Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by f6v 1113 days ago
You make it sound like big tech companies never cooperate with the law enforcement. I bet CIA and FBI have their hand so far up Zuck’s ass it’s almost like Minority Report at this point.
1 comments

Of course it is like this. We live in the golden age of cyberwars.

But you as a founder decide whose values of the surrounding society you align your company with.

In an autocratic nation these controls are kind of absolutist in nature, whereas in democracies you have at least some sense of oversight.

Given the mechanics of the game, where you reside your company tells a lot about who you're friends with.

These days on a larger scale there's basically NATO, SCO, UAE, Israel and the African Union as alliances (setting aside (former) British colonies).

Companies have to cooperate with either of those, otherwise they would not be allowed to exist.

> These days on a larger scale there's basically NATO, SCO, UAE, Israel and the African Union as alliances (setting aside (former) British colonies).

Which one's the good one?

Only Siths deal in absolutes.

Among that list, NATO is by far the preferred option.

I'm not even sure which SCO is under discussion here, the unix one, Pakistan's "Special Communications Organization", the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, or if Scotland is up to something surprising, or if it's one of several "State Controller's Office" and "Special Counsel's Office" in the USA…
I mean, unless you live in Middle East and one day they say you have WMD and they destroy your whole country. If you live in the EU or the US - then yes.
Which middle eastern country have NATO attacked?
Was there a NATO country that condemned Iraq invasion and imposed sanctions? Like banning McDonalds or UPS from doing business there? Most of them participated in the invasion one way or another, did they not?
When the US invoked Article 5 after 9/11 and NATO invaded Afghanistan?

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_8189.htm

Not sure why the downvotes, this is literally the one and only time in NATO's history that Article 5 has been invoked https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Atlantic_Treaty#Septembe...

Or you live in Russia and you thought you had a deal that NATO wouldn't encroach further on your border...

It was a trick question, none of them are good.

Soviet Union asked to join NATO but was rejected, and the post-Soviet Russian Federation started on the path to joining back in the day.

It's not NATO's fault that all the small countries around Russia are so scared of Russian forces that they all ask to join a mutual defence pact.

Has NATO crossed any Russian border?

Now nearing borders appears motivated more by Russia's bullying of its neighbors than any desire within NATO to expand.

Maybe you're forgetting the protection treaty Russia signed to respect Ukraine's borders in exchange for USSR nukes.

Unlike you, I actually lived in Russia and I can tell with 100% certainty that it's a bs narrative that was used to build up Putin support based on confrontation with the "west".
For your statement to make sense, Russia's borders would have to start at Ukraine's borders, which they do not.
> whereas in democracies you have at least some sense of oversight

Can you give some examples of oversight ?

None of those things except NATO is an actual alliance.