The military loved Discord for Gen Z recruiting. Then the leaks began(washingtonpost.com)
washingtonpost.com
The military loved Discord for Gen Z recruiting. Then the leaks began
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/04/15/discord-military-recruitment-pentagon-document-leaks/
90 comments
> government-corporate propaganda aimed at expanding the surveillance state
I'm one of those people who believes very strongly that Snowden was a hero for exposing grossly illegal and immoral activity, and should be pardoned.
But I do not feel this way about this case. Why? Because the leak did not expose government malfeasance, and therefore wasn't in the interest of the American people. Ordinary anti-espionage rules can and should apply.
I'm one of those people who believes very strongly that Snowden was a hero for exposing grossly illegal and immoral activity, and should be pardoned.
But I do not feel this way about this case. Why? Because the leak did not expose government malfeasance, and therefore wasn't in the interest of the American people. Ordinary anti-espionage rules can and should apply.
You don't have to support the leaker to oppose expanded social media monitoring back-channels for the intelligence services.
I think ICs are already in all the major social media back-ends that a nation hosts. I think that allies (like Israel and the US) regularly trade access to circumvent laws preventing surveillance of own citizens. Meanwhile LEOs of all stripes are already in social media, through the front-door.
The former is abhorrent and should be a big scandal, but it won't be. Snowden showed that Americans simply don't care. Given that signal, why stop?
The latter is actually good, in general. LEOs doing actual police work, joining groups that might be extremist...that's the online equivalent of undercover work, and I think it's good when it's human work.
So, basically I agree that proactive, general IC infiltration of back-ends is wrong, but I think its already happening and won't stop without change of sentiment. LEOs can and should do more human investigation, join groups, get involved, see what they are about - and then leave them alone if they aren't a physical threat. Obviously this can be super problematic (e.g. the FBI vs MLK) but the only alternative is to just sit there and wait for an attack. That's no bueno, either.
The former is abhorrent and should be a big scandal, but it won't be. Snowden showed that Americans simply don't care. Given that signal, why stop?
The latter is actually good, in general. LEOs doing actual police work, joining groups that might be extremist...that's the online equivalent of undercover work, and I think it's good when it's human work.
So, basically I agree that proactive, general IC infiltration of back-ends is wrong, but I think its already happening and won't stop without change of sentiment. LEOs can and should do more human investigation, join groups, get involved, see what they are about - and then leave them alone if they aren't a physical threat. Obviously this can be super problematic (e.g. the FBI vs MLK) but the only alternative is to just sit there and wait for an attack. That's no bueno, either.
If ICs were already all over major social media like Discord, then how did these leaks sit spread around unnoticed for almost half a year? I swear every time this comes up people's critical thinking just vanishes into thin air. Mythologizing intelligence agencies as these omniscient entities only benefits them.
Having access, using access, using access to detect threats, and using access to detect leaks are 4 different capabilities. If I was NSA chief I personally would rank "proactive leak detection" far below "proactive threat detection".
As an aside, if lack of critical thinking skills sets you off easily, you are in for a rough ride. It's particularly dangerous because directed at others, it gives you clout in with the wrong people, and directed at yourself contempt can lead to self-loathing and depression.
As an aside, if lack of critical thinking skills sets you off easily, you are in for a rough ride. It's particularly dangerous because directed at others, it gives you clout in with the wrong people, and directed at yourself contempt can lead to self-loathing and depression.
Parent post doesn't distinguish between those. It just annoys to see people always talking about governmental or corporate bureaucracy but when it comes to intelligence agencies suddenly it's like they're immune to it and become perfect panopticons of information gathering and analysis.
Sorry for the offtopicness but could you please email me at [email protected]?
I want to send you a repost invite for https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34556378.
I want to send you a repost invite for https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34556378.
> But I do not feel this way about this case. Why? Because the leak did not expose government malfeasance, and therefore wasn't in the interest of the American people. Ordinary anti-espionage rules can and should apply.
It does confirm that Ukraine is losing the war badly, I think it was like 7 Ukrainians dying for 1 Russian. With that knowledge, it seems that continuing to fund this war with a blank check to Ukraine is not in the interests of the American people.
So I feel that this leak was a good thing, from the perspective of the American people, especially if it ends the US funding of this war.
It does confirm that Ukraine is losing the war badly, I think it was like 7 Ukrainians dying for 1 Russian. With that knowledge, it seems that continuing to fund this war with a blank check to Ukraine is not in the interests of the American people.
So I feel that this leak was a good thing, from the perspective of the American people, especially if it ends the US funding of this war.
> It does confirm that Ukraine is losing the war badly, I think it was like 7 Ukrainians dying for 1 Russian.
No:
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/13/world/europe/ukraine-russ...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2023/03/14/did-the-ukr...
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-war-already-wit...
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-65260672
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/04/14/...
> With that knowledge
What you call "knowledge" here is, in fact, just lies.
It's interesting how susceptible people have become to falsehoods in the internet age. People get told what they want to hear and they believe it wholeheartedly, not matter how untrue it is.
No:
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/13/world/europe/ukraine-russ...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2023/03/14/did-the-ukr...
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-war-already-wit...
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-65260672
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2023/04/14/...
> With that knowledge
What you call "knowledge" here is, in fact, just lies.
It's interesting how susceptible people have become to falsehoods in the internet age. People get told what they want to hear and they believe it wholeheartedly, not matter how untrue it is.
None of the sources you listed are credible.
Out of curiosity, what do you think credibility is? How do you think it is acquired? Do you think you have credibility? If so, why?
Personally I don't find it odd that someone might reject "mainstream reality" as not credible. But what is odd are the things they often choose to replace it. E.g. 4chan ramblings or general internet randomness. It's like, be super skeptical, fine, but you don't get to be selective. You can't say the BBC is shit but forum22334.hackerville.ru is credible and be taken seriously.
Personally I don't find it odd that someone might reject "mainstream reality" as not credible. But what is odd are the things they often choose to replace it. E.g. 4chan ramblings or general internet randomness. It's like, be super skeptical, fine, but you don't get to be selective. You can't say the BBC is shit but forum22334.hackerville.ru is credible and be taken seriously.
Sorry, but the factual world does not correspond to your fantasy world. You're going to have to grow up and learn to see the world beyond your computer screen.
You've become internet siloed. It's rotting you.
You've become internet siloed. It's rotting you.
>It does confirm that Ukraine is losing the war badly, I think it was like 7 Ukrainians dying for 1 Russian.
Are you referring to the picture with 17k russians vs 71k ukrainians? I thought that was the one that had been edited/falsified…
Are you referring to the picture with 17k russians vs 71k ukrainians? I thought that was the one that had been edited/falsified…
ihatepython(1)
I don't see how the ratio of dead Ukrainians to dead Russians is relevant to the utility of winning this war. It can also be construed as an argument for increased funding, because the Ukrainians are losing so badly.
In my view, curtailing Russian expansion is the point of the war, and Ukrainian lives are unfortunately one cost of doing so. It's important that Ukrainians are participating in the war of their own volition; the US is not paying Ukrainians to join the battle, unlike the scenario with the ANA in Afghanistan.
Even if the leak produces good outcomes, it should still be prosecuted as espionage, since there was no good faith motivation for the leak.
In my view, curtailing Russian expansion is the point of the war, and Ukrainian lives are unfortunately one cost of doing so. It's important that Ukrainians are participating in the war of their own volition; the US is not paying Ukrainians to join the battle, unlike the scenario with the ANA in Afghanistan.
Even if the leak produces good outcomes, it should still be prosecuted as espionage, since there was no good faith motivation for the leak.
The war itself is illegal. Congress never authorized the war. Exposing illegal activity of the US government should not be a crime.
> The war itself is illegal
Yes, Russia's invasion of Ukraine is illegal. It's a war of choice waged for reason no better than Putin's vanity. It hasn't helped Russia and it certainly hasn't helped Ukraine.
Fortunately, it is within Russia's power to end the war tomorrow. All Russia needs to do is leave Ukrainian territory, return relocated Ukrainian citizens, start paying reparations, and begin the process of extraditing war criminals so they can be tried.
Yes, Russia's invasion of Ukraine is illegal. It's a war of choice waged for reason no better than Putin's vanity. It hasn't helped Russia and it certainly hasn't helped Ukraine.
Fortunately, it is within Russia's power to end the war tomorrow. All Russia needs to do is leave Ukrainian territory, return relocated Ukrainian citizens, start paying reparations, and begin the process of extraditing war criminals so they can be tried.
> Congress never authorized the war.
The US aid to Ukraine that is the relation of the US government to the war is, in fact, authorized by Congress. See, e.g., the Ukraine Democracy Defense Lend-Lease Act of 2022 (PL 117-118).
The US aid to Ukraine that is the relation of the US government to the war is, in fact, authorized by Congress. See, e.g., the Ukraine Democracy Defense Lend-Lease Act of 2022 (PL 117-118).
Please give an example of a document that reveals greater US involvement than was known previously.
The documents I've seen revealed Ukrainian secrets. For example, they revealed Ukrainian casualty numbers and Ukrainian estimates of Russian casualty numbers.
Everyone paying attention before this leak knew that the US is giving significant support in the form of advice, money, and arms. Everyone knew that the US has a small number of military personnel in the embassy but isn't fighting in the war. Some people think this is bad, but it's not a secret.
The documents I've seen revealed Ukrainian secrets. For example, they revealed Ukrainian casualty numbers and Ukrainian estimates of Russian casualty numbers.
Everyone paying attention before this leak knew that the US is giving significant support in the form of advice, money, and arms. Everyone knew that the US has a small number of military personnel in the embassy but isn't fighting in the war. Some people think this is bad, but it's not a secret.
For example:
"Ukraine war: Leak shows Western special forces on the ground" (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-65245065)
You can say "everyone knew that" but nobody could prove it before.
"Ukraine war: Leak shows Western special forces on the ground" (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-65245065)
You can say "everyone knew that" but nobody could prove it before.
I stand corrected. The presence of US troops in the Kyiv embassy was revealed last November, but the fact they are special forces is new.
Well we knew that, we also know they are there mostly training Ukrainian soldiers, and some might be tasked with embassy duty as most countries (unlike USA) don't protect their embassies with military presence. You're not going to find any NATO SoF near the front-lines.
They literally openly admitted it last November. You can say the special forces part is new but that isn't the point being made by most, which is about US troop boots on the ground, and the military never says which specific type of troops are there anyway for operational security reasons.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/us-military-inspectors-...
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/us-military-inspectors-...
[deleted]
> Lord forbid the Ukraine war end in some kind of negotiated settlement, that would mean Europe might lift sanctions on Russian gas, reducing the demand for LNG exports... as well as reducing the diversion of taxpayer dollars to bloated military-industrial contracts.
You did not write that, but just to make it clear to people who do not know - there were no EU sanctions on Russian gas, but Russia cut off (most of) the supply unilaterally.
You did not write that, but just to make it clear to people who do not know - there were no EU sanctions on Russian gas, but Russia cut off (most of) the supply unilaterally.
A list of sanctions is available:
https://eu-solidarity-ukraine.ec.europa.eu/eu-sanctions-agai...
Russian oil and coal are heavily sanctioned, but not gas. This may have caused the confusion. Bans on any fuels from Russia likely contribute to European demand for fuel from other countries.
https://eu-solidarity-ukraine.ec.europa.eu/eu-sanctions-agai...
Russian oil and coal are heavily sanctioned, but not gas. This may have caused the confusion. Bans on any fuels from Russia likely contribute to European demand for fuel from other countries.
Back when I got my DoD security clearance, I remember my employer's security officer sitting down with me and going through a PowerPoint together, and then witnessing my signing of some paperwork. As I remember, one of the points in that paperwork is that a warrant wasn't required to tap my phone, etc. (and also, I'd go to prison if I shared anything improperly).
Am I misremembering? Maybe it was only that no warrant was required to monitor me on company systems, but (it's been 20 years), I thought I was generally signing away an expectation of privacy in exchange for access to classified information. (So, indirectly gaining extra pay, job security, and access to interesting technology in exchange for signing away privacy... not sure how I feel about that 20 years later, but it seemed a good trade at the time.)
If I'm remembering things properly, no extra legislation is necessary for monitoring people with DoD security clearances. Even if monitoring were warranted, I believe these powers already exist to cover this case, and any extra legislation is a power grab.
Am I misremembering? Maybe it was only that no warrant was required to monitor me on company systems, but (it's been 20 years), I thought I was generally signing away an expectation of privacy in exchange for access to classified information. (So, indirectly gaining extra pay, job security, and access to interesting technology in exchange for signing away privacy... not sure how I feel about that 20 years later, but it seemed a good trade at the time.)
If I'm remembering things properly, no extra legislation is necessary for monitoring people with DoD security clearances. Even if monitoring were warranted, I believe these powers already exist to cover this case, and any extra legislation is a power grab.
> Am I misremembering? Maybe it was only that no warrant was required to monitor me on company systems...
I've only been in uniform, not worked for private defense contractors, but it should be this. On government (classified or not) systems, websites, etc. you're subject to monitoring, and a prominent banner reminds you of this every time you logon. All web traffic goes through a proxy that breaks TLS to do inspection. Your .mil email and files on your government device(s) get scanned. Even a low level (like, 19 year-old E-2 with a Sec+ certificate) sysadmin can manage accounts in Active Directory and browse any machine on the domain through C$ administrative shares.
This doesn't apply to your personal devices unless you've brought them somewhere that they shouldn't go.
The paperwork is mostly a non-disclosure agreement.
I've only been in uniform, not worked for private defense contractors, but it should be this. On government (classified or not) systems, websites, etc. you're subject to monitoring, and a prominent banner reminds you of this every time you logon. All web traffic goes through a proxy that breaks TLS to do inspection. Your .mil email and files on your government device(s) get scanned. Even a low level (like, 19 year-old E-2 with a Sec+ certificate) sysadmin can manage accounts in Active Directory and browse any machine on the domain through C$ administrative shares.
This doesn't apply to your personal devices unless you've brought them somewhere that they shouldn't go.
The paperwork is mostly a non-disclosure agreement.
We don't want Russian gas any more. We don't want any gas. I sadly live in a country where 50% of the power generation comes from LNG, but fuck that. We need to work to make it 0%.
This is a tired topic. We are not in a position to negotiate the surrender of territory to a murderous barbarous invading power so they can build more concentration camps through which to "process" more of the citizens who live there. Only Ukraine can do that and she has little incentive to do so given what has and will be done to its people and the unwillingness of Russia to keep prior settlements in 1991 or 2014.
Allowing them to enlarge their share then consolidate, regroup, rebuild their forces, and ease out of financial straights and better prepare to take the rest of it in a few years and once again sally forth to murder, rape, and destroy is a bargain no reasonable person would take.
If you are suggesting that we stop providing them weapons in hopes that they be more inclined to negotiate you have misjudged the situation and you would have us only condemn people to murder and horror as punishment for your failure to analyze what is ultimately a simple situation explained in simple terms by Putin's own words on the topic.
Furthermore you seem to have analyzed the article in question based mostly on the title as the shallow straw man you scoff at seems absent from the actual reporting. In fact it does a better job than you of dismissing the argument you foist upon it.
>----------------------------- “We do not have nor do we want a system where the United States government monitors private internet chats,” Glenn Gerstell, the former general counsel of the National Security Agency, told NBC on Wednesday.
On Discord, some servers already joke about the possibility of being surreptitiously infiltrated by the government. Using a word first coined on the anything-goes message board 4chan, people commonly accuse others of being “glowies” — federal agents whose out-of-place behaviors are so obvious that they practically glow.
But surveilling gamer chatrooms might also end up pushing away the same young recruits the military desperately needs, all for questionable practical gain: The internet is full of ways to anonymously share images, videos and documents. >-----------------------------
I invite you to read more of it as its actually fairly well thought out
Allowing them to enlarge their share then consolidate, regroup, rebuild their forces, and ease out of financial straights and better prepare to take the rest of it in a few years and once again sally forth to murder, rape, and destroy is a bargain no reasonable person would take.
If you are suggesting that we stop providing them weapons in hopes that they be more inclined to negotiate you have misjudged the situation and you would have us only condemn people to murder and horror as punishment for your failure to analyze what is ultimately a simple situation explained in simple terms by Putin's own words on the topic.
Furthermore you seem to have analyzed the article in question based mostly on the title as the shallow straw man you scoff at seems absent from the actual reporting. In fact it does a better job than you of dismissing the argument you foist upon it.
>----------------------------- “We do not have nor do we want a system where the United States government monitors private internet chats,” Glenn Gerstell, the former general counsel of the National Security Agency, told NBC on Wednesday.
On Discord, some servers already joke about the possibility of being surreptitiously infiltrated by the government. Using a word first coined on the anything-goes message board 4chan, people commonly accuse others of being “glowies” — federal agents whose out-of-place behaviors are so obvious that they practically glow.
But surveilling gamer chatrooms might also end up pushing away the same young recruits the military desperately needs, all for questionable practical gain: The internet is full of ways to anonymously share images, videos and documents. >-----------------------------
I invite you to read more of it as its actually fairly well thought out
> Only Ukraine can do that and she has little incentive to do so given what has and will be done to its people and the unwillingness of Russia to keep prior settlements in 1991 or 2014.
They were a year ago: https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-zelenskyy-kyiv-bor...
They were a year ago: https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-zelenskyy-kyiv-bor...
Coming from the region and following the war super closely… Decision is fully in West hands.
Ukraine can win if West supplies enough weapons. Some trained manpower may be required too because Ukraine’s losses are pretty bad too. Especially if you look into most experienced ranks.
At the same time, Ukraine would loose soon if West cut off support. Ukraine would both run out of ammo and morale would be ruined.
Ukraine can be forced to take whatever peace treaty West wants.
Ukraine can win if West supplies enough weapons. Some trained manpower may be required too because Ukraine’s losses are pretty bad too. Especially if you look into most experienced ranks.
At the same time, Ukraine would loose soon if West cut off support. Ukraine would both run out of ammo and morale would be ruined.
Ukraine can be forced to take whatever peace treaty West wants.
Do you think that is an outcome anyone in the west should want?
Personally - I hope not. If Russia is not crushed in Ukraine, we’re likely next.
In reality… If West was strongly in crush-Russia camp, Ukraine war escalation in February of 2022 wouldn’t have happened. Even 2014 wouldn’t have happened.
Had West went all-in, I believe the war could be ended in 24-72 hours. Close airspace over Ukraine. Put some boots on the ground. Done.
Now the question is why the war is not over yet. Nuclear scare? Economics? Corruption and blackmailing? All of those could make crappy peace treaties a thing either.
In reality… If West was strongly in crush-Russia camp, Ukraine war escalation in February of 2022 wouldn’t have happened. Even 2014 wouldn’t have happened.
Had West went all-in, I believe the war could be ended in 24-72 hours. Close airspace over Ukraine. Put some boots on the ground. Done.
Now the question is why the war is not over yet. Nuclear scare? Economics? Corruption and blackmailing? All of those could make crappy peace treaties a thing either.
"We are not in a position to negotiate the surrender of territory"
Richard N. Haass (President of the Council on Foreign Relations) would like to see as many Russians as possible killed in an Ukrainian offensive and start negotiating afterwards. (do not know wether he wants Ukrainian soldiers killed as well)
"Given the likely trajectory of the war, the United States and its partners need to begin formulating a diplomatic endgame now."
"Ukraine’s Western supporters would propose a ceasefire as Ukraine’s coming offensive reaches its limits"
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/ukraine/russia-richard-haass-...
Richard N. Haass (President of the Council on Foreign Relations) would like to see as many Russians as possible killed in an Ukrainian offensive and start negotiating afterwards. (do not know wether he wants Ukrainian soldiers killed as well)
"Given the likely trajectory of the war, the United States and its partners need to begin formulating a diplomatic endgame now."
"Ukraine’s Western supporters would propose a ceasefire as Ukraine’s coming offensive reaches its limits"
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/ukraine/russia-richard-haass-...
Ukraine's Western supporters can propose a ceasefire but why would either side agree to one? Putin seems to be in it for the long haul, he probably knows Western support for Ukraine will gradually go down and then once Russia's military recovers a bit they can go back their original aim of taking all of Ukraine. For Zelenskyy there exists plenty of popular support for trying to take back territory, and unless the US says they'll completely throw them to the wolves and cut off all aid (which would make the US look completely terrible internationally), why would he agree to a ceasefire if he thinks Russia will go back to war once they recover anyway?
Mr. Haass answers:
"Ukraine might still refuse the call for a cease-fire. If so, it would hardly be the first time in history that a partner dependent on U.S. support balked at being pressured to scale back its objectives."
"Another plausible outcome is that Russia would agree to a cease-fire in order to pocket its remaining territorial gains but in fact has no intention of negotiating in good faith to secure a lasting peace settlement."
My own maybe wishful thinking:
There are reasons for both sides to end the war.
Ukraine is failing more and more and Ukrainian people are suffering the most.
The cost of war is high for Russia as well and Putin's aims are limited.
"Ukraine might still refuse the call for a cease-fire. If so, it would hardly be the first time in history that a partner dependent on U.S. support balked at being pressured to scale back its objectives."
"Another plausible outcome is that Russia would agree to a cease-fire in order to pocket its remaining territorial gains but in fact has no intention of negotiating in good faith to secure a lasting peace settlement."
My own maybe wishful thinking:
There are reasons for both sides to end the war.
Ukraine is failing more and more and Ukrainian people are suffering the most.
The cost of war is high for Russia as well and Putin's aims are limited.
> Lord forbid the Ukraine war end in some kind of negotiated settlement
No negotiation is possible when Russia's starting position is that Ukraine is not a real country and Ukrainians are not a real people. Putin's held that position for years:
https://www.businessinsider.com/putin-denies-reviving-russia...
The way the war ends is Russia is first defeated and the negotiations that will then follow will be about the reparations Russia must pay and the war criminals Russia must extradite.
No negotiation is possible when Russia's starting position is that Ukraine is not a real country and Ukrainians are not a real people. Putin's held that position for years:
https://www.businessinsider.com/putin-denies-reviving-russia...
The way the war ends is Russia is first defeated and the negotiations that will then follow will be about the reparations Russia must pay and the war criminals Russia must extradite.
If you want to simp for genocidal dictators please at least be original.
You think he leaked these documents to bring about a negotiated end to the war?
It's weird and extremely dishonest how they try to blame the platform instead of them hiring a knob (or I guess under-training them in the first place). I fear it will cause for more push for government spying on their people
This is exactly what this is about. They are trying to make legal mass drag net surveillance and censorship. The key here is legal, they are already doing it covertly. There are plenty of murmurs this was done on purpose to set the excuse in place for restrict act, etc. Do you use a vpn? 20 years or a million dollar fine. Do you use tor? How about encrypted email? Signal? Crypto currency?
We look more like china everyday.
We look more like china everyday.
It was always part of the deal that "God's watching". You just had to believe it before, and now it's kind of literal.
I'm not trying to hide and I don't want to see everybody's lives.
When more people let go of hiding in humility, and do not want to see everything... we could manifest a new America, that didn't start in Plymouth.
The increase of the (now electronic) overseers, makes us more like the 1600s New England. China is playing catch up.
I'm not trying to hide and I don't want to see everybody's lives.
When more people let go of hiding in humility, and do not want to see everything... we could manifest a new America, that didn't start in Plymouth.
The increase of the (now electronic) overseers, makes us more like the 1600s New England. China is playing catch up.
Most cryptocurrencies make dragnet surveillance super easy, barely an inconvenience.
[deleted]
Then they would have to consider what beliefs said knob held that are red flags and that is a much bigger problem.
? His motivations were pretty modest. This wasn't some ideological thing as far as we know.
The only thing that could resemble a red flag was one of the discord people described him as anti-war, while working for the military. A pretty normal position for a 20yr old though.
The only thing that could resemble a red flag was one of the discord people described him as anti-war, while working for the military. A pretty normal position for a 20yr old though.
20 years ago there were recruiters at my school bribing us to join because they'd pay 100% of our college tuition. Assuming they're still doing that, with costs going up I can imagine more people taking them up on it despite their viewpoints.
Plenty of usmil enlisted are anti-war. They’re the ones with skin in the game, after all.
he was literally a neo-Nazi, OP
Citation? What I've seen is that he probably leaked the documents to impress his friends and was racist. Not every racist is a neonazi, though, so if you have other information I'd love to see it.
In common American parlance, "nazi" is becoming a slur for any racist/sexist/*ist/*phobe, and doesn't refer specifically to those with interest or sympathy for/with Nazi Germany.
That may be how some people use it, but that doesn't mean we should put up with that usage. The Nazis slaughtered millions of people because of their ethnicity/religion/sexual orientation/what have you. To use that word to describe an immature group of friends who say racist things because they think it's edgy waters down the meaning of a very powerful word in a way that severely harms public discourse.
If we're going to use the phrase "literally a neo-Nazi", I want to see swastikas or tattoos or something other than garden-variety hooliganism.
If we're going to use the phrase "literally a neo-Nazi", I want to see swastikas or tattoos or something other than garden-variety hooliganism.
I must have missed that.
The story I've heard is that he leaked the documents to win an argument. He doesn't even appear to have seriously considered that they would travel far beyond his little Discord friend group. Of course, I could have misheard.
No, they should probably just not have access in the first place. Like having files encrypted with keys of only people that coudl access it or something
It's humorous how incompetent US intelligence is that they give this access to a 21 year old, don't notice any data exfiltration by someone with presumably 0 technical skills, and take (weeks?) to catch the guy only after the leaks are made incredibly public.
Age is not a determination for what level of access someone is given. It's not technically difficult to take a picture with a smartphone even given that smartphones are not allowed in SECRET and TOP SECRET areas. Multi-function devices (ex: printer/scanner/fax combo) still exist.
What is humorous is the vast amount of comments surrounding this event on HN that have no idea how security clearances, compartmentalization of information, federal and military law work.
What is humorous is the vast amount of comments surrounding this event on HN that have no idea how security clearances, compartmentalization of information, federal and military law work.
Presumably you could alert on someone printing 300 secret documents
Seems like even allowing for printing is a bad idea
I wonder how big tech compare in their security posture for insider leaks
Edit: the other thing is he took home the docs and photographed them on his kitchen table. So not only was he able to print them undetected but he was able to leave the base with them
Seems like even allowing for printing is a bad idea
I wonder how big tech compare in their security posture for insider leaks
Edit: the other thing is he took home the docs and photographed them on his kitchen table. So not only was he able to print them undetected but he was able to leave the base with them
[deleted]
Could you alert on something like that? If the MFD is on the network, sure. How fast would you want the response? Someone to constantly be checking an email mailbox? Ok, that could be setup for a 24/7 rotation. An alert to a smartphone like we do in industry for those on-call? Not as simple as sending an alert to a civilian smartphone and an O365 hosted mailbox.
>Seems like even allowing for printing is a bad idea
It is very easy to make things very secure, but then it would also be impossible to do work. Everything's a trade-off.
It is very easy to make things very secure, but then it would also be impossible to do work. Everything's a trade-off.
21-year-old males are notoriously immature. Cue a college party montage. There's a reason they pay more for car insurance until they're 25. Something about the prefrontal cortex.
I believe Chelsea Manning was 23 when she leaked intel?
I'd actually argue this is why the military wants recruits in the sweet spot when they're legally adults, but haven't fully developed their decision making. You just don't give them sensitive intel. You give them a gun and a CO.
I believe Chelsea Manning was 23 when she leaked intel?
I'd actually argue this is why the military wants recruits in the sweet spot when they're legally adults, but haven't fully developed their decision making. You just don't give them sensitive intel. You give them a gun and a CO.
>Something about the prefrontal cortex.
It's worth pointing out that this is an artefact of nurture, not nature. Stunting of the development of the prefrontal cortex is worsening each decade.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-myth-of-the-t...
It's worth pointing out that this is an artefact of nurture, not nature. Stunting of the development of the prefrontal cortex is worsening each decade.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-myth-of-the-t...
Incompetence or happy to let it happen.
Somewhere in the intelligence community, a new project just received unlimited funding: join as many Discord servers (and Slack instances, and…) as possible, idle, and log everything.
Whether that requires 1,000 quietly idling accounts or 100,000 of them, there’s now enough motivation to pull it off.
Whether that requires 1,000 quietly idling accounts or 100,000 of them, there’s now enough motivation to pull it off.
Bold of you to assume they won't just be given access to a firehose of data. Money talks.
For Discord, I think the perceived risk outweighs the benefit. Unlike a government contractor or large telecom conglomerate[1], Discord doesn’t have a business unit that serves governments enough to directly benefit.
I think a more likely outcome is Discord ignoring accounts that they strongly suspect are operated by the US government, or not thoroughly investigating that possibility (so they never know enough to strongly suspect). Basically, willful ignorance.
(Discord staff, if you’re reading this: add likely government accounts - including probable country - to https://discord.com/tags/transparency-reports and add a warrant canary for overly-broad requests to https://discord.com/safety/360044157931-working-with-law-enf...)
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A
I think a more likely outcome is Discord ignoring accounts that they strongly suspect are operated by the US government, or not thoroughly investigating that possibility (so they never know enough to strongly suspect). Basically, willful ignorance.
(Discord staff, if you’re reading this: add likely government accounts - including probable country - to https://discord.com/tags/transparency-reports and add a warrant canary for overly-broad requests to https://discord.com/safety/360044157931-working-with-law-enf...)
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A
Discord doesn't have a revenue stream that makes sense given the scope of services they offer for free. Discord Store is a flop, Discord Nitro subscription fees can't add up to much. Selling digital 'stickers' is a joke. To keep the boat afloat they keep having new investment rounds, but unless they plan on running a ponzi scheme they need to find a real source of revenue.
They have user data in troves, even logs of all the programs that (non-browser) users are running. Expecting them to not sell access/use of that data seems very naive. They could already be selling access to this data under the table to their 'investors.'
They have user data in troves, even logs of all the programs that (non-browser) users are running. Expecting them to not sell access/use of that data seems very naive. They could already be selling access to this data under the table to their 'investors.'
Who says it needs to come from Discord? These aren't heavily encrypted communications. I don't know if it's still the case, but Discord used Google at one point. Enough said.
The sheer scale of data generated means they are unlikely to ever successfully identify an account if that's their intent.
Where's the difference between a consumer that joins a lot of servers versus a contractor who joins a lot of servers? Where's the difference between a consumer that joins a specific server and a contractor that joins a specific server? There isn't one as far as monitoring them goes, unless they're coming from IPs known to not be civilian IPs, which is an easily solved problem for anybody to not be discovered.
The sheer scale of data generated means they are unlikely to ever successfully identify an account if that's their intent.
Where's the difference between a consumer that joins a lot of servers versus a contractor who joins a lot of servers? Where's the difference between a consumer that joins a specific server and a contractor that joins a specific server? There isn't one as far as monitoring them goes, unless they're coming from IPs known to not be civilian IPs, which is an easily solved problem for anybody to not be discovered.
What risk? They've had a long history of doing invasive data collection on their users already, and everyone keeps going. What's the risk of handing a login to their existing databases to the government?
[deleted]
The military loved keyboards for typing. Then someone leaked information with a keyboard.
Yep, this. How is Discord in any way the problem here? The problem is that they had gave unvetted personnel access to military secrets, not which chat software was being used.
No way. A messaging platform that can be used to recruit soliders can also be used to leak military secrets? That's crazy.
No surprise about modern media and their unoriginal uncreative titeling...
X loved y and then z happend...
Yawn.
X loved y and then z happend...
Yawn.
It's hard to keep a secret. It's what gives me confidence that there are no alien UFOs. Let me give you some examples:
1. Someone leaks classified plane specs to win argument on an Internet forum [1];
2. US soldiers leak nuclear secrets via website for creating flash cards [2]; and
3. Fitbit app Strava gives away location of secret military base [3].
There's of course no way of convincing conspiracy theorists. They'll probably point to the above and call them fake or a psy op. The way simpler explanation is that pretty much nothing remains secret and that probability keeps going down the more people that know it.
I once heard it said it would be harder to fake the Moon landing than actually land on the Moon given all the people involved.
Anywa, Discord is just the next evolution of that.
[1]: https://kotaku.com/military-game-fan-leaks-classified-docs-t...
[2]: https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2021/05/28/us-soldiers-expos...
[3]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jan/28/fitness-tracki...
1. Someone leaks classified plane specs to win argument on an Internet forum [1];
2. US soldiers leak nuclear secrets via website for creating flash cards [2]; and
3. Fitbit app Strava gives away location of secret military base [3].
There's of course no way of convincing conspiracy theorists. They'll probably point to the above and call them fake or a psy op. The way simpler explanation is that pretty much nothing remains secret and that probability keeps going down the more people that know it.
I once heard it said it would be harder to fake the Moon landing than actually land on the Moon given all the people involved.
Anywa, Discord is just the next evolution of that.
[1]: https://kotaku.com/military-game-fan-leaks-classified-docs-t...
[2]: https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2021/05/28/us-soldiers-expos...
[3]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jan/28/fitness-tracki...
I really love how young people don't give a damn about old tropes.
Like CLASSIFIED or something. Dude, secrets will get leaked. Stamping red capital letters on it, making up cringe words like treason that belong more in warhammer 40k than real world and punishing people by taking away their freedom for speaking won't change that.
Leaked secrets is really your fault for even having them.
If you can't ever have your thing in the open maybe you shouldn't be having it at all? No matter how many gray hairs you have and how nice your suit is.
Young are way more resilient towards narrative verbal bs that kept our generation and previous in line.
Like CLASSIFIED or something. Dude, secrets will get leaked. Stamping red capital letters on it, making up cringe words like treason that belong more in warhammer 40k than real world and punishing people by taking away their freedom for speaking won't change that.
Leaked secrets is really your fault for even having them.
If you can't ever have your thing in the open maybe you shouldn't be having it at all? No matter how many gray hairs you have and how nice your suit is.
Young are way more resilient towards narrative verbal bs that kept our generation and previous in line.
>If you can't ever have your thing in the open maybe you shouldn't be having it at all?
This variant of "If you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to hide" shares the same naïve worldview of those who do not understand there are pragmatic reasons for privacy both for individuals and nation-states. One would do well to reflect on the old chestnut that knowledge is power and consider who or what should have that power over, say, one's country.
As for narratives for the young, the obvious education is to have a clear and immediate consequence for a specific action. It's what they call "fucked around and found out" nowadays.
This variant of "If you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to hide" shares the same naïve worldview of those who do not understand there are pragmatic reasons for privacy both for individuals and nation-states. One would do well to reflect on the old chestnut that knowledge is power and consider who or what should have that power over, say, one's country.
As for narratives for the young, the obvious education is to have a clear and immediate consequence for a specific action. It's what they call "fucked around and found out" nowadays.
> "If you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to hide"
This narrative is fine if you start at the top not at the bottom of society.
Impractical? Yes. Naive? Perhaps. But not wrong.
This narrative is fine if you start at the top not at the bottom of society.
Impractical? Yes. Naive? Perhaps. But not wrong.
> If you can't ever have your thing in the open maybe you shouldn't be having it at all? No matter how many gray hairs you have and how nice your suit is.
Nice in theory, but doesn't stand up to basic scrutiny. I have secrets. Hundreds of them. Mostly passwords. And I mostly keep them secret because if I don't, naughty people will take the things I need from me or generally cause chaos for me and my family.
You're absolutely right that young people are more likely to question traditional narratives, but they are less likely to have the context (or apply it, anyway) necessary to form a coherent narrative in its place, which will often lead you to at least some variation on a traditional narrative.
I think where young people often do good by questioning authority is when a traditional narrative used to apply but in recent history no longer does for some reason or another. If you're an old, you've likely already mentally examined some idea or process and found it to be sound, and now you're less likely to come back and question it later. Young people come along later and question it and find it to not be sound anymore, and the olds realize they might be right.
For most other things... You don't have to be young to smell the bullshit.
Nice in theory, but doesn't stand up to basic scrutiny. I have secrets. Hundreds of them. Mostly passwords. And I mostly keep them secret because if I don't, naughty people will take the things I need from me or generally cause chaos for me and my family.
You're absolutely right that young people are more likely to question traditional narratives, but they are less likely to have the context (or apply it, anyway) necessary to form a coherent narrative in its place, which will often lead you to at least some variation on a traditional narrative.
I think where young people often do good by questioning authority is when a traditional narrative used to apply but in recent history no longer does for some reason or another. If you're an old, you've likely already mentally examined some idea or process and found it to be sound, and now you're less likely to come back and question it later. Young people come along later and question it and find it to not be sound anymore, and the olds realize they might be right.
For most other things... You don't have to be young to smell the bullshit.
Those are secrets because only you know them. And that's fine. What's not fine is that you could have organisational shared secret in this day and age that won't ever leak. That's dumb fantasy and attempts at making it real are laughable and should have holes poked into them.
> You're absolutely right that young people are more likely to question traditional narratives, but they are less likely to have the context (or apply it, anyway) necessary to form a coherent narrative in its place, which will often lead you to at least some variation on a traditional narrative.
How strongly narratives affected people historically is downright frightning. Millions have died because of philosophers. I hope that in the future humanity will gain much more relislience toward narratives just by tearing them apart and restiching in chaotic competeing manners. I hope LLMs will help with that by examplifying how easy it is to produce any bs narrative that even hunk of silicon can do it. I hope people who grow up in this environment will no longer be able to be cheated by single bs narrative for decades of their life.
> For most other things... You don't have to be young to smell the bullshit.
The fact you can smell it doesn't matter you'll have audacity to complain about the smell or imagine a world without this smell or even find that smell bad enough to get off the couch.
> You're absolutely right that young people are more likely to question traditional narratives, but they are less likely to have the context (or apply it, anyway) necessary to form a coherent narrative in its place, which will often lead you to at least some variation on a traditional narrative.
How strongly narratives affected people historically is downright frightning. Millions have died because of philosophers. I hope that in the future humanity will gain much more relislience toward narratives just by tearing them apart and restiching in chaotic competeing manners. I hope LLMs will help with that by examplifying how easy it is to produce any bs narrative that even hunk of silicon can do it. I hope people who grow up in this environment will no longer be able to be cheated by single bs narrative for decades of their life.
> For most other things... You don't have to be young to smell the bullshit.
The fact you can smell it doesn't matter you'll have audacity to complain about the smell or imagine a world without this smell or even find that smell bad enough to get off the couch.
> I really love how young people don't give a damn about old tropes.
The vast majority of young people with access to secret information aren't leaking it. The inane, incredibly naive trend you are suggesting simply doesn't exist (thank goodness.) Most of them take their jobs seriously and have a lot more sense than you.
The vast majority of young people with access to secret information aren't leaking it. The inane, incredibly naive trend you are suggesting simply doesn't exist (thank goodness.) Most of them take their jobs seriously and have a lot more sense than you.
It exists in a sense that there weren't those leakers decades ago. Everybody was playing spy/patriot mental game. And now there are people who no longer give a damn.
All of that is security circus. And the fact that most comedians can keep straight face throughout their whole performance doesn't make it less so.
All of that is security circus. And the fact that most comedians can keep straight face throughout their whole performance doesn't make it less so.
Yeah, back in the day people only sold intel to the enemy instead. The truly patriotic stance.
So how do you square this, with the Assange and Snowden witch hunts?
Making an example of them didn't stop the next generation leaking whenever they wanted.
Making an example of them didn't stop the next generation leaking whenever they wanted.
Well if you take a laissez-faire attitude to raising the next generation, allow corporations to fry their brains, turn them into lonely monsters grasping at anything to feel ok, it shouldn't really be a surprising that putting them in front of classified information will come back to bite you.
Most zoomers don't want to join the military (if they're even mentally well enough to join in the first place) because the government actively made an enemy of the people, the fact that anyone is still signing up is more surprising than the fact that someone leaked something.
Most zoomers don't want to join the military (if they're even mentally well enough to join in the first place) because the government actively made an enemy of the people, the fact that anyone is still signing up is more surprising than the fact that someone leaked something.
The consolidated corporate media seems to believe that if this 21-year old leaker had all his communications monitored and was tagged with a constantly updated social credit score, he could have been flagged as a risk much earlier and these embarrassing documents about the scale of the US government's involvement in the Ukraine war could have been kept from the public. That's of course a profoundly anti-Bill-of-Rights authoritarian stance, maybe adopted because 'the ruling class in America hates our freedoms?'
Lord forbid the Ukraine war end in some kind of negotiated settlement, that would mean Europe might lift sanctions on Russian gas, reducing the demand for LNG exports... as well as reducing the diversion of taxpayer dollars to bloated military-industrial contracts.
> "U.S. LNG exporters boosted shipments to Europe by more than 137% in the first 11 months of 2022 from the same period in 2021..."
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/us-lng-exports-both-...
It's kind of astonishing how bad the Washington Post has gotten since Jeff Bezos bought it...oh and look, Discord uses Google Cloud, not AWS! Well that explains a lot.