Live data from Hacker News

FBI raids home of prominent computer scientist who has gone incommunicado

arstechnica.com

441–450 of 517 posts

Re: FBI raids home of prominent computer scientist who has gone incommunicado

#441
post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which should make it easier to provide a source. Other comments have already done so, I was able to read up on it.

This is one of those things that's so well known, with plenty of sources, it's kind of odd to have to ask for one. Any search should have been full of these results.

I don't think it is odd and I disagree with you. First, if you find too many search results, that is just as bad as not finding any. Secondly, when it comes to this specific issue, the quality of information can range from unusable to thorough based on what article about it you read. Given that "Secret overseas Chinese police force" is such a good headline, there are many many websites and lower tier news sites publishing about this. There seems to be no one catalyst publication that broke this story first. This makes it hard to establish any objective facts about it (for me). On top of all this, there may also be personal bias involved when reporting about it.

Given all this, why is it so odd for me to ask for more information here? Like, instead of discouraging me from asking for more information in the future, you could have listed the sources you feel are usable.

Re: FBI raids home of prominent computer scientist who has gone incommunicado

#442
post #385
post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There'd be a fair bit of noise if the Holocaust was happening today. Why are we talking in hypotheticals when it literally is happening today?

The Uyghur thing has been fairly well discussed and I assume people know everything they care to. Wikipedia is pretty comprehensive on the current state of knowledge.

I was referring to the holocaust the US is currently aiding in

Re: FBI raids home of prominent computer scientist who has gone incommunicado

#443
post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes moving him to a different house would be an incredibly difficult thing for the Chinese govt to do. And of course, this would be something that he couldnt possibly do himself without some sort of secret govt involvement.

I'm sorry, are you arguing that he's in Chinese witness protection inside the US?

No I'm arguing that moving him from one house to another is something the Chinese govt could assist with.

Re: FBI raids home of prominent computer scientist who has gone incommunicado

#444

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're downvoted because you imply a conspiracy exists but cannot articulate what it is.

It should be obvious to anyone that what this guy was doing and/or knows is something that governments are extremely interested in.

Look, this wouldn't be a story in the first place if there weren't multiple highly suspicious things going on.

Re: FBI raids home of prominent computer scientist who has gone incommunicado

#445
post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Chinese govt also has a pretty nasty track record of pressuring erstwhile Chinese citizens to engage in espionage by making life hard for family back in china China also has a history of establishing "police" stations in foreign countries with the mandate to harass and control expats. They did this in Canada at least, surely they did in the US too.

I can only urge you to provide one or more good primary sources if you are making such a claim. It should be a given...

Primary sources exist(ed?) on Chinese web, i.e. provincial gov websites advertising these "overseas service centres" used for diaphora services like renew PRC drivers license, which western western MSM regurgitating "Safeguard Defender" propaganda turn into overseas "police stations". Services also entail liasing with PRC law enforcement, i.e. if Chinese tourist gets robbed, they can refer to service centres for guidance, but it's largely PRC public security telling them how to work with local authorities due to language barrier (see drama of Italian police patrolled with Chinese police). These setups exist because PRC tourists/diasphora everywhere now (and thus targetted everywhere), but most places haven't brought up Chinese competency in public services.

Except US, AFAIK no other gov investigating has publically released evidence of foul play. Like there's arguments to close these stations are extra territorial setups, except as far as I'm aware, they're run by diasophra citizens of countries, not Chinese nationals. And LBH, anything pertaining to US actions vs China from last few years is indistinguishable from propaganda. There's some US court docs on the couple Chinese (US citizens) in NY being prosecuted for repressing dissidents on behalf of PRC gov, that's as close to primary source as you can get. This all without touching the founder of SafeGuard Defender, Peter Dahlin... history with PRC, first westerner to be charged for work undermining national security afer NGO reforms, arrested for a few weeks, deported, seperated from Chinese gf). Let's just say he's got bones to pick.

IMO accusations are borderline retarded, and unsurprisingly borderline retarded western msm and useful idiots in west believe it. Spend half a second thinking why PRC intelligence operations would coordinate under very public (and publically advertised) arrangements that gets comingled with civil activities. It's dumbest possible "front" to host these activities, especially for operation foxhunt tier work. Like Chinese spies, especially those with foreign citizenship,can get all sorts of cover work that doesn't directly linked back to official Chinese gov activities (as in terms of paperwork)... and they choose what, network of borderline extraterritorial consulate service arrangements?

E: The TLDR for me is western (really US led) propaganda associated with broad effort to dismantle PRC's United Front like work abroad, started with Chinese programs at various universities. Because again, Chinese intelligence so stupid and lazy (or bold) that they would setup in actual campuses. Which itself is response to PRC basically destroying US/Western NGO operations in PRC mid 2010s for subversive influence ops. Except Chinese don't really run large think tanks or well resourced NGOs as cover for their intelligence activities aboard. They don't need to, they have diasphora citizens everywhere already integrated. The few comparable arrangments that exist are United Front related setups in the west.

Re: FBI raids home of prominent computer scientist who has gone incommunicado

#446
post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Even the most egregious cases, which are very bad, have left a paper trail for lawyers and journalists to follow. How can you be confident in this? Is it possible that you are saying this because the only cases we know about are when they have happened to leave "a paper trail for lawyers and journalists to follow"?

> How can you be confident in this? Is it possible that you are saying this because the only cases we know about... This is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance and is also asking someone else to prove nonexistence of a situation. Both of these are inappropriate in a good faith discussion and I believe it would benefit you to consider how you reason about these situations if you want to come to well…

1) The current president has explicitly said that he wants to use violent force to enact his policies.

2) There are numerous cases of the current administration using its discretionary powers to enact its desired policies in ways that violate norms and are quite probably illegal.

3) The administration actively circumventing record-keeping requirements, likely in an attempt to avoid detection of illegal actions.

The federal government is unbelievably powerful. Because of the jobs it is expected to do, it must maintain capabilities to do many terrifying things. For that reason, the government does not get the presumption of innocence. It has to be able to prove exactly what it was up to, and where its resources are being spent.

The reason there are so many tedious and wasteful rule-making and record-keeping and due-process requirements is exactly because it would be trivial otherwise to do things like disappear law-abiding citizens off the street and cover it up.

So when someone says "I want do do crimes A, B, and C", and then you discover that they have in fact done crimes B and C, and taken steps to conceal the potential commission of crime A, it isn't a fallacy to infer that they may have committed crime A.

Re: FBI raids home of prominent computer scientist who has gone incommunicado

#447
post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can only urge you to provide one or more good primary sources if you are making such a claim. It should be a given...

people seem downvote you, but I think this is a good example of how discussions SHOULD work. > A: makes a strong claim, suggesting it to be well known > B: doubts > [100 people provide credible sources] Also congrats for being 1 of 10000 today i guess https://xkcd.com/1053/

> B: doubts

It's weird to doubt something that's been in the news a bunch and is reported on by reputable sources though. Instead of expecting 100 people to do a basic search for them, they should have done their own search and only doubted if they didn't find anything.

Re: FBI raids home of prominent computer scientist who has gone incommunicado

#448
post #368
post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nor would it be surprising if he was a "spy" or even a double agent. It would be very surprising. How many spies and 'double agents' are there?

> Approximately 7% of Chinese people are registered CCP members so in a rough estimate, if you have 10 chinese coworkers around you, there is over a 50% probability that CCP is watching you

This is some of the worst use of statistics I have ever seen on this site. Genuinely something the John Birch Society or McCarthy would have said.

Re: FBI raids home of prominent computer scientist who has gone incommunicado

#449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is never a time where it's appropriate to give up benefit of the doubt in general toward an entity. If your starting position is that they most likely did any and every bad thing you can think of, you quickly reach absurdity.

You are wrong about that. You have never dealt with malevolent entities where that cannot be given. Decision-making, and its related presumptions change when the threat becomes existential. Deceivers with resources who abuse the public trust and its presumptions towards individuals, take advantage of societies understanding, towards destructive ends, and continue doing so regardless. They corrupt the systems meant to…

You didn't address my argument though, my second sentence.

It's one thing to not trust some entity and say they do bad things a lot, or to assume they're being evil in certain areas where they have established motives and patterns.

It's quite another to be so general about it that if a single person flippantly accuses them of basically anything you start off believing it. That's going too far and leads to some ridiculous early conclusions.

Re: FBI raids home of prominent computer scientist who has gone incommunicado

#450
post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They were not disappeared (the links below say we know where they went), and they were arrested by people who do have legal powers of arrest. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detention_of_Mahmoud_Khalil#Ar... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detention_of_R%C3%BCmeysa_%C3%... I am not saying it is the right thing to do, but it is a very very long way from someone being grabbed, bundled into an unmarked van by people who are…

Exactly, I get a little bit uneasy with people throwing around "got disappeared" - it lands as politically charged. What that means to me is something like Khmer Rouge, or Pinochet throwing thousands of people off planes into the ocean (no parachute), tentatively it means gulag, but even with gulag, you're not disappeared, you find out this person is in a gulag somewhere (though is likely to die), having myself read…

You guys are taking my previous comment out of context but that's less interesting than the fact that you have a strange definition of "disappeared".

> Even in Guantanamo, people lived, and people were known to be there, and I think that is how people are using "disappeared" i.e. extrajudicial and illegal, but alive and known to be somewhere.

So you're arguing that no one was disappeared to Gitmo because some information eventually came out about a few people? Or do you really believe everyone at Gitmo was publicly identified?

A quick google reveals that Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch don't agree with you.

For one, Bush admitted we were doing enforced disappearances

> In early September 2006, US authorities transferred to Guantánamo 14 men who had been held in secret CIA custody. President George W. Bush finally admitted that, in the “war on terror”, the USA has been resorting to secret detentions and enforced disappearance, which is a crime under international law.

https://www.amnesty.org/en/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/amr511...

Some of those men had been held incommunicado for 4 years at that point.

Or, here is a list of people who, at the time, were believed to be disappeared at Gitmo https://www.hrw.org/legacy/backgrounder/usa/ct0607/4.htm#_To...

So yes, people were absolutely disappeared at/to Guantanamo Bay and you using Gitmo as your example makes me really question your definition.

Post reply on HN