U.S. firm Cogent cutting internet service to Russia(reuters.com)
reuters.com
U.S. firm Cogent cutting internet service to Russia
https://www.reuters.com/technology/us-firm-cogent-cutting-internet-service-russia-2022-03-04/
179 comments
I think the overall idea here is to piss off ordinary Russians enough to incentivize grassroots change.
I'm completely in support of those types of measures - especially sanctions - but cutting off the internet means the only information many Russians will have is domestic propaganda. The Russians have already cut off most non-state-TV stations and are instituting 15 year prison terms for derogatory remarks about the army.
The young folks in Russia are using TikTok et al to find out what's really going on. These are the ones who will most be hurt. Those seeking the truth.
We need those folks to have information so they can push back.
This is why the BBC has a Tor service. [1]
[1] https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-50150981
The young folks in Russia are using TikTok et al to find out what's really going on. These are the ones who will most be hurt. Those seeking the truth.
We need those folks to have information so they can push back.
This is why the BBC has a Tor service. [1]
[1] https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-50150981
>" ... but cutting off the internet means the only information many Russians will have is domestic propaganda."
I think the Roskomnadzor watchdog has pretty much preemptively done that already though no? And it's not just social media but things like the BBC and Deutsche Welle etc. See:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/04/russia-complet...
and
https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-rferl-bbc-facebook-google-twi...
I think the Roskomnadzor watchdog has pretty much preemptively done that already though no? And it's not just social media but things like the BBC and Deutsche Welle etc. See:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/04/russia-complet...
and
https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-rferl-bbc-facebook-google-twi...
(Posted this earlier on another story.)
If someone is going to disconnect Russia from Internet it is going to be Russian themselves, to limit the free flow of information that might be conflicting with the official truth.
But like with the Chinese firewall, information find its way. Unless Russia wants to set itself back to 70s, they still need to access Github, Cloudflare, Amazon Cloudfront, etc. For the Russian IT business to work. It is going to be very inefficient to run anything with a pen and a paper.
Software development and Internet were built on scientific principles, criticism, criticial thinking. This requires free flow of information. You cannot have one without the other, or you are going to end up with very inferior and inefficient software ecosystem.
If someone is going to disconnect Russia from Internet it is going to be Russian themselves, to limit the free flow of information that might be conflicting with the official truth.
But like with the Chinese firewall, information find its way. Unless Russia wants to set itself back to 70s, they still need to access Github, Cloudflare, Amazon Cloudfront, etc. For the Russian IT business to work. It is going to be very inefficient to run anything with a pen and a paper.
Software development and Internet were built on scientific principles, criticism, criticial thinking. This requires free flow of information. You cannot have one without the other, or you are going to end up with very inferior and inefficient software ecosystem.
> they still need to access Github, Cloudflare, Amazon Cloudfront, etc
LOL. Do you really think the brass even know what it is?
Putin doesn't even know how the modern mobile phones look, he didn't needed one for more than 20 years.
To give you a slight idea how long it is - the famous Nokia 3310 was announced 9 months later than his (acting) presidency.
LOL. Do you really think the brass even know what it is?
Putin doesn't even know how the modern mobile phones look, he didn't needed one for more than 20 years.
To give you a slight idea how long it is - the famous Nokia 3310 was announced 9 months later than his (acting) presidency.
Well, at least that carries the immense benefit of him not incessantly tweeting on his smartphone even from the loo.
The BBC also have shortwave - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30553243
That would be organized how exactly? The internet is literally the only lifeline left right now to both get the true information about the recent events and to organize anti-government protests / help people that were already detained (8261 people as of today)
The idea of protests is grossly underestimating Putin and the regime.
I also can't think of any examples where it worked - are there? I mean sanctions pushing a population into revolt?
Sanctions? Yes. Cold War
The beatings will continue until morale improves.
The purpose of the sanctions is for morale not to improve.
Some Russian citizens were saying they don't support the war and have nothing to do with it. These sanctions make it personal for them in a non-violent, non-lethal way.
We are trading Russians' convenience for Ukrainians' lives and, judging by Putin's tone today, it is working.
Some Russian citizens were saying they don't support the war and have nothing to do with it. These sanctions make it personal for them in a non-violent, non-lethal way.
We are trading Russians' convenience for Ukrainians' lives and, judging by Putin's tone today, it is working.
[deleted]
What did Putin say today?
Some details here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/03/04/putin-russia...
You will have to decide how to interpret it and whether he really believes it. It's not exactly a "let's de-escalate together" statement, but it certainly suggests sanctions are working.
You will have to decide how to interpret it and whether he really believes it. It's not exactly a "let's de-escalate together" statement, but it certainly suggests sanctions are working.
I think you summarized that best.
I'm in Russia, an let me tell you, this does not have that effect at all. Most folks are just getting angry at collective west for all these bans, undeserved in their opinion. Big news: people are shortsighted and irrational, especially during crisis. I'm afraid this will just help Putin in uniting Russians in hatred.
I think the anger is also understandable, there have been so many illegal wars, interventions and invasions that didn’t cause all these bans. If I were in Russia I’d probably be easily swept up by that anger. It’d be hard to see how it’s fair when this is happening to you, even if it feels deserved from an outside perspective.
> I think the anger is also understandable, there have been so many illegal wars, interventions and invasions that didn’t cause all these bans.
"But mom, they got to do crime, why can't I do crime?"
Obviously superpowers get to do crime, Russia just mistakenly thought it was a superpower.
I mean, sure. But I think it's perfectly natural to get pissed off when some other party punishes you for doing something that other party does repeatedly, and without consequence. I imagine that there are plenty of Russian citizens who are against the war in Ukraine, but are also -- perfectly rationally -- angry at the US and West for the new round of sanctions and restrictions.
But not everyone gets punished for it.
I guess because the Zodiac killer got away with it, people should be mad they can't serial kill too - instead of mad that they weren't caught?
one despot's crime is another hegemon's police action
> there have been so many illegal wars
Is this even an "illegal" war? I mean, other than by the standard of "every war is an illegal war"? Not taking sides (I don't know enough about the history and politics to do so), but I know Ukraine was part of Russia until very recently. If, somehow, Mexico had the means to do so and were to try to "take back" Texas... I can't help but wonder if the international response would be a lot more neutral than the response to Russia trying to "take back" Ukraine.
Is this even an "illegal" war? I mean, other than by the standard of "every war is an illegal war"? Not taking sides (I don't know enough about the history and politics to do so), but I know Ukraine was part of Russia until very recently. If, somehow, Mexico had the means to do so and were to try to "take back" Texas... I can't help but wonder if the international response would be a lot more neutral than the response to Russia trying to "take back" Ukraine.
Your sentiment is normally valid, but most Russians supposedly literally don't believe they're at war because of the content Putin feeds them. They think it's a small operation in the Donbas. It has nothing to do with being 'illegal' or whatever.
Do you have a (recent) source for that? I can’t imagine that to be true with the impact this war has had on daily life for Russian.
The Russian government acknowledged that hundreds of soldiers died, publicly. That’s not a tiny mission.
The Russian government acknowledged that hundreds of soldiers died, publicly. That’s not a tiny mission.
That will probably change over time as Russia becomes more and more isolated from the world.
I'm sure the oligarchs are pissed at yacht seizures and banking discomfort too but so what? This is a valid tactic since they didn't attack a NATO member.
If they did, then they would be facing the same things that Ukrainian citizens are.
Russia flexes their might against their own citizens constantly and disrupts their quality of life. There's always going to be some that will be emboldened for the wrong reasons. But it doesn't make sense for nations to sit idly by.
The idea that citizens over there could organize with internet and actually accomplish any change is nonsense.
I'm sure the oligarchs are pissed at yacht seizures and banking discomfort too but so what? This is a valid tactic since they didn't attack a NATO member.
If they did, then they would be facing the same things that Ukrainian citizens are.
Russia flexes their might against their own citizens constantly and disrupts their quality of life. There's always going to be some that will be emboldened for the wrong reasons. But it doesn't make sense for nations to sit idly by.
The idea that citizens over there could organize with internet and actually accomplish any change is nonsense.
I think its pretty rational to blame your censor, not your censor's enemy.
It's important to recognize that most people in the world are hicks. They are low information, and not rational in the way you mean it. (America is unusual because our hicks are rich, but we're mostly hicks, too.)
Let’s just call it as it is - Putin is a product of Russian culture and Russian society.
In retrospect we should have ground the Russian military to dust after ‘91. No aid without nuclear disarmament and population reeducation.
Hopefully when the dust settles this time, we don’t make the same mistakes.
In retrospect we should have ground the Russian military to dust after ‘91. No aid without nuclear disarmament and population reeducation.
Hopefully when the dust settles this time, we don’t make the same mistakes.
Why? Why are people okay with their comfortable life getting worse? There doesn't appear to be any ideology. It isn't communism. It isn't religion. It appears to be an ego struggle paid for by the comforts of the Russian people. What are you getting out of this deal?
If you don't live under a functioning democracy, you're not going to feel agency to actually change the actions of the state. For you it will be akin to a natural disaster, and it's better to live with the discomfort than it is to protest and surely forfeit your life and impact your family. This isn't like the West where you can organize massive protests in anger, however ineffective they end up being.
And if ISPs stop providing service, how will protestors organize anyway? By laying cable in the ground themselves?
And if ISPs stop providing service, how will protestors organize anyway? By laying cable in the ground themselves?
If you don't live under a functioning democracy, you're not going to feel agency to actually change the actions of the state.
People keep saying this, but it’s not even close to accurate. The Shah, Marcos, Ceaușescu, and Mubarak come to mind.
And, I vaguely remember something in the USSR in ‘91.
People keep saying this, but it’s not even close to accurate. The Shah, Marcos, Ceaușescu, and Mubarak come to mind.
And, I vaguely remember something in the USSR in ‘91.
Do they need connection to outside the country to organize? They can still organize on the local network.
Right but I don't see how any of this leads to blaming the West.
Because the West chose to impose these sanctions and restrictions, knowing full well that regular Russian citizens would be hurt by them, but also be fairly powerless to change the course of their government. "I'm pissed that you are hurting me because of the actions of others, and I can't meaningfully influence what these others will do." Seems pretty reasonable to me.
The logic doesn't follow though. Citizens have more influence over their own sovereignty than foreign nations unwilling to engage in armed conflict. "My country brought on the ire of the rest of the world and I am completely devoid of responsibility." Okay.
If you were to rank who is to blame for the sanctions why is the West in the top position? Why not the party responsible? If you tug on the thread of "why is this happening?" one thing seems clear: for no reason worth the discomfort.
If you were to rank who is to blame for the sanctions why is the West in the top position? Why not the party responsible? If you tug on the thread of "why is this happening?" one thing seems clear: for no reason worth the discomfort.
strategic bombing doctrine during the second world war was designed with the same intent of incensing the targeted civilian populations into uprising against their government. in effect they simply made people depressed and hopeless. i do not see why deprivation would have a markedly different psychological effect than extermination, if suffering was all that was required to overthrow a despot, there would simply be no more despots.
Sanctions are a very far cry from bombing cities. I'm talking about discomfort, not terror.
People are not okay. They are afraid. Starting from today in Russia any public action against war (or even calling it war) can be punished with up to 15 years in prison.
Trying to think when this worked well. Iran and North Korea had sanctions imposed on them for quite a bit of time, and they seem to have a pretty stable leadership structure for years. Perhaps some of the colored revolutions or Arab Spring movements but not sure how much sanctions played into those...
As long as Putin can re-interpret this as an external aggression from the $insert_pejorative West, and broadcast that better than Twitter, CNN, etc, I can see those sanctions having an opposite effect and further solidify his power.
On the other hand, I can see attacking those who are closer to him being a lot more effective. His billionaire friends not being able to travel to south of France for vacation is a much more serious threat than a regular person who cannot use Apple Pay or watch Netflix any longer.
As long as Putin can re-interpret this as an external aggression from the $insert_pejorative West, and broadcast that better than Twitter, CNN, etc, I can see those sanctions having an opposite effect and further solidify his power.
On the other hand, I can see attacking those who are closer to him being a lot more effective. His billionaire friends not being able to travel to south of France for vacation is a much more serious threat than a regular person who cannot use Apple Pay or watch Netflix any longer.
The example everybody brings up is South Africa. The claim is that sanctions were instrumental against apartheid. It's hard to evaluate that claim.
Studies have consistently shown that sanctions only result in a change in behavior of governments 30-35% of the time. Sanctions designed to cause regime change have an effectiveness even lower than that. Also worth noting that this effectiveness rate has been declining since the 90s.
See: http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~cas86/GSDB_FKSYY.pdf
See: http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~cas86/GSDB_FKSYY.pdf
That's a good example. Thanks for brining it up. I hadn't thought of it.
Is this an acceptable strategy?
There's an ethical argument against it: "hey lets punish innocent civilians so they attack the real enemy" and a practical argument: "hey russia started the conflict, but didnt cut-off your internet, that was a US company that sees you as their enemy"
There's an ethical argument against it: "hey lets punish innocent civilians so they attack the real enemy" and a practical argument: "hey russia started the conflict, but didnt cut-off your internet, that was a US company that sees you as their enemy"
Man, you people who when babies are being exploded and apartment buildings attacked with missiles, an entire nation being invaded, who ask these questions about inconveniencing citizens of the attacking nation, are you even real?
The next time the USA invades someone I welcome for you to destroy my financial life and drive my family and I into subsistence farming if it helps to stop us. You have my permissions.
stop doing war.
The next time the USA invades someone I welcome for you to destroy my financial life and drive my family and I into subsistence farming if it helps to stop us. You have my permissions.
stop doing war.
> Man, you people who when babies are being exploded and apartment buildings attacked with missiles, an entire nation being invaded, who ask these questions about inconveniencing citizens of the attacking nation, are you even real?
I dont understand the point of conflating a nation and its citizens here. There are Russians that live in the US, and americans that live in Russia. There are warmongers in all countries, as pacifists in all countries.
> The next time the USA invades someone I welcome for you to destroy my financial life and drive my family and I into subsistence farming if it helps to stop us. You have my permissions.
Can we put this into a contract? I'm more than willing to be the recipient of your funds if this came to pass.
I dont understand the point of conflating a nation and its citizens here. There are Russians that live in the US, and americans that live in Russia. There are warmongers in all countries, as pacifists in all countries.
> The next time the USA invades someone I welcome for you to destroy my financial life and drive my family and I into subsistence farming if it helps to stop us. You have my permissions.
Can we put this into a contract? I'm more than willing to be the recipient of your funds if this came to pass.
Easy to say from the comfort of your keyboard and within a democracy that responds to polling data and protest. In Russia you'll get thrown in jail for 15 years.
Also realize that statistically speaking you likely didn't dissent when we invaded Iraq. We were propagandized and consent was manufactured via the NYT and others. If your family was driven into poverty as a result, I don't believe you would have welcomed it whatsoever.
Also realize that statistically speaking you likely didn't dissent when we invaded Iraq. We were propagandized and consent was manufactured via the NYT and others. If your family was driven into poverty as a result, I don't believe you would have welcomed it whatsoever.
You'd be the same guy wanting to take assault weapons of all Americans that own one ONLY to turn-around and say it's OK for Ukraine to hand out these same weapons to their citizens and let loose a handful of criminals to defend the country. What are your thoughts on USA perpetrating a violent coup in Ukraine by replacing its democratically elected Government with an anti-Russian one in February 2014? https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2018/06/04/how-and-why-the-u-s-go...
> "stop doing war"
That's not how war works.
Have you considered that these actions might provoke and prolong greater conflict?
That's not how war works.
Have you considered that these actions might provoke and prolong greater conflict?
> The next time the USA invades someone I welcome for you to destroy my financial life and drive my family and I into subsistence farming if it helps to stop us. You have my permissions.
Uh, you mean like Iraq, Afghanistan, or Syria? I don't think whataboutism is a good argument for sanctions here. Sanctions are a balancing act between inconveniencing the regime and inconveniencing their people. There's a calculus to consider. You're acting as if this is a new tenet of international diplomacy or something.
Uh, you mean like Iraq, Afghanistan, or Syria? I don't think whataboutism is a good argument for sanctions here. Sanctions are a balancing act between inconveniencing the regime and inconveniencing their people. There's a calculus to consider. You're acting as if this is a new tenet of international diplomacy or something.
Not everything is whataboutism (which is strangely the newest favourite word of everyone and my pet peeve).
He is just criticizing people who criticize sanctions. From his perspective, the cost of sanctions is trivial compared to the cost of war.
No whataboutism here.
"Man, you people who when babies are being exploded and apartment buildings attacked with missiles, an entire nation being invaded, who ask these questions about inconveniencing citizens of the attacking nation, are you even real? The next time the USA invades someone I welcome for you to destroy my financial life and drive my family and I into subsistence farming if it helps to stop us. You have my permissions.
stop doing war."
He is just criticizing people who criticize sanctions. From his perspective, the cost of sanctions is trivial compared to the cost of war.
No whataboutism here.
"Man, you people who when babies are being exploded and apartment buildings attacked with missiles, an entire nation being invaded, who ask these questions about inconveniencing citizens of the attacking nation, are you even real? The next time the USA invades someone I welcome for you to destroy my financial life and drive my family and I into subsistence farming if it helps to stop us. You have my permissions.
stop doing war."
And I'm arguing that the USA _has_ invaded other nations and left them worse for the wear. Like Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria. You're right this isn't whataboutism, it's more like sanctions "for thee but not for me". The USA manufactured a flimsy reason to send boots on the ground to Iraq and Afghanistan, much like Russia manufactured a flimsy reason to send boots to the ground in Ukraine. There _were_ massive domestic protests over it. And yet the US did it and received no international censure. The "next time the USA invades I welcome ... [sanctions]" is a flimsy argument; the world has shown that sanctions don't apply when the US invades.
> the cost of sanctions is trivial compared to the cost of war.
To whom?
To whom?
Ultimately if we need to pick sides, I’m going to apply pressure to the Russian citizens who will need to apply pressure to their own dictator.
That’s kinda how war works. I think a lot of the folks criticizing you are in a position of privilege, or have an interesting perspective on what open warfare really means.
Apply pressure to the country until you get the results you want. I can appreciate the focus on Putin and his cronies, but no one gets out untouched.
That’s kinda how war works. I think a lot of the folks criticizing you are in a position of privilege, or have an interesting perspective on what open warfare really means.
Apply pressure to the country until you get the results you want. I can appreciate the focus on Putin and his cronies, but no one gets out untouched.
That requires a lot of confidence that the replacement will be better. I think this is a 'be careful what you wish for' scenario.
Has this ever worked?
Yes.
See "13 times that economic sanctions really worked" from this Washington Post article from 8 years ago when the questions of sanctions efficacy surfaced as a result of Putin's then invasion of Crimea:
https://archive.ph/KPwJH
https://archive.ph/KPwJH
It's interesting to note that the last successful thing they can come up with was 27 years ago. Sanctions (or threats of sanctions) have been wielded many times since then, and I guess they haven't been working all that well in more recent history?
Also consider that sanctions as a result of the Crimea annexation haven't done anything. We're still here, today, 8 years later, and Putin is waging war again. The funny thing is that when I was looking for something about this, I found an article[0] that is generally positive about the effects of sanctions on Russia post-Crimea. Which I find kinda hilarious, because I think it really proves the point here that these sanctions don't actually work. The Russian economy slowed quite a bit, but it seems clear Putin and the oligarchs don't care all that much; the harm from those sanctions were disproportionately borne by regular Russian citizens, who were powerless to change the country's foreign policy. And, regardless, Russia is still in control of Crimea, and has not deterred Putin from this current war, so... that's a pretty big hint the sanctions did not do what they were supposed to.
[0] https://www.nato.int/docu/review/articles/2015/07/13/sanctio...
Also consider that sanctions as a result of the Crimea annexation haven't done anything. We're still here, today, 8 years later, and Putin is waging war again. The funny thing is that when I was looking for something about this, I found an article[0] that is generally positive about the effects of sanctions on Russia post-Crimea. Which I find kinda hilarious, because I think it really proves the point here that these sanctions don't actually work. The Russian economy slowed quite a bit, but it seems clear Putin and the oligarchs don't care all that much; the harm from those sanctions were disproportionately borne by regular Russian citizens, who were powerless to change the country's foreign policy. And, regardless, Russia is still in control of Crimea, and has not deterred Putin from this current war, so... that's a pretty big hint the sanctions did not do what they were supposed to.
[0] https://www.nato.int/docu/review/articles/2015/07/13/sanctio...
The world has certainly changed a lot in those 27 years. I think the financialization of world's economies, the prevalence of offshore assets/shell companies(The Panama Papers et al.) and a global real estate and art market boom that seem to all but requires "hot" money, have all conspired to make sanctions less effective. That being said I don't think the world has ever seen this level or targeted sanctions so I suppose it's a bit of an experiment. The experiment itself does seem to support your question though I think.
So… begging the question. How did those sanctions go then?
The article clearly states what the outcomes were in each of the cases. It's literally a summary.
Certainly this is not the same situation, and these are not the same places with the same government structure, but let's take a look at how well that worked in Iran: that is, it hasn't worked at all. Government propaganda has caused most Iranian citizens to blame the US & the West for sanctions, and support for their government seems strong.
Of course Russia is a different situation, and there are already plenty of Russian citizens there protesting the war, but I find it a little hard to believe that peaceful protest works all that well in what is effectively a dictatorship. (Hell, consider how ineffective -- or at best, excruciatingly slow-acting -- anti-war protests have been in even the US since WWII.)
I expect the only thing that could get Putin to stop would be his oligarch cronies getting financially destroyed to the point that they can't take it anymore. But it seems like they've been preparing for this for a while, and might not be hurt by sanctions as much as we'd expect. Regardless, if we assume that the oligarchs and government officials are the right people to target, broad-based measures that hurt regular Russians are just cruel and probably not that effective.
Of course Russia is a different situation, and there are already plenty of Russian citizens there protesting the war, but I find it a little hard to believe that peaceful protest works all that well in what is effectively a dictatorship. (Hell, consider how ineffective -- or at best, excruciatingly slow-acting -- anti-war protests have been in even the US since WWII.)
I expect the only thing that could get Putin to stop would be his oligarch cronies getting financially destroyed to the point that they can't take it anymore. But it seems like they've been preparing for this for a while, and might not be hurt by sanctions as much as we'd expect. Regardless, if we assume that the oligarchs and government officials are the right people to target, broad-based measures that hurt regular Russians are just cruel and probably not that effective.
It doesn't really matter who the citizens blame, people really over-emphasize the revolutionary potential of sanctions but the far more important & practical purpose of sanctions is to limit state's economic and technological capability to continue its destructive behavior.
Look at Iran now: a pariah state whose power has been effectively contained, limited in its ability to fund a substantial warchest or buy modern weapons & technology. It's currently working with the US on a new nuclear deal to ameliorate its heavy sanctions.
Russia can look forward to a similar future. Military invasions cost a lot of resources, the current invasion is largely funded by European gas sales and a variety of foreign trade. Aside from weapons & tech, military morale is an important factor in combat effectiveness, but it's also affected by resource availability. A less resourced military is a less capable one.
We're beyond just deterrence now. Russian citizens can blame everyone except Putin, it doesn't matter. What does matter is that when Putin's military lackeys draw up plans, when they threaten others, they do so with a fraction of the tech and resources they are used to. Let's see them bully a 21st century world with a 20th century economy.
Look at Iran now: a pariah state whose power has been effectively contained, limited in its ability to fund a substantial warchest or buy modern weapons & technology. It's currently working with the US on a new nuclear deal to ameliorate its heavy sanctions.
Russia can look forward to a similar future. Military invasions cost a lot of resources, the current invasion is largely funded by European gas sales and a variety of foreign trade. Aside from weapons & tech, military morale is an important factor in combat effectiveness, but it's also affected by resource availability. A less resourced military is a less capable one.
We're beyond just deterrence now. Russian citizens can blame everyone except Putin, it doesn't matter. What does matter is that when Putin's military lackeys draw up plans, when they threaten others, they do so with a fraction of the tech and resources they are used to. Let's see them bully a 21st century world with a 20th century economy.
Grassroots change in an autocracy (dictatorship), where protest is banned and criticizing the leader can get you killed is a lot to ask for, much less expect, as a result. Such actions may just rally ordinary Russians against the sanctioners
And in fact that's pretty much what's been happening in Iran over the past few decades. I think we can expect Russia to be a bit different, but I'm not sure that difference will be enough to get your average Russian to direct their anger at Putin rather than the West.
can anyone point to an instance where these kinds of sanctions actually lead to grassroots change?
Yeah, generally speaking, when a foreign country screws you over, either directly or indirectly through a company based in said foreign country... you tend to hate the foreign country and its people, not your own country. Unless you already hate your own country (most people don't, outside of the American left).
Ah, probably from the same people who think what the best way to prevent teenage pregnancies and STDs is to practice abstinence. As we know that works well too.
AKA, "Collective Punishment".
I rather see history repeating itself with the rise of Hitler as consequence of the excessively punitive treaty of Versailles after World War 1.
At the risk of invoking Godwin's law, I wouldn't be surprised seeing Putin going fully fascist to hold together a Russia that's disintegrating.
At the risk of invoking Godwin's law, I wouldn't be surprised seeing Putin going fully fascist to hold together a Russia that's disintegrating.
This also risks convincing the Russian population still on the fence about the whole thing that Putin is indeed right and the West does indeed have something against Russia and against ordinary Russians, this being an excellent example.
They've been pissed off since Putin started this thing. The people aren't complicit here, they're just being overruled. Same for Belarus, too.
People are coming at this from the perspective that it will hurt recreational internet usage and access to non-state news sources - which is absolutely true.
Another angle which I think people are missing out on is the impact to business. For all the economic sanctions around payments, lack of internet access will prevent many Russian companies from functioning AT ALL even internally to Russia.
I still don't support this move, but its interesting to think about just how many company processes would be bricked as a result of this action - picture tens of thousands of employees sitting in an empty chair or being sent home without any work to do.
Another angle which I think people are missing out on is the impact to business. For all the economic sanctions around payments, lack of internet access will prevent many Russian companies from functioning AT ALL even internally to Russia.
I still don't support this move, but its interesting to think about just how many company processes would be bricked as a result of this action - picture tens of thousands of employees sitting in an empty chair or being sent home without any work to do.
To me it feels like since the covid pandemic, there is this widespread desire to "Do something" amongst corporations and pretty much every group in general. It's not just enough for them to comply by the legal sanctions put in place by the state, they have to feel involved and socially engaged in every single widely mediatized issue. You could also see that with how a lot of corporations went overboard with covid restrictions and measures "just in case and because we are all in this together".
It's a bit maddening because the reactions are mostly trash and completely unhelpful since the people who take these decisions are usually clueless when it comes to foreign relations. It can even be counter productive, because I'm sure that if this would've hurt russia in any meaningful way the state department would've probably pushed for these sanctions in the first place.
Maybe this is not a recent trend at all but from my perspective it has been much more apparent in the past 2 years. Just compare this to back when corporations/non profits were pretty keen to open businesses in say, the Soviet Union or China with every loophole they can find instead of doing the exact opposite like we see now. Or internet corps trying to open new markets and connect as many people as they could instead of...this?
It's a bit maddening because the reactions are mostly trash and completely unhelpful since the people who take these decisions are usually clueless when it comes to foreign relations. It can even be counter productive, because I'm sure that if this would've hurt russia in any meaningful way the state department would've probably pushed for these sanctions in the first place.
Maybe this is not a recent trend at all but from my perspective it has been much more apparent in the past 2 years. Just compare this to back when corporations/non profits were pretty keen to open businesses in say, the Soviet Union or China with every loophole they can find instead of doing the exact opposite like we see now. Or internet corps trying to open new markets and connect as many people as they could instead of...this?
Decline of religion (maybe). People aren't sure what makes someone a good person, so they latch on to whatever fashionable cause is being promoted as GoodThink by the media this week and then try to make everything about that.
An amusing example I just read about is Tony's Chocoloney, an "edible virtue signal":
https://thenewconservative.co.uk/tonys-chocbaloney/
What's interesting is how often this blows up in the faces of the people doing it. Tony's Chocolate seems to have mostly just infuriated customers with its actions. If anyone is actually buying this chocolate bar because it makes them feel virtuous it's hard to notice.
At some point smart CEOs are going to crack down on this stuff. It was the founder of Hacker News who said "keep your identity small". Probably that'll come back into fashion as awareness grows of how destructive letting insecure marketing interns emotionally bully executives is.
An amusing example I just read about is Tony's Chocoloney, an "edible virtue signal":
https://thenewconservative.co.uk/tonys-chocbaloney/
What's interesting is how often this blows up in the faces of the people doing it. Tony's Chocolate seems to have mostly just infuriated customers with its actions. If anyone is actually buying this chocolate bar because it makes them feel virtuous it's hard to notice.
At some point smart CEOs are going to crack down on this stuff. It was the founder of Hacker News who said "keep your identity small". Probably that'll come back into fashion as awareness grows of how destructive letting insecure marketing interns emotionally bully executives is.
This is good for russian propaganda, since only internal media (news, communications,...) will be accessible. Bad for everyone wanting to see the other view. On the other hand, by banning RT, europe is not much better at this...
But we're also in the middle of propaganda war, and the west has to be "doing something", if the result is good or bad, it doesn't really matter.
But we're also in the middle of propaganda war, and the west has to be "doing something", if the result is good or bad, it doesn't really matter.
> This sort of thing is just a terrible idea.
It's not an idea. US-based companies have to comply with sanctions.
It's not an idea. US-based companies have to comply with sanctions.
As a sibling points out, Cogent is not required to do this.
Regardless, I was more talking about the overall situation: hurting your enemy's citizens when those citizens have essentially zero power to affect the situation is just cruel and pointless. And can turn those citizens -- many of whom may be anti-war themselves -- against you.
Regardless, I was more talking about the overall situation: hurting your enemy's citizens when those citizens have essentially zero power to affect the situation is just cruel and pointless. And can turn those citizens -- many of whom may be anti-war themselves -- against you.
Sure, but for most of the service cutoffs so far, including this one, there were no relevant US sanctions in place.
It's more a publicity stunt, they have to look like they are doing their thing to help the cause. In this case it's counter productive but that doesn't really matter, they look good.
When cancel-culture comes to geopolitics.
It will be interesting to look back at how all these bad moralistic takes on geopolitics influenced the media narrative and pressured leaders and companies into hard-line stances against Russia, thus helping to cause whatever escalation is coming down the line. No longer can nations quietly engage in realpolitik to avert disaster. The populace is too engaged and information is too widespread, and the demand for retribution is universal. It would be naive to think the decision makers are immune to the moral narratives coming out of the media.
It will be interesting to look back at how all these bad moralistic takes on geopolitics influenced the media narrative and pressured leaders and companies into hard-line stances against Russia, thus helping to cause whatever escalation is coming down the line. No longer can nations quietly engage in realpolitik to avert disaster. The populace is too engaged and information is too widespread, and the demand for retribution is universal. It would be naive to think the decision makers are immune to the moral narratives coming out of the media.
It’s also bad because the world needs to get the truth into them. Russia is blocking a lot of sites but discussion about the war is all over. Cutting them off leaves them with just one information source - the Russian government.
> The main people who will suffer are just regular Russian citizens, many of whom have been protesting the war.
This is exactly what sanctions do.
This is exactly what sanctions do.
All here is pretty awful.
The sad reality is that if the Russian army (composed by Russians) is successful, all Russian citizens including those who suffer would gladly "inherit" the raw resources, land and properties (those left intact) from Ukrainians without passing a tear. Putin's "Make Russia great again" plan would be cheered unanimously in Russia
If the Russian army fails, Russians have an unique in life opportunity of having Putin out of power. Ukraine instead keeps a country partially destroyed, or totally destroyed, or with big chunks unlivable for decades, and take huge loses in all their infrastructures and lives.
Some Russian people seem to want the gain without the pain.
The sad reality is that if the Russian army (composed by Russians) is successful, all Russian citizens including those who suffer would gladly "inherit" the raw resources, land and properties (those left intact) from Ukrainians without passing a tear. Putin's "Make Russia great again" plan would be cheered unanimously in Russia
If the Russian army fails, Russians have an unique in life opportunity of having Putin out of power. Ukraine instead keeps a country partially destroyed, or totally destroyed, or with big chunks unlivable for decades, and take huge loses in all their infrastructures and lives.
Some Russian people seem to want the gain without the pain.
> many of whom have been protesting the war.
So more of them can protest. Not sure if you've seen the latest news and videos, Russians aren't even trying to fight soldiers anymore, they're just straight-up bombing apartment complexes...
I have absolutely no sympathy for any Russian until there's no more bombs killing Ukrainian civilians. Maybe more incentive to depose Putin.
So more of them can protest. Not sure if you've seen the latest news and videos, Russians aren't even trying to fight soldiers anymore, they're just straight-up bombing apartment complexes...
I have absolutely no sympathy for any Russian until there's no more bombs killing Ukrainian civilians. Maybe more incentive to depose Putin.
"I have absolutely no sympathy for any Russian"
You have no sympathy for people who will be beaten, jailed or worse for simply peacefully protesting the war their country is waging?
You have no sympathy for people who will be beaten, jailed or worse for simply peacefully protesting the war their country is waging?
If enough protest they won't go to jail... And all those who have will be released.
And I might if Russia wasn't literally bombing apartments without even attempting to fight the Ukrainian military...
They should think about what living with Putin for another 15 years will look like...
And I might if Russia wasn't literally bombing apartments without even attempting to fight the Ukrainian military...
They should think about what living with Putin for another 15 years will look like...
That's not how protest movements work. They require organizers and leaders.
What precisely do you think happens to those organizers in Russia when they defy their dear leader's sacred mission? A brief stint in jail? I think the best case scenario is nothing cruel happens to their family. But their life is essentially forfeit.
Besides, we had the largest protests in US history to prevent the invasion of Iraq. I was at many of them. They did absolutely nothing to stop that war.
What precisely do you think happens to those organizers in Russia when they defy their dear leader's sacred mission? A brief stint in jail? I think the best case scenario is nothing cruel happens to their family. But their life is essentially forfeit.
Besides, we had the largest protests in US history to prevent the invasion of Iraq. I was at many of them. They did absolutely nothing to stop that war.
> If enough protest they won't go to jail...
Yeah, there is a point where the regime switches from handcuffs to tanks and machine guns to discourage repeats.
(And, yes, enough, particularly of the people in the right positions, can defeat that, too, but the outcome tends to be ... unpredictable.)
Yeah, there is a point where the regime switches from handcuffs to tanks and machine guns to discourage repeats.
(And, yes, enough, particularly of the people in the right positions, can defeat that, too, but the outcome tends to be ... unpredictable.)
That's certainly not what happened in Tiananmen Square in 1989...
On the flipside the Russian Empire fell as did the USSR.
The USSR didn't fall because of protests. The USSR fell because Gorbachev was willing to give up the USSR. Putin is not Gorbachev. Putin is the longest serving Russian leader since Stalin. And the history of the USSR is full of armed actions used to suppress local rebellions. Even Khruschev, the other reforming premiere of the USSR known for his post-Stalinist thaw, intervened during the 1956 Hungarian Revolution [1].
The fall of the Russian Empire in 1917 happened at such a different time in world history (smaller differences between the state's military capabilities and individuals military capabilities, more diffused knowledge of warfare among civilians due to frequent occurrence of wars, greater difficulty in monitoring communications due to older forms of technology, etc) that it doesn't serve to offer many lessons to modernity.
If anything Putin's Russia is much closer to China during the 1989 Tiananmen Square movement than Gorbachev's USSR.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_Revolution_of_1956
The fall of the Russian Empire in 1917 happened at such a different time in world history (smaller differences between the state's military capabilities and individuals military capabilities, more diffused knowledge of warfare among civilians due to frequent occurrence of wars, greater difficulty in monitoring communications due to older forms of technology, etc) that it doesn't serve to offer many lessons to modernity.
If anything Putin's Russia is much closer to China during the 1989 Tiananmen Square movement than Gorbachev's USSR.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_Revolution_of_1956
> The USSR didn't fall because of protests. The USSR fell because Gorbachev was willing to give up the USSR
Without the protests, the coup by forces not willing to give up the USSR against Gorbachev would have succeeded.
Without the protests, the coup by forces not willing to give up the USSR against Gorbachev would have succeeded.
Sure. The popular sentiment/protests were necessary but not sufficient is my point. Gorbachev was willing to give up power and a coup needed to be organized to hold onto the Soviet Union. In this case, Putin is going nowhere unless he's removed at home by other Russian power brokers. Moreover if Putin gives up the war and goes home, he'll have no face to show in his own government, and he will be disgraced by the West; he's committed so far down this path that it's political suicide to stop.
The United States has been the biggest perpetrator of terrorism, destruction and death around the globe since at least the overthrow of the Iranian government in the 50s.
Vietnam, Central America, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria. Never-ending, ongoing economic sanctions leveled against a myriad of countries which destroy the lives of ordinary people.
Israel, whose oppression against the Palestinians we actively support and fund, blows up an apartment building in the Gaza Strip and it makes the news for a day, and here we are incredulous when this happens in the Ukraine. We are, this very moment, engaged in the wanton murder of civilians, either directly through drone strikes or indirectly via the supply of weapons, like the ones used to bomb Yemenese today.
What then of your sanctimony? Where the hell is your outrage towards and condemnation of Americans, or of NATO or other US allies that tolerate our behavior? Americans and our allies objectively share responsibility for the largest portion of the sum total of evil acts occurring on this planet, and yet most of us, like you, act and speak as if this isn’t the case. Absurd.
Vietnam, Central America, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria. Never-ending, ongoing economic sanctions leveled against a myriad of countries which destroy the lives of ordinary people.
Israel, whose oppression against the Palestinians we actively support and fund, blows up an apartment building in the Gaza Strip and it makes the news for a day, and here we are incredulous when this happens in the Ukraine. We are, this very moment, engaged in the wanton murder of civilians, either directly through drone strikes or indirectly via the supply of weapons, like the ones used to bomb Yemenese today.
What then of your sanctimony? Where the hell is your outrage towards and condemnation of Americans, or of NATO or other US allies that tolerate our behavior? Americans and our allies objectively share responsibility for the largest portion of the sum total of evil acts occurring on this planet, and yet most of us, like you, act and speak as if this isn’t the case. Absurd.
Nice whataboutism. I hear there's recent job openings in Russia (some people with balls resigned rather than spread lies), you can spread propaganda there. Literally straight from RT...
The US doing shitty things doesn't mean Russia isn't doing shitty things, right now.
The US doing shitty things doesn't mean Russia isn't doing shitty things, right now.
> The US doing shitty things doesn't mean Russia isn't doing shitty things, right now.
This is a strawman.
This is a strawman.
[deleted]
Don't be confused: this is pure virtue signalling by Cogent.
If you think that limiting a population's access to imported goods can lead to regime change via "grassroots change", just look at the myriad of counterexamples: Cuba, Iraq, Iran, Venezuela, Syria, North Korea.
The sanctions imposed by the governments against Russia make sense: they aim at crippling the state economy to prevent Russia from waging war and dismantling the power structure by pitting elites against each other.
But limiting access to information for ordinary people is a completely empty gesture that brings no value into the world.
If you think that limiting a population's access to imported goods can lead to regime change via "grassroots change", just look at the myriad of counterexamples: Cuba, Iraq, Iran, Venezuela, Syria, North Korea.
The sanctions imposed by the governments against Russia make sense: they aim at crippling the state economy to prevent Russia from waging war and dismantling the power structure by pitting elites against each other.
But limiting access to information for ordinary people is a completely empty gesture that brings no value into the world.
I really doing think 'virtue signaling' is the right term here - The NYT coverage of this explicitly states that Cogent was motivated by a significant increase in bot traffic coming out of Russia, and they basically said 'we don't want to support Russia's cyber-attacks'. They aren't trying to overthrow the government in Russia. This is meant to prevent them from waging cyber war using Cogent's infrastructure, and Cogent was a significant carrier of Russian internet traffic. It's both expensive for Cogent to do this, and significantly impacts Russia.
You've made me reconsider my position and I think you're actually right.
On some level, losing things you already had hurts a lot more than preventing it from taking root.
Russia limits information themselves - they’ve blocked facebook and twitter mere just a day ago.
I tend to agree. Cutting off communications should be a very serious step. There may be some circumstances when we might have to cut off communications as part of real emergency measures --but I don' think doing this is where we want to go.
Why not cut off phone communication too? Maybe postal mail as well? Did we ever stop delivering mail and cut the phones to Germany and Japan during WWII?
Why not cut off phone communication too? Maybe postal mail as well? Did we ever stop delivering mail and cut the phones to Germany and Japan during WWII?
How is Cogent supposed to be paid or fund operations in Russia? Starlink seems a better fit for routing around state censorship anyway.
Counterproductive IMO. Blocking ordinary Russians from the world would be akin to creating a Russia sized analogue to N. Korea with much better weapons and industrial capacity. Virtue signalling by banning anything that carries the name "Russian" is a childish response when there are citizens of Russia protesting against the invasion and risking arrest and violence thanks to the state and economic ruin due to the sanctions from Europe and the US.
Citizens will only be able to view russia approved information now. Not sure how this will help anything or if it has even been thought out properly.
Internet access should be a human right and any attempts to limit it should be decried regardless of context.
Internet access should be a human right and any attempts to limit it should be decried regardless of context.
Bad. Bad. Bad. Let's not make the free and open internet a political casualty. Please.
I've been an on-and-off Cogent customer for two decades now. Getting into peering wars used to be one of their major recreational sports.
Cogent still doesn’t carry a full IPv6 table due to years-long peering disputes. Most significantly they black hole all Google IPv6 traffic. So you can’t use IPv6 on Cogent singly-homed; you need a second ISP and two expensive routers that can each take a full BGP table.
Source: am an irritated Cogent customer with no other options in our office building.
Source: am an irritated Cogent customer with no other options in our office building.
While I don't think a company should ever be forced to operate in countries they are unwilling to, I believe that it would be far more responsible to keep these people connected. The Internet is their chance to see things that aren't pure propaganda.
Horrible decision.
We should be beaming free internet service down on Russia so there are as many opportunities as possible for Russian citizens to route around censorship, shine light on propaganda, and organize.
We should be beaming free internet service down on Russia so there are as many opportunities as possible for Russian citizens to route around censorship, shine light on propaganda, and organize.
This was the perspective with Arab spring, etc. It’s easy to get into, assuming your perspective and ideology is what’s being shared. However we’ve seen in the last half decade that often isn’t the case, and in fact, it makes misinformation become a dominant thought and ideology.
It’s not so clear cut.
It’s not so clear cut.
These are not moves to celebrate. Not even the "just build your own!" cries we heard when people like the Orange Man Bad was deplatformed from Twitter apply here.
There are two primary criticisms of this move in this thread:
C1) This is just hurting ordinary Russian citizens and serves no other purpose. I empathize strongly with the Russians. But I also empathize with the Ukrainians. Since Russia has nuclear weapons, the only thing rest of the world can do is impose sanctions. Sanctions work in the long run, but they take a long time to show effects. Ukrainians do not have a long time. All of these moves will cumulatively amplify the unrest among common Russian people, giving Putin less time to sit back and let his plan go to work. Will these be enough? Only time can tell. But ignoring the impact of secondary and tertiary effects for the primary negative effects is short sighted.
C2) This is just virtue signaling. Virtue signaling may be a component of this move, but this is business for Cogent. They make money moving data, and Russian money has lost a lot of its value. So I am not convinced this is just virtue signaling, there is definitely a business component.
C1) This is just hurting ordinary Russian citizens and serves no other purpose. I empathize strongly with the Russians. But I also empathize with the Ukrainians. Since Russia has nuclear weapons, the only thing rest of the world can do is impose sanctions. Sanctions work in the long run, but they take a long time to show effects. Ukrainians do not have a long time. All of these moves will cumulatively amplify the unrest among common Russian people, giving Putin less time to sit back and let his plan go to work. Will these be enough? Only time can tell. But ignoring the impact of secondary and tertiary effects for the primary negative effects is short sighted.
C2) This is just virtue signaling. Virtue signaling may be a component of this move, but this is business for Cogent. They make money moving data, and Russian money has lost a lot of its value. So I am not convinced this is just virtue signaling, there is definitely a business component.
It's crazy I had to scroll all the way to here for someone to mention that Cogent sells interconnects and well Russian clients can't pay them now. If you don't pay, you don't get peering.
A third option would be that the firewall requirements are pretty severe and they don't want to contribute to that ( just mentioning)
Man they are really trying to create a western vs eastern block conflict. So many cold-warriors still in the nat sec community. If Russia gets attacked by the west, China will not be aligning with the west because we're also attacking them. So much potential for a nuclear ww3.
That makes exactly opposite effect. The problem with current Russia that people don't have access to the information alternative to the official government version. Putin's supporters don't know much about the war, they told it's a peaceful operation and so on. Meanwhile others trying to show them reality about the war, sometimes by pointing them to websites outside of the government control. And of course government wants those websites to be slow or blocked. It's exactly what Cogent does, so everything looks like the 1984's doublespeak, and in reality it's a big favor to Putin.
I don't get it, do they have actual infrastructure in Russia ?
From my understanding, the goal here is to prevent routing to Cogent which is a backbone provider. You can see a map here:
https://www.cogentco.com/en/network/network-map
https://www.cogentco.com/en/network/network-map
Note: They are not a tier 1 network.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tier_1_network#List_of_Tier_1_...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tier_1_network#List_of_Tier_1_...
Via stupid spat reasons with Google and HE on IPv6, not via the usual meaning of Tier 1 vs Tier 2 (of which there is no official mediator of anyways) where they'd be unable to get it. It's not really worth considering them anything but a backbone provider here even if they don't meet the strict definition of a tier 1 because of those 2 standoffs on IPv6.
Also Cogent sucks but I guess you could say that about most providers.
Also Cogent sucks but I guess you could say that about most providers.
Stupid question here, what stops Russia re-routing their traffic through, let's say India or Turkey, and then to the outer world? That is in case the West decides to stop "providing" network links directly to Russia itself.
Nothing, that's exactly what is happening here. It's also possible for countries to block Russia even if they transit through other countries on the way but that's something completely different.
What's happening is that Russia will want to cut themselves off the internet anyway.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30580456
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30580456
This is a terrible idea, or one might say, not at all cogent thinking.
I deplore what Putin is doing in Ukraine. This is a war of aggression undertaken because he is scared of the democracy in Ukraine making its way to Moscow (i.e. Russians wanting democracy too).
But. Ensuring Russians can see a view of the world not provided to them by Putin is critical to stopping him and those like him. It gives them access to news on what is happening in Ukraine and gives us news on what is happening in Russia. Cutting off the internet makes his life a lot easier.
I can only imagine people from the State Department to newsrooms to the CIA are hitting their foreheads repeatedly on their respective desks.
I deplore what Putin is doing in Ukraine. This is a war of aggression undertaken because he is scared of the democracy in Ukraine making its way to Moscow (i.e. Russians wanting democracy too).
But. Ensuring Russians can see a view of the world not provided to them by Putin is critical to stopping him and those like him. It gives them access to news on what is happening in Ukraine and gives us news on what is happening in Russia. Cutting off the internet makes his life a lot easier.
I can only imagine people from the State Department to newsrooms to the CIA are hitting their foreheads repeatedly on their respective desks.
A lot of discussion here is focused on "suffering". There's ample demonstration that increasing the suffering of a population doesn't lead to uprising. North Korea, Iran, even the Soviet Union are examples.
What leads to revolution are ideas and belief of success. Cutting off the internet seems counter productive.
What leads to revolution are ideas and belief of success. Cutting off the internet seems counter productive.
I applaud Cogent and anybody taking stand like this. Anybody still working with Russia has the blood on their hands.
As a Russian myself i'm ashamed and disgusted by all the Russian whining. Russia is at war, the genocidal war that is criminally started and is being criminally conducted by Russia, and instead of whining the Russians should grace the God that they have plummeting rouble instead of falling bombs like Ukrainians have gotten. You need to completely lose any shame to expect any quality of life while your country is genociding a neighbor.
Wrt. the myth of "regular Russians" - it is regular Russians and their children who shoots in Ukraine, not Putin. In the years leading to that the whole society was ostracizing anybody who have voiced even minor disagreement with Putin's fascist regime. The FSB and police supposedly oppressing Russians consist of those regular Russians and their children, not some aliens from Alfa Centauri.
It is pretty clear that the reality still hasn't set on Russians, and until that happens the pressure should grow, the faster the better. The only way of dealing with a nuclear country is to put so much stress on it that it breaks from inside.
As a Russian myself i'm ashamed and disgusted by all the Russian whining. Russia is at war, the genocidal war that is criminally started and is being criminally conducted by Russia, and instead of whining the Russians should grace the God that they have plummeting rouble instead of falling bombs like Ukrainians have gotten. You need to completely lose any shame to expect any quality of life while your country is genociding a neighbor.
Wrt. the myth of "regular Russians" - it is regular Russians and their children who shoots in Ukraine, not Putin. In the years leading to that the whole society was ostracizing anybody who have voiced even minor disagreement with Putin's fascist regime. The FSB and police supposedly oppressing Russians consist of those regular Russians and their children, not some aliens from Alfa Centauri.
It is pretty clear that the reality still hasn't set on Russians, and until that happens the pressure should grow, the faster the better. The only way of dealing with a nuclear country is to put so much stress on it that it breaks from inside.
> Schaeffer said Cogent took the step at least partially because the company did not want to be used for "outbound cyber attacks or disinformation."
Here we go again with this nonsense.
I wonder why they didn’t cut off their internet service off in the 2020 US election if they didn’t want their service to be used for disinformation or cyber attacks? Maybe Cogent should learn how it is done in Uganda [0] and the Republic of Congo [1] then?
At this point with any service, the ‘disinformation’ reason is becoming an excuse to execute such unnecessarily extreme actions guaranteed to always backfire and it is exactly what Putin wants as it doesn’t stop ‘disinformation’.
Mission Accomplished. /s
[0] https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20210118-uganda-eases-...
[1] https://netblocks.org/reports/internet-shutdown-in-the-repub...
Here we go again with this nonsense.
I wonder why they didn’t cut off their internet service off in the 2020 US election if they didn’t want their service to be used for disinformation or cyber attacks? Maybe Cogent should learn how it is done in Uganda [0] and the Republic of Congo [1] then?
At this point with any service, the ‘disinformation’ reason is becoming an excuse to execute such unnecessarily extreme actions guaranteed to always backfire and it is exactly what Putin wants as it doesn’t stop ‘disinformation’.
Mission Accomplished. /s
[0] https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20210118-uganda-eases-...
[1] https://netblocks.org/reports/internet-shutdown-in-the-repub...
So US company cutting access from Russia good
Russia cutting access to US company bad.
Weird
Russia cutting access to US company bad.
Weird
Cogent doing the Roskamnadzor’s job for them?
Maybe routing will improve.. It's been my experience that cogent circuits are oversubscribed.
Good. Hopefully other providers follow suit, and hopefully China is next.
I guess the only possible explanation I can come up with is that they don't want to send their staff to a place with murderous regime, where neither twitter nor facebook works and where you can get 15 years for the "disinformation" about the war. (oh I've forgot you can't call it war, it must be called 'special operation' according to the russian ministry of truth (Roskomandzor))
Russia has prepared for this.
Russia Takes a Big Step Toward Internet Isolation (Jan '20)
https://www.wired.com/story/russia-internet-control-disconne...
Russia Takes a Big Step Toward Internet Isolation (Jan '20)
https://www.wired.com/story/russia-internet-control-disconne...
How does this affect hacking attempts from Russia to/from US.
Ah, yes, surely cutting access to independent information will help russians in their fight with Putin
Russian Internet Censorship sends flowers in response.
[deleted]
This seems like a questionable idea at best, and I wonder how effective this will really be at keeping Russia offline. Unless the internet backbone within Russia is also disturbed, what's to stop another neighboring country like China from supplying Russia with connectivity? Sure, they may have less bandwidth, but this could be mitigated by kicking ordinary Russian citizens offline to reserve bandwidth for the disinformation and hacking campaigns.
Makes me wonder if this wasn't Putin's goal all along. Completely breaking the Russian population off of the free internet means they'll be fed only propaganda. The whole "prison terms for disagreeing with the official media" and "it's not war, it's peace" feels very 1984 to me; worth a reread in case Putin is actually using it as a manual (alongside Dugin's book)
MOB: Cut off Russia from Internet!
ISP: *cuts off Russia from Internet*
MOB: ¿¿¿why Russians don't know what is happening outside off Russia???
ISP: *cuts off Russia from Internet*
MOB: ¿¿¿why Russians don't know what is happening outside off Russia???
You forgot that one: the Kremlin: Cuts off Russia from Internet.
This is what Putin wants, don't do this! Please!
Ukraine wants the same.
Isn't it strange that both wants the same?
Ukraine want to punish Russia in whatever way it can, which is totally understandable, but it will leave Russians with only internal propaganda, which will make them even easier to control for the regime. Not sure how is it strange?
The strange part is that Ukraine thinks it would punish but the Russian government wants the same to keep up their propaganda.
When you want the same as your enemy that is strange.
When you want the same as your enemy that is strange.
This is just a commercial entity making their own market driven choices. I see no problems, here.
[deleted]
I know it's hard to target only the government and leadership with many of these punitive measures, but this broad-based measures that have a lot of collateral damage are pretty awful.