Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by cookiengineer 1113 days ago
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.

3 comments

> 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.

Russia wanting to join NATO is an anecdote.
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.

> Has NATO crossed any Russian border?

Does NATO even have a border with the counties member states invaded in the past three or so decades? Except Yugoslavia.

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".
So no agreements had previously been made then?

https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017...

I mean, I'm not supporting Russia's actions here, I'm saying the US (mainly) are just a bad an actor. They're essentially fighting a war with Russia (as their warmongers and military complex love to tell their shareholders about), Ukraine is just the pawn in the middle.

I should have said 'towards' the border, not 'on.' My bad.

Saying there was a narrative prior to 2021 is a kind of a lie.
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.