreign policy, other leading nations are not giving aid, they are investing. We could just as easily do our "soft power" stuff in a more equitable way. Ever…

>Now there is at least an attempt to address our budget.

NO THERE IS NOT

DOGE hasn't saved a dime, and by cutting IRS employees has already cost more than they could ever save, meanwhile the Trump admin is pushing a budget that just keeps adding to the deficit to pay for more tax cuts for the hyperwealthy.

Why are you so unaware of these things?

Re: America's cyber defenses are being dismantled from the inside

#214

Post by varjag »

ivan_gammel wrote: post #209
varjag wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are trying to hypothesise a rational actor except you model the actor on ordinary people. An aging authoritarian is not concerned with long term security, well being of his subjects or boring diplomatic minutae. Seeing his days vanishing, he is intent on leaving a mark in history. What matters is not how pretty the mark is going to be but how visible shall it be through centuries. And since the authoritarian's st…

You are describing a fantasy fiction, but reality is not that simple. Putin’s actions were very rational by Western standards of reasoning (NB not moral standards). His invasion had a point, but was based on bad intelligence and some logical flaws, just like American invasion to Iraq two decades before. He is no more crazy than Chinese or Iranian leaders and probably more sane than current American administration. He…

There was no threat of losing Sevalstopol, which was leased until 2049 in non-aligned and then substantially pro-Russian Ukraine. You build your whole chain of reasoning on a faulty premise.

Re: America's cyber defenses are being dismantled from the inside

#215

Post by ivan_gammel »

varjag wrote: post #214
ivan_gammel wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are describing a fantasy fiction, but reality is not that simple. Putin’s actions were very rational by Western standards of reasoning (NB not moral standards). His invasion had a point, but was based on bad intelligence and some logical flaws, just like American invasion to Iraq two decades before. He is no more crazy than Chinese or Iranian leaders and probably more sane than current American administration. He…

There was no threat of losing Sevalstopol, which was leased until 2049 in non-aligned and then substantially pro-Russian Ukraine. You build your whole chain of reasoning on a faulty premise.

>There was no threat of losing Sevalstopol, which was leased until 2049 in non-aligned and then substantially pro-Russian Ukraine.

This is not correct. Kharkov agreements in 2010 extended the lease until 2042 in exchange for gas price discounts, but they would start working only in 2017 and Ukraina could cancel them (and may have cancelled them if anti-Russian opposition would be back in power - the threat of losing the base was real). After annexation of Crimea Russia itself cancelled the agreements and they effectively were never in place.

>You build your whole chain of reasoning on a faulty premise.

That was not the premise for the whole chain of reasoning. Premises do not start with "may". :)

Re: America's cyber defenses are being dismantled from the inside

#216

Post by ivan_gammel »

geoka9 wrote: post #187
ivan_gammel wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>listen to people like Dugin, it is very clear Don’t be afraid of scarecrows. He is a powerless freak far away from the decision makers, not Rasputin. Says a lot, but doesn’t really matter. It is much more interesting what people in security council say and who gets the contracts. There’s zero indication of expansion but a lot of messages about not messing with “legitimate interests”. They protect what they think is…

> It is much more interesting what people in security council say People in the security council were cowering with fear on 22-02-22 afraid to say the unthinkable and Putin openly gloating while forcing them to say it. Dugin is a freak alright, but he has the ear of (and is privy to) the paranoid decision makers there; he was talking about the impending war long before anyone else. > They need absence of threat and p…

>People in the security council were cowering with fear on 22-02-22 afraid to say the unthinkable and Putin openly gloating while forcing them to say it.

I think you are making up some stuff here. First of all, the war was declared on 24.02.2022, two days later, and that matter was not discussed on Security Council on 22.02. Watch the video, it's available on YouTube. On 22.02 they discussed the recognition of independence of Donesk and Luhansk People Republics and the only person who was seemingly uncomfortable was the director of foreign intelligence service. He may have known about what's going to happen, but it was just him. Maybe he has also known that his intel is either bad or was ignored in the decision-making process and the war is going to be something different than planned: he is certainly not the guy who would feel so bad because of a military operation. As a matter of fact, he may be the only guy in Security Council who whould be sympathetic to Dugin.

>It will be much easier to park their money in any one of the small rich countries (e.g. Switzerland). Same with their luxury properties and kids in private schools.

"Parking money" is not locking them in a vault. It's investing. There's a reason why Russian oligarchs prefer London and were trying to buy European assets. Small countries cannot absorb capital on that scale. If Russia controls the continent, why only small countries? If Russia does not, KYC rules etc apply to Switzerland too - they cannot resist the pressure.

>They don't need to invade every country to control the continent. Look at Finland prior to the collapse of the USSR

What a giant leap. I'm not sure this fiction is interesting to discuss. Russia is not USSR, EU is not Finland (which by the way is part of EU and NATO now and does not look at Russia when making foreign policy decisions for at least 40 years).

>For the same reason they won't be invading Hungary or Slovakia any time soon

If Hungarian or Slovakian opposition will win on next election they won't invade too. It's not the reason they don't do it. Just look at the map.

Re: America's cyber defenses are being dismantled from the inside

#217

Post by varjag »

sofixa wrote: post #204
geoka9 wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Name one thing in Polish military that Ukrainian military today doesn't have though? Lack of combat experience. But seriously, very good analysis!

> But seriously, very good analysis Nah, it's utter bullshit. Russia can't defeat Ukraine on its own, but they think Russia has a 1 in 3 chance of victory if they add Poland, Baltics, Finland to their war? It's pure wishful nonsense.

First if you want me to continue in this tone you set here do let me know. But you'll ultimately come to regret it.

Second I have friends and product manufacturing in the Baltics, so my opinion is anything but wishful. One thing I can not afford though is your head in the sand optimism.

Re: America's cyber defenses are being dismantled from the inside

#218

Post by sofixa »

varjag wrote: post #217
sofixa wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But seriously, very good analysis Nah, it's utter bullshit. Russia can't defeat Ukraine on its own, but they think Russia has a 1 in 3 chance of victory if they add Poland, Baltics, Finland to their war? It's pure wishful nonsense.

First if you want me to continue in this tone you set here do let me know. But you'll ultimately come to regret it. Second I have friends and product manufacturing in the Baltics, so my opinion is anything but wishful. One thing I can not afford though is your head in the sand optimism.

> One thing I can not afford though is your head in the sand optimism

It's not optimism to be dismissive of opinions with no basis in reality.

Russia cannot defeat Ukraine. If they attack in the Baltic, they'll add at least a few more enemies. It's mathematically impossible for them to fare better with more enemies when their current efforts are suffering due to men and materiel.

Post reply on HN