Military grade sonic weapon is used against protesters in Serbia • Hacker News Board

Re: Military grade sonic weapon is used against protesters in Serbia

#441

Post by ty6853 » Mon, Mar 17, 2025, 2:02 PM UTC

consteval wrote: post #435

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Who defines what counts as a riot? Practically, the media and the public at large. I forgot the source, but you can pretty much directly see the negative effect of e.g. bridge blocking on public sympathy for a cause.

I don’t think this is true. In order for the media to consider something a riot there has to be some violence. Gone are the days of print media, we expect videos now. But it’s trivial for police to incite violence. We saw it all the time in the US during BLM protests. A protest starts peacefully, then the protesters are pushed by riot control, then rubber bullets are fired into the peaceful protest, and now it’s not…

Yep, if you are depending on perception by media you have already lost. They will manipulate it to look however they like, trivially and convincingly.

If change does occur, what will happen is they will repaint history to make it seem as if the most cowish placid of the protests brought the change, to fool the public. And people actually believe it.

Re: Military grade sonic weapon is used against protesters in Serbia

#442

Post by mmooss » Mon, Mar 17, 2025, 2:07 PM UTC

impossiblefork wrote: post #383

mmooss wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Once there's violence targeting you, the politics is over You are missing the fundamentals: violence is the continuation of politics, and is resolved by politics. > If someone has attacked you and there has been no apology or attempt to solve the situation, he must be eliminated. Really? If someone assaaults you, you must "eliminate" them? That is bizarre, extreme, dangerous behavior. People have become highly indo…

I don't really agree that it's necessarily a continuation of politics. It's an interpretation of things from Clausewitz. It's to some degree a great interpretation, explaining certain aspects of warfare, but you choose the role that your violence plays. You can make it an extension of politics, you can make it simple self-defence, purely a matter of destroying your enemies. >Really? If someone assaaults you, you must…

> You can make it an extension of politics, you can make it simple self-defence, purely a matter of destroying your enemies.

You still don't understand.

> If the government or other powerful entities target you specifically, yes, you have to get rid of them.

Changing the government is politics; you are just accomplishing it through other means - violence.

You are going to "get rid" of the government through violence? When has that happened? And what are the results? Politics enables people to change governments regularly, and with much better results.

My perception is that it's an ideology of violence. People just want to advocate violence - like anyone else who wants to feel like a rebel against the status quo. Maybe find something bad to upend, rather than peace. If you can choose violence, so can other people, so can the next people who don't like you - it's not a good outcome for society or for you or your descendents.

Re: Military grade sonic weapon is used against protesters in Serbia

#443

Post by _heimdall » Mon, Mar 17, 2025, 2:10 PM UTC

lazide wrote: post #420

_heimdall wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is your argument that the use of force should be acceptable as long as you know its asymmetric?

I’m not making an argument, rather an observation. A saying I’ve heard from many folks I know who have been in the US military is ‘fair fights are for idiots’. I think it’s a common mindset in any (successful) military.

For sure, I agree with that. How does that link back to having exceptions allowing law enforcement to use tear gas on civilians though?

Re: Military grade sonic weapon is used against protesters in Serbia

#444

Post by lazide » Mon, Mar 17, 2025, 2:12 PM UTC

_heimdall wrote: post #443

lazide wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not making an argument, rather an observation. A saying I’ve heard from many folks I know who have been in the US military is ‘fair fights are for idiots’. I think it’s a common mindset in any (successful) military.

For sure, I agree with that. How does that link back to having exceptions allowing law enforcement to use tear gas on civilians though?

Because civilians don’t have WMD style chemical weapons, generally? So are not an ‘MAD’ type risk. Unlike potential enemy combatants.

Morality has nothing to do with these scenarios (treaty/convention wise) near as I can tell.

Re: Military grade sonic weapon is used against protesters in Serbia

#445

Post by consteval » Mon, Mar 17, 2025, 2:16 PM UTC

mdhb wrote: post #387

vvchvb wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Governments, by definition, have legal access to anything they can get their hands on.

The people can and should act as a check on the social contract they have with their citizens

Technology also attacks this front, through mass surveillance and disinformation. Which is really what we’ve been seeing in the past 20 years. More and more, the focus is shifting to the “source”, the human minds who demand change.

Re: Military grade sonic weapon is used against protesters in Serbia

#446

Post by killjoywashere » Mon, Mar 17, 2025, 2:28 PM UTC

soco wrote: post #389

_heimdall wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the argument here is that its okay to use against a crowd because the risk of escalation is very low.

It's acceptable only because the authorities know the masses will accept it. And what could the masses do otherwise, gather signatures? So yes, it is how it is, until the masses somehow decide it's not - and then will get gassed again. Because the masses wishing for a change are rarely in a majority and authorities usually listen to majorities.

I think this discussion is missing a significant issue: why would a democratic government, of the people, by the people, and for the people, use tear gas? Why do British Bobbies carry batons?

The simplest answer, which is the basis of all police powers of the state: to prevent crimes against persons and crimes against property. Riotous mobs get people hurt, often killed. The businesses proximate to a protest, often small businesses, often under-insured due to cost constraints, are very likely to be severely affected by protests that turn violent. Major corporate storefronts can absorb the cost of damages, but the same damages to a mom-and-pop grocery could be the end of the business, no matter how much they sympathize with the community that is outraged. And let me reiterate what I started with: riotous mobs get people hurt, often killed.

Tear gas vs the baton is a lesser version of the observation by James B. Conant, president of Harvard University, in his autobiography: "To me the development of new and more effective gases seemed no more immoral than the manufacture of explosives and guns. . . I did not see in 1917, and do not see in 1968, why tearing a man's guts out by a high-explosive shell is to be preferred to maiming him by attacking his lungs or skin."

https://www.amazon.com/My-Several-Lives-Memoirs-Inventor/dp/...

Re: Military grade sonic weapon is used against protesters in Serbia

#447

Post by mandmandam » Mon, Mar 17, 2025, 2:33 PM UTC

gruez wrote: post #434

mandmandam wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is begging the question. It's not. It's about setting a clear legal line. > It's only a moral contradiction when people fall for the non-central fallacy that all chemical weapons are bad. Who's begging the question here? > You can literally say that about any other bad thing that police does. Maybe police shouldn't be doing bad things? ... And maybe supporting them when they do bad things is also bad? > This i…

>It's not. It's about setting a clear legal line. Which one is it? Are you sticking to the exact wording of the law (ie. that all chemical weapons are banned), or the principle (that we shouldn't use substances like mustard gas against combatants)? If you're going to stick to the exact wording, you should also note that the geneva convention only applies to conflicts between countries, so chemicals weapon use by poli…

> this presumes that if it wasn't for tear gas, police would stand down, when realistically speaking they'll just escalate to more lethal weapons.

When cops use tear gas on peaceful protesters, a sizable segment of the population shrugs. That's nor the case when "more lethal weapons" are used.

Do you have stocks in tear gas manufacturers or something? This endless sea lioning is super weird. Every attempt to explain what the noncentral fallacy actually is and why it doesn't apply here just seems to leave you more confused, so I'mma stop trying. Good luck!

Re: Military grade sonic weapon is used against protesters in Serbia

#448

Post by mmooss » Mon, Mar 17, 2025, 2:57 PM UTC

asdf6969 wrote: post #382

mmooss wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds bold and exciting, but it's clearly false and terrible advice. Violence, like warfare, is politics by other means. Every expert knows that law of warfare - the first law of warfare, in a sense - that it ends when and only when there is political agreement. Even in warfare, violence just buys time and changes your political position. In countries with rule-of-law, you can use the political / legal system t…

The operator deserves to be killed for this. Stop defending evil

> The operator

who?

> for this

for what?

> deserves to be killed

Who are you to say? What if someone else disagrees, as they likely do? Should any one person have the authority to kill another? Maybe that's why someone is attacking you (in the hypothetical scenario).

Re: Military grade sonic weapon is used against protesters in Serbia

#449

Post by user_7832 » Mon, Mar 17, 2025, 3:00 PM UTC

grujicd wrote: post #100

Close friend who was on the spot described it as car or plane running towards you, you don't only hear it, you also feel vibrations in the body creating panic and fear. All demonstrations of LRAD I heard on youtube were with high pitched sound, not a "whoosh" as witnesses experienced last night in Belgrade. Can these devices play any kind of sound? What is described by victims, and what can be heard on some recording…

I’m moderately suspicious of the details some people/articles say. Long story short, there’s 1-4khz audio weapons (LRAD), and microwave/heat based ADS. It appears that both of these were used, a Reddit army vet commented about how that’s apparently the “protocol” as the ADS is strong enough to pick off the last stragglers.

I’m ever so slightly suspicious of the “low frequency sound weapon” aspect because that typically takes a lot of energy (I’m speaking from an audio background). However the reports of feeling uneasy do match that of infrasound… yet typically (based on what I’ve read) infrasound doesn’t have an instant reaction but takes some time for people to feel it.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Directed-energy_weapon has a lot more info if anyone is interested.

Re: Military grade sonic weapon is used against protesters in Serbia

#450

Post by h2zizzle » Mon, Mar 17, 2025, 3:02 PM UTC

red-iron-pine wrote: post #439

hayst4ck wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They already know words are meaningless and don't count for anything. Democrats have been trying to use words to get their way or even compromise and republicans fully understand they don't have to pay attention to them at all. Threats are laughable. If democrats had any power they would have used it. Their inaction is proof of their impotence. Words don't matter, only actions matter. "upvotes don't count." A street…

to paraphrase another person: if you're posting it online on a public social media channel, it doesn't matter. the stuff that's going to change the government, for the better or worse, is going to get the FBI and Secret Service on you, and you're not saying on that on the front page of reddit. every twitter meme that makes the rounds, every sneering HN post is a sign of impotence. if there was real opposition DOGE wo…

It drives me crazy that none of the people targeted by DOGE have locked themselves in their office and called WaPo and CNN. If you want to keep your job, the image of jackbooted thugs dragging you out can't be better for raising alarms and drawing sympathy. Everyone is complying in advance.

Someone made the comparison between SK politicians shoving their way past guards to impeach their corrupt president, and Congressional Dems who let themselves get turned away. It's either theater or they're completely feckless (or both). How has there been not one Profile in Courage, with everything going on?