Our investigation into the suspicious pressure on Archive.today • Hacker News Board

Re: Our investigation into the suspicious pressure on Archive.today

#471

Post by throaway1975 » Tue, Nov 18, 2025, 2:52 PM UTC

immibis wrote: post #454

throaway1975 wrote: post #439

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lol. They won't. A small team to delete repetitive emails has nothing to do with getting hundreds of emails a day from different people in your constituency. Also "weak free speech" is pretty much just a US-centred meme.

People get arrested in Germany for saying bombing little kids is bad, and I think it's the same in different countries. Each one has a few issues the leaders really want to get done, and you're punished for opposing those, but you're allowed to protest the ones they don't really care about. In every country where I'm aware of it, emailing your MP does not email your MP, but emails a member of their staff who read mos…

You "think"...well you're wrong...you're talking about the 15 year old arrested at the Palestine protest? hardly a EU phenomenon...again, go ahead and actually read the timeline of CC and the website which headed up the mass emailing campaign against it. There's no reason to be MORE jaded than we need to be.

Re: Our investigation into the suspicious pressure on Archive.today

#472

Post by permo-w » Tue, Nov 18, 2025, 5:56 PM UTC

trimethylpurine wrote: post #378

permo-w wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

my understanding of the article is that they suspect FBI involvement based on the timing but don't have any concrete evidence to support it

I appreciate so much the pragmatist's approach to their methods. They mentioned the coincidence and that they had no evidence to support that hypothesis. They did not accuse anyone of anything, they only requested investigation. I'm stating this because I think it might be the most important distinction in our lifetime. I think that wars are fought, lives are lost, and maybe even society itself will be lost, on that…

bit dramatic but arguably true. then again most of the time when people make such accusations that lead to conflict, they do it while punching downwards. here they're likely being careful not to make the accusation mostly for fear of the wrath of the FBI. if it it were someone a little less fearsome perhaps they'd be less careful

Re: Our investigation into the suspicious pressure on Archive.today

#473

Post by _yb2s » Tue, Nov 18, 2025, 11:26 PM UTC

shkkmo wrote: post #200

_yb2s wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This article is specifically an article about an investigation by the FBI- US federal agents.

The article mentions the FBI investigation but is not about that. This article is about a pressure campaign, the letter Web Abuse Association Defense sent to adguard making threats under french law and adguard's investigation in response to that letter.

Which was what my parent comment referred to. Comments replying to mine act like it's unreasonable for me to talk about US federal agents in the context of this subject, when those are what the article mentions specifically, many times.