Right -- this is one of the few cases where I'd rather see a link to a blog post (providing some analysis of the raw data) rather than just the link to the data.
Government-IP updates can be either completely innocuous (someone's lunch break habit, or possible goofing off during working hours... in which case this might get someone in hot water), or seriously ominous, if "re-writing history" is someone's paid job.
The thing is we are conditioned to believe that anything the government does, especially anonymously, is necessarily bad.
From what I've seem on the list, this has been some kind of an effort to actually improve the arcticles, and update government related information, like embassy addresses and websites.
It looks like there is a bunch of responsible, well intentioned and helpful people in the government - at lealst in Norway.
>>> The thing is we are conditioned to believe that anything the government does, especially anonymously, is necessarily bad.
I definitely noticed this trend here, in HN. While it's popular and not surprising in general public (cheap joke sort of thing), it's quite disappointing here.
Are you Norwegian? Because my understanding is that Scandinavians tend to be the most trusting of their governments and have the least corrupt and most transparent governments (perhaps excluding Iceland). It would strike me as odd to hear someone from Norway say they are conditioned to believe anything government does is necessarily bad.
No, I'm Brazilian, and I'm speaking of "we" as everyone else outside scandinavia.
I phrased like that because most of the comments here were highlighting the fact that they did not find anything sinister going on, just as it was implicit that if it comes from the government, it must be sinister.
I've been to Sweden and even if they are not particularly fond of their government, they do trust it ways of magnitude more than we - as in everyone else - generally do.
Government-IP updates can be either completely innocuous (someone's lunch break habit, or possible goofing off during working hours... in which case this might get someone in hot water), or seriously ominous, if "re-writing history" is someone's paid job.
The former case isn't news-worthy, is it?