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

U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective

inventati.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

671–680 of 817 posts

Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective

#671

Post by mdp2021 »

p-e-w wrote: post #668
culi wrote: post #454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You want them to be "held accountable" for supporting groups that don't align with the ideology of the US whitehouse.

If you select who you provide services to based on their ideology, you can’t shrug and say “I’m just an infrastructure provider, same as the electrical grid” when it turns out that some of those individuals committed crimes using the stuff you gave them. That’s a very different situation compared to the standard “sign up with your email here”. The provider is responsible because they picked their clients, rather than…

Look, really not. When the bartender glances at the customer and decides whether they have already drank too much, if the bartender makes a mistake and the customer later crashes into something it is not the bartender's responsibility.

If the bartender decides as a rule "first of all, if they seem uncertain on their legs it is already a no", again that is just a codification of the former.

Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective

#672

Post by woodpanel »

throwawayqqq11 wrote: post #618
kova12 wrote: post #465

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Meanwhile, you find weapon stashes and insurgency plans on what political side?

This is literally the thing you will find when busting groups that have been performing multiple attacks on German electricity and rail infrastructure in the last years. Attacks that results in dead people and are ok with many more dead

Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective

#673

Post by breppp »

inigyou wrote: post #634
breppp wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Opposing someone who happens to be anti-fascist doesn't make you anti-anti-fascist or fascist any more than opposing someone who is blue makes you anti-blue or yellow. However if I say all blue are terrorists and it's legal to shoot blue on sight. Then I'm anti-blue. If I say all anti-blue are terrorists and it's legal to shoot anti-blue on sight, then I'm very pro-blue. It doesn't matter if there's a bunch of green…

yes, that's exactly my point

Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective

#674

Post by woodpanel »

iamnothere wrote: post #45

Everyone’s missing the big picture here which is that this targeting of infrastructure providers as “terrorists” is unprecedented and concerning: https://decode39.com/16319/autistici-inventati-case-sets-a-n... If a radical group sets up shop on I2P, are I2P users and devs now terrorists? This is a problem. What about Monero users/devs? Veilid? Tox? Signal?

Why are you leaving out the important details:

You can't as an ISP prevent malicious actors from using your service, but you do can assist the government - in the case of the recent attacks on Berlins electricity that caused a fatality the German - to hand over the data to help assist law enforcement.

If US state-department's claims [1] are true, did noblogs.org do so – help German authorities track Terrorists or did it cover for them?

Because their statement does say nothing about the claims made by the state department.

[1] https://www.state.gov/releases/office-of-the-spokesperson/20...

Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective

#675

Post by mdp2021 »

p-e-w wrote: post #670
mdp2021 wrote: post #667

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> fair No, with these limited elements. The filter may just be "of course I will not provide my (free) service to people that may use it in what I call a repugnant way". When you know Harry is a rogue CEO, say a misinformation spreader or the issuer of unethical products, and you refuse to work for it, to provide it your services: does that make you an "activist"? Many people will call it "just the normal right thing…

> Many people will call it "just the normal right thing to do". It’s absolutely not a normal thing to do for entities that want to use the “we are just infrastructure, our users are responsible for their actions” excuse. In fact, such entities (e.g. power grid, telecom) are often legally prohibited from choosing their clients, and in exchange aren’t held responsible for what their clients do with their services.

Also see my other post.

So if you had a hammer in your yard, and somebody took it and misused it, you would not be responsible, but if you gave it to your neighbour and he used it to crush a skull, you the owner of the hammer would be responsible? It is clearly at least the opposite. Abstract from the "paid service", but see that.

The rule you propose (filtering would create responsibility) makes no sense. Try to show why it would be so, maybe.

Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective

#676

Post by KomoD »

subvol wrote: post #476
timpera wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting to see that their most important domain, noblogs dot org, seems unaffected.

I think the registrar makes the difference: autistici.org was registered via Gandi, but noblogs.org registrar is Tucows Domains Inc., which points[1] to njal.la, an "offshore" domain hoster that should be more resilient, but isn’t really usable for email hosting, since domains at such a hoster will land on blacklists almost immediately. [1]: https://tucowsdomains.com/provider-result/

It makes no difference when the registry (which is above registrars) is the one taking action.

Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective

#677

Post by dismalaf »

inigyou wrote: post #613
dismalaf wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A tactic of certain "anti-fascist" groups is to simply call anyone they don't like fascist and attack them. Just like actual fascists used to excuse violence as "anti-communist". Claiming to be anti-fascist doesn't actually make them anti-fascist nor excuse them from breaking laws.

A tactic of certain fascist groups is to simply claim their opponents simply call anyone they don't like fascist and attack them. How can we objectively decide who's right?

Have objective laws and prosecute people who break them.

Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective

#678

Post by well_ackshually »

CMay wrote: post #588
2legit2quit wrote: post #560

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Anti-communism was and still is highly important and critical. McCarthyism was the pinnacle of the anti-communism movement. How did that turn out, again? > It was an open objective and part of what caused World War 2 I'm pretty sure Germany invading other countries was the cause of World War 2. I don't see how you can lump "dang commies were spreading, so we had to go fight 'em" in as a justification, when there wa…

> McCarthyism was the pinnacle of the anti-communism movement. How did that turn out, again? It worked out fine? > I'm pretty sure Germany invading other countries was the cause of World War 2. I don't see how you can lump "dang commies were spreading, so we had to go fight 'em" in as a justification, when there was only a non-aggression pact between Germany and the former-USSR. "Those dang commies were spreading wit…

>>McCarthyism was the pinnacle of the anti-communism movement. How did that turn out, again?

>It worked out fine?

Please stop giving people ammo to take the piss out of you, it really shows how ignorant you are. Although it's very fun to find a blind exceptionalist in the wild and to make fun of it: every single one of your answers has been a demonstration of how the US likes to act with impunity and pretend you have a mission of divine importance. From saying you have a "duty" to stall communism, to willingly destroying other countries for your own benefit, you remain a perfect example of why the world is better off with the US gone.

PS: if you want to count deaths from famines as "caused by the communists", whether it was the USSR or the great leap forward, at least have the decency of admitting that these countries were suffering from famines for centuries beforehand, and that they were the last famines they ever lived through at this point. Communism stopped those famines. The US is perfectly happy to let a few dozen million die every year of famines, lack of access to medication, clean water, all things it has in large amounts and refuses to give because "it's not profitable". War profiteers, murderers and dangers to the world.

Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective

#679

Post by strbean »

mlindner wrote: post #577
Arainach wrote: post #515

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Opposing fascism and racism is not "radical left". It's centrism. The State Department's words are not A/I's.

Being against facism and racism is centrism, being part of an "anti-fascist" or "anti-racist" group is radical left. If you're part of a "group" that has stated goals of pushing something that is already a norm then its pretty clear what what you're doing is not pushing for what is already the norm as if it was the norm you wouldn't need to push for it.

Checks notes

Okay, so the chamber of commerce is a radical organisation, got it.

Re: U.S. sanctions against the A/I Collective

#680

Post by A1kmm »

impossiblefork wrote: post #528
tptacek wrote: post #458

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again: in every system there's always some kind of sleuthing you could do to attempt to identify a user. That's not the legal standard. The complaint against A/I is that they knowingly and deliberately assisted the PKK.

No. With dummy messages you are guaranteed that traffic analysis will not be possible. Because you connect to the network, then start sending messages to everybody continuously, a message every second, or every ten seconds, or every 100 seconds, you will, every second, or every ten seconds, or 100 seconds, be able to send a message to whoever you want, and you will not be distinguished in any way from the other netwo…

> No. With dummy messages you are guaranteed that traffic analysis will not be possible.

I don't think that's true.

There are two possibilities: If you're proposing that dummy messages are in addition to normal messages, then dummy messages add noise to the signal, but over a long enough time, for known noise distribution, it is possible for the signal to be statistically significant. That depends on there being enough signal, but then things depend on signal traffic patterns, there are no guarantees.

The second possible design is that the node-to-node communication volumes for any pair of nodes is truly independent of the signal - i.e. the statistical model decides how much traffic flows from a node to another node, and that fixed amount of flow is either used for signal or for noise, and if there is more signal, it's dropped or waits. Encryption makes it impossible to distinguish signal from noise without the key known between the pair of nodes. That is secure against a passive adversary who doesn't participate in the network. However, if network users are anonymous and mutually untrusting, then the adversary can use active methods without much risk (i.e. lots of users and nodes can actually be the adversary). Every packet/message delayed or dropped also allows inference about network traffic by other users.

These methods can harden a network and make analysis harder, but they don't guarantee it is not possible.

Post reply on HN