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

Kremlin Cash Behind Yuri Milner’s Twitter and Facebook Investments

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 204 posts

Re: Kremlin Cash Behind Yuri Milner’s Twitter and Facebook Investments

#91

Post by makomk »

EGreg wrote: post #31
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Compared to what the USA does on a regular basis, Russia is a pretty good actor when it comes to external dealings It has been a while since the United States forcibly annexed another country's territory [1]. In any case, this argument is irrelevant. Irrespective of whether Russia is a "good actor" or not, they are a geopolitical competitor who surreptitiously exercised control over, or at least non-public purview…

Would you consider the Iraq war a while? Guantanamo? Norriega? Contras? How long is a while? Or is only annexation considered the red line here? If you want to blame Russians, you should blame the USSR for deporting the Crimean Tatars after WW2 as collective punishment. Being outraged at an annexation of a territory that was unilaterally given away 50 years earlier where not a single gunshot was fired while giving a…

Technically, the US didn't annex any of those countries, which makes what it did more above-board in terms of international law than Russia's actions. Sure, a lot of those interventions ended a lot more badly than annexation, but that apparently doesn't matter.

Re: Kremlin Cash Behind Yuri Milner’s Twitter and Facebook Investments

#92

Post by vkou »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #32
throwawaysml wrote: post #27

Is the difference to Chinese and Saudi money floating in the valley that we expect violent repercussions for anyone that opposes some aspect of the financiers' wishes? Or is it just that Russia is the most outspoken big nation that takes a different stance on critical issues where, say, Saudi and DC are in agreement. And that this is a danger to post-WW2 US influence? Genuinely curious. Back when Milner invested in F…

When Saudis, Chinese or Russian individuals invest, they do so openly. When Uber took Saudi state money, they knew why the Saudis were buying. I think this sort of state-backed investing is fine. The issue here is companies didn't treat Milner et al as an extension of the Russian state. They treated them as private individuals who made money in Russia. The difference is night and day. The latter want to make money li…

> The former may want things other than money.

There are plenty of Western businessmen who have political agendas of their own - who do things for reasons besides money. Rupert Murdoch, the Koch Brothers, etc. They are incredibly open about their goals, and none of them are good for the rest of us.

Re: Kremlin Cash Behind Yuri Milner’s Twitter and Facebook Investments

#93

Post by postramus »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #74
YuriNiyazov wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In that case, I am really confused about what the point that's being made here is. > If a state-backed investor invests in your company, and you don't know about it, that's cause for alarm in itself. Is the only difference between today and yesterday is that yesterday there was no direct evidence that rich people associated ("backed by", "working in" - I am not sure what terminology you prefer to suggest nefariousnes…

> anyone who believed yesterday that Milner was not $funded (once again, insert preferred terminology) by the Kremlin is an idiot Then more of us are idiots than you give credit for :). At the very least, I was an idiot and pg was an idiot [1][2]. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3143894 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3144475

Without making any specific accusation I would simply point out that the user with whom you have been conversing is present in [1] and playing the “it’s no big deal” card even then.

Re: Kremlin Cash Behind Yuri Milner’s Twitter and Facebook Investments

#94

Post by YuriNiyazov »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #74
YuriNiyazov wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In that case, I am really confused about what the point that's being made here is. > If a state-backed investor invests in your company, and you don't know about it, that's cause for alarm in itself. Is the only difference between today and yesterday is that yesterday there was no direct evidence that rich people associated ("backed by", "working in" - I am not sure what terminology you prefer to suggest nefariousnes…

> anyone who believed yesterday that Milner was not $funded (once again, insert preferred terminology) by the Kremlin is an idiot Then more of us are idiots than you give credit for :). At the very least, I was an idiot and pg was an idiot [1][2]. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3143894 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3144475

Are you suggesting that the uncovered transactions are evidence of money laundering?

The best response to that would be this [1] from that same thread. It's not money laundering if it's just how post-Soviet laissez-faire capitalism does things.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3144520

Re: Kremlin Cash Behind Yuri Milner’s Twitter and Facebook Investments

#95

Post by Synaesthesia »

makomk wrote: post #91
EGreg wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you consider the Iraq war a while? Guantanamo? Norriega? Contras? How long is a while? Or is only annexation considered the red line here? If you want to blame Russians, you should blame the USSR for deporting the Crimean Tatars after WW2 as collective punishment. Being outraged at an annexation of a territory that was unilaterally given away 50 years earlier where not a single gunshot was fired while giving a…

Technically, the US didn't annex any of those countries, which makes what it did more above-board in terms of international law than Russia's actions. Sure, a lot of those interventions ended a lot more badly than annexation, but that apparently doesn't matter.

Pfft international law. The US is in Syria against the wishes of that country. It invaded and destroyed Iraq, bombed Libya, Afghanistan, Yemen, and countless other crimes all in contempt of international law.

The US occupation of Guantanamo bay for example, is contested by Cuba, who protests continuously. However the Russian annexation of Crimea was at least supported by the inhabitants. They’re both crimes of imperialism but the former is far worse.

Re: Kremlin Cash Behind Yuri Milner’s Twitter and Facebook Investments

#96

Post by vkou »

makomk wrote: post #91
EGreg wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you consider the Iraq war a while? Guantanamo? Norriega? Contras? How long is a while? Or is only annexation considered the red line here? If you want to blame Russians, you should blame the USSR for deporting the Crimean Tatars after WW2 as collective punishment. Being outraged at an annexation of a territory that was unilaterally given away 50 years earlier where not a single gunshot was fired while giving a…

Technically, the US didn't annex any of those countries, which makes what it did more above-board in terms of international law than Russia's actions. Sure, a lot of those interventions ended a lot more badly than annexation, but that apparently doesn't matter.

That's the beauty of slamming the other side's behaviour in geo-politics - you can find any distinction without a difference, and play it up to 11. The US didn't annex Iraq - it merely invaded, occupied it, and plunged it into a bloody civil war.

By that logic, the USSR didn't annex Afghanistan either. It just invaded, occupied it, and participated in a bloody civil war. Why did everyone get all worked up about that war, anyways? Why did the Soviets not have a moral high hill to make a stand on in that conflict?

Re: Kremlin Cash Behind Yuri Milner’s Twitter and Facebook Investments

#97

Post by postramus »

pen2l wrote: post #30
seizethecheese wrote: post #10

Concerns about Milner And his ties to YC are not new. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3143604

> I meant that even if Yuri's money was tainted in some way, it was being used as a counterweight to another bad thing. Dammit, this is disappointing. I really thought pg was above saying things like that. Between this, thiel, and some other things, I am quite bummed out.

Always a mistake to expect communicative rather than instrumental use of language!

Re: Kremlin Cash Behind Yuri Milner’s Twitter and Facebook Investments

#98

Post by nodesocket »

malvosenior wrote: post #36

I’m having a very hard time understanding why anyone would be upset by the Russian government making technology positive investments. Especially technologists! I wish more money was deployed into software development. Russia seems to be a positive influence here.

Because some have been proven to be deceptive, manipulative, and have un-american aspirations. They are playing the extreme liberalism for their own gain.

Re: Kremlin Cash Behind Yuri Milner’s Twitter and Facebook Investments

#99

Post by YuriNiyazov »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #74
YuriNiyazov wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In that case, I am really confused about what the point that's being made here is. > If a state-backed investor invests in your company, and you don't know about it, that's cause for alarm in itself. Is the only difference between today and yesterday is that yesterday there was no direct evidence that rich people associated ("backed by", "working in" - I am not sure what terminology you prefer to suggest nefariousnes…

> anyone who believed yesterday that Milner was not $funded (once again, insert preferred terminology) by the Kremlin is an idiot Then more of us are idiots than you give credit for :). At the very least, I was an idiot and pg was an idiot [1][2]. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3143894 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3144475

@postramus - Yes I am. Because it's not.

Re: Kremlin Cash Behind Yuri Milner’s Twitter and Facebook Investments

#100

Post by virtuabhi »

YuriNiyazov wrote: post #70
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> evidence that Kremlin gave orders to do X and not Y Again, you're moving the goalposts. Others [1][2][3] have directly responded to you on this point. Arguing that there is no need for alarm until some undefined threshold of red-handed evidence is attained is silly. If a state-backed investor invests in your company, and you don't know about it, that's cause for alarm in itself. It means you need to review, very ca…

In that case, I am really confused about what the point that's being made here is. > If a state-backed investor invests in your company, and you don't know about it, that's cause for alarm in itself. Is the only difference between today and yesterday is that yesterday there was no direct evidence that rich people associated ("backed by", "working in" - I am not sure what terminology you prefer to suggest nefariousnes…

> In that case, I am really confused about what the point that's being made here is.

I think you are being intentionally ignorant. Maybe you have rationalized that it doesn't matter if the money comes from authoritarian regimes because it pays your bills.

Post reply on HN