This might be off topic, but it's getting harder and harder to see Russian casualties as less of a tragedy, and more of an annoyance. Don't get me wrong, I know that it's a cruel and tragic thing, but every time I look at reports of 'heavy losses', I just think to myself that the numbers not high enough. That more of them should be dead.
And that's just it. It's a dark thought, but what else am I supposed to think? How can everyone involved in this war allow it to reach to this extent? Putin and Russians justifying this as a 'necessary war' while chest thumping about how their willing to throw millions of bodies away for the sake of advancement? The collective West dragging their feet on giving the needed weapons in a volume that could have ended this damned war? Ukraine's progress at reforming themselves to meet the changes? Just feels maddening to read these reports more and more while everyone argues over the most inane details instead of the larger picture
Welcome to politics as it really is, I'm afraid. There's a reason that Clausewitz said war is a continuation of politics (policy, depending on translation). This wasn't just military theory, but social. Welcome to life among humans. It's why I much prefer cats.
First of all, Russian losses are not that high as reported, especially in 2024. Of course, from time to time high-ranked idiots cause unjustified losses like the notorious destruction of trucks of reservists this August in Kursk region. Otherwise, losses are more or less on par, no matter what pro-UA sources report.
Contrary to UA losses, when dellusioned patriots or forced conscripts are dying, RU losses mainly consist of paid volunteers or former prisoners. Such losses are bearable for society, no matter how cinycal it may sound. You can't see on the streets of Russia the scenes of horrow and despair of people hunted on the street by UA recruiters. Hundreds of videos surge each month. Strange that neither Tom nor Don notice them.
You are a real bot. The Russians are attacking on motorcycles, having increased payments to contractors by as much as 2000000 rubles. Strange, but the losses are less than the AFU, but there are captured conscripts, and there are hundreds of them. You want to convince Tom and Don of something just by writing that they are wrong. Are you some kind of OSINTer?) Is there any analysis, but not from Russian propagandists? )
A paid volunteers is like what?)
Ex-convict like murderers, pedophiles, cannibals who then get pardoned and go back to peaceful life and then they are heroes) And look into the eyes of relatives of their victims. It's so beautiful)
How could you say so? Stupid Russians are dying "in hordes, en masse, whole RU brigades are decimated, all cruise missiles are downed, thousands of prisoners, and etc..."
However, the reality is different. There's absolutely no panic about Kursk incursion anymore, most of RU sources are happy about best UA brigades being exausted while step by step, kilometre by kilometre RU troops are advancing in Donbass.
Putin promised that conscripts would not take part in the Strategic Defense Forces. But they were never withdrawn afterwards, even when the AFU was already in the Kursk region.
Yeah, nothing, I just wanted them to attack on bicycles. Hopefully they'll get around to it soon. Bikes are quiet, cheap to run and you can buy a lot more of them than motorcycles.
Strategic Defense Forces ? I am not familiar with the term, what is that ? I think he promised they will not take part in the fighting in Ukr. , but I might be mistaken, I am not a Russian language speaker.
Bikes, tricycles even rollerblades if they think it helps them.
Dear Юра! You promised a while a ago to go to the front to fight orcs! Why are you spending your precious time for battling at forums and blogs? Or you are simply a reservist of Krakow , Sevillia or Lion brigades that prefer to defend Ненька far away from it?
I'm already there) And if I have time to read Tom's blog, so what? Or you bot, specify the brigade number and send the geolocation. You better tell me about your prisoners, murderers, rapists. About the 155th brigade of their videos. So who are these hired volunteers? There will be answers. Or is that all you can say blah-blah-blah
And by the way, you are participating in the defense of your homeland. You were kind of attacked)
My dear парубок! I don't know at what kind of front you are (probably at WW2 analogue of Tashkent front), still it's a well known fact that most of RU troops in Ukraine are hired volunteers. There was a huge % of former prisoners when Wagner was at action. Now the percentage of guys from jail is much lower.
Just for a change some recent videos of UA citizens caught by UA recruiters in a Frederich the Great's style. The first video shows how one UA "volunteer" died out of heart attack:
I asked you questions, and you're telling me some nonsense, about paid arson attacks on minibuses, heart attacks in the ТЦК. Guys from prison - that's so cute) So you're defending your homeland?
Noticed and reported. But then you're trying to construct your own reality because of your support for Russian aggression. The fact that "such losses are bearable" for the kind of society that you love speaks of your humanity.
What's going on says a lot about russian mentality, families and alcohol abuse. Probably wives are happy their husbands get killed and earn them a small fortune. Otherwise I cannot imagine why russian men would allow to be led to slaughter simply for the money. Are they all so misinformed or hate their lives so much? I assume latest after arriving in Ukraine they learn about the massive number of casualties. Perhaps they all just follow the herd. I don't know what to make of "modern russians".
Studies show that people that live under state ideologies that deprive the individual to think freely and suppresses its ability to express itself becomes largely despondent over time. When it comes to certain matters that the individual can’t affect due to the separation between state and people and state retribution, people become largely apathetic to these matter. They might function normally as a smaller social group but they haves no future to control in sense of their own fates as this is limited by the state or the intellectual (or social) poverty they live in. They might oppose the war and do not want to die but they simply cannot do anything about it. Which by ‘western standards’ is the goal of any dictatorship.
After some generations of this, it can lead to uncomprehension of other ways of thinking and reasoning, or other styles of living except their own, just as any isolated population far from main society. Westerners are so blinded to their social level that they associate most Europeans as having the same perspectives, but a large population (outside St. Moskva-Burg) in Russia live by 1930’s European (~social) standards, cut off from any type of cultural influence or evolution for more then a hundred years (or simply stuck in the plain formatted Stalinistic model). This cause problems with communication. We simply don’t understand each other because we have not lived in each others countries.
In sense we might want them to reflect, but they might not be unable to, be it pride, ideology, fear, educational deprivation or simply they don’t care much because they know nothing about non Russian Europe (and how it functions [What is the pillars of democracy and why do we have them? What is critical thinking? How do you do fact checks? What is fact?]). Or the most common for those russians connected to internet - point fingers but never look into the mirror (as that is “Verboten” in their country).
There is also a hypothesis of the cultural/geological influence between Christen-Jewish perspective and the Confuciusistic of human value of the individual where eastern world tend to...
...to go more towards the Confuciusistic traditions/values where people are more dead tools of the state and the opposite where it is the individual persons value matters (and principles of the 10 commandments). Hence a (chocking) tendency of letting people die in droves (that is not really related to evolution of modern warfare tactics) and the state being completely snow white of care.
I feel sympathy for some of the "Russian" soldiers, mainly the enslaved ethnic minorities being forced to die in the cause of the slavic Moscow inhumanity. But for the genuine volunteers, the buthcers, the rapists, the looters, I celebrate the higher the casualty figures go.
Tom, you write that Telegram was "heavily targeted until successfully cracked by the FSB . . ."
Do you have a source for that? That's big if true, but I've never seen anything but speculation, which seems to be contradicted by the fact that Telegram continues to be used by Russian dissidents and Ukrainian soldiers and even the Ukrainian government. I'm glad to be corrected if there is some actual concrete information, but if not, it would seem rather reckless to present that as an established fact.
They used other means, for example it was recorded that they broke SMS authentication by using a device that behaved like a cell phone provider. It switched the opposition member's phone to itself, re-registered it as in roaming in Africa, intercepted the SMS with access code to their account, and switched the phone back.
Also, if they have physical access to the phone, they may download the history of chats. And some phones are easy to hack.
At the very least, we know that:
* The Russian government blocks Telegram (and some other Internet services) in the whole region when something bad (like riots) happens. This means they have no means to finely control it.
* The Ukrainian MOD was advertising its Telegram accounts for Russians to send information about movement of troops, etc. If FSB had access there, that would only bring every informer to the jail.
And those informers are being rounded up in quite a few cases. Unfortunately.
SIM spoofing is definitely a thing, but it is a very labor intensive method that is used for high value targets.
For my money, the best indicator of RF having TG under some sort of control is the story of the 2017 attempted blocking. They announced that they would block it, there were some protests, and some negotiation with Durov, after which they did a 180 degree turn and instead of blocking it started promoting it as the preferred messenger for RF government and citizens. Don't know about you, but that smells very fishy to me.
There is some collaboration with FSB, for example the TG account of wives of the mobilized men is marked as "fake" though it is very public and they wrote to Durov multiple times.
On the other hand, it does not look like he gave them admin access (unlike Yandex and VK which are totally moderated). They cannot even block the messenger without making lots of other web services unavailable.
I don't know how much access they have, but my hunch is they have "enough" to make it a problem (see my comment above). As far as blocking groups, TG was blocking Navalnys groups for "smart voting" wholesale. So they do have cooperation.
Ukraine’s top general Oleksandr Syrskyi said that Ukraine had captured 594 Russian servicemen during its operation in the Kursk region, disclosing that figure for the first time.
Damned lier Syrsky! There were more than 2 thousand of them!!!)))
Seriously speaking, the Go Pro cameras of UA soldiers killed/captured in Kursk region showed that civilian males were also captured in Russian villages. So, real number of militaries/paramilitaries captures was less, as US newspaper stated "just" 247.
One thing is when 'moderators' think they can moderate without actually reading and comprehending the content of my post, and another is to intentionally spread BS.
The intentional BS is spread by such users as you and me while the moderators are away.
The creator of the platform has nothing to do with that - just as the manufacturer of your phone or Google that programmed Android should not be sued if somebody calls you and threatens to kill you - in the end the threats are distributed by Android that runs on your Samsung Galaxy, thus the CEOs of Google and Samsung go to court for helping to threaten your life. Or even for murder, if the killer used a cell phone.
Aw please... so, you are ready to tolerate racism, greed, genocide, ethnic cleansing, fanaticism, and destruction of environment (just a few examples) - all for the sake of free speech?
Well, sorry: I'm not.
The sheer idea of 'unlimited tolerance' is as paradox as the idea of limitless capitalism. It's leading to the extinction of tolerance (just like there can be no limitless capitalism on a planet with - actually - very limited resources).
Defending tolerance requires not to tolerate the intolerant.
Therefore, the creator of any platform is very much responsible for the content. Even more so if he/she is then also neck-deep into creating intolerance. Of course, it's on state to conclude this (if not 'on time', then 'better late than never'), and develop corresponding jurisdiction.
One should draw the border for unlawful behavior. Racism and hate speech may be tolerated if it does not result in violence. If it does - attackers go to jail.
BTW, Bible is racist and calls for genocide. Should it be banned?
While I mostly agree, in the US at least regulation of speech doesn't work because there is no unified definition of anything in a practical sense - including tolerance. People believe what they want. Most will insist that any speech they dislike is hateful and whatever they like is science.
Hence Islamophobia and Sinophobia being totally okay, but antisemitism not.
In theory that's fine. In practice, that means giving someone the right to decide what's BS (censorship power). And humans being humans, that power will always be abused for the benefit of those who hold it.
That's where private persons are simply wrong for such positions. That's why we have the state: the purpose of the state is the protection of society through the rule of law and order (which, between others, is putting any persons, groups of persons, or movements out of law, as soon as they are preaching intolerance and persecution).
Having grown up in the USSR, I do remember "fondly" how the state used its power to decide what's "right to be said" and what's "wrong to be said" with unbelievably repressive consequences for those who said the "wrong thing".
So, please color me sceptical that any other state, given the power for its bureaucracy to decide what is correct and wrong thinking/speech to have a different outcome.
I know that all the European and American bureaucrats built their careers for nothing but love and charity for their fellow citizens, carry a tiny flag on their breast and pray to the God of liberty every morning in the mirror after showing....
But we both know that BS, and whatever powers that the humans in the bureaucracy are given will be abused to the fullest extent of their capabilities.
No one is really for total free speech. The costs are too high. Everybody wants censorship. They just want it in different places, at different levels, convicted by different groups, following different rules etc. Such discussions are meaningful and important. Chesthumping free speech «uber alles» is stupid posturing.
That's simply not true. I am for total free speech and I abhore any and all kind of censorship. And I think the Bill of Rights is one of the greatest human achievements ever. There's a reason limiting free speech is the first thing illiberal powers are attempting when they have the power to do so.
Why would it be impossible? Do you think there are sentences that cannot be physically pronounced? It's absolutely possible, all speech are free by default, but most of the time there are powers that want to curtail it.
You're right though, the First Amendment doesn't provide free speech. However that's because free speech is a basic human right and the First Amendment doesn't need to grant it. On the other hand, it prevents the government from abridging it in any way. Therefore any rules curtailing free speech is unconstitutional.
There are limits on free speech and the limits have changed over the years. The phrases, "shouting fire in a crowded theater" and "imminent danger" have been used in rulings that supported limitations, whereas the phrase "marketplace of ideas" was used to support expression.
You can limit speech in your own private home or a private workplace. Obscenity can be limited and speech in schools can be limited, and you can be sued for defamation in civil court.
I'm aware of all of these, but none of these points make unlimited freedom of speech impossible. These are just examples of the government infringing on basic human rights. It could have happened the other way, but unfortunately the state will always try to chip away rights that they perceive as a limitation to their power. That's why the US Bill of Rights is so important, it's a strong limit against the abuse that keeps coming from the state.
Not really. Just caught some assessments (online) that the number of new recruits is in (sharp?) decline. So much so, they've multiplied the 'bonus' for new contracts, and still: ever less people are volunteering.
It would be interesting, if somebody has the data and skills to reconcile the development of signing bonus to Russian distribution of income/education.
Assuming there is a large share of individuals in Russia with a low income (I.e. low „price point“ to sign up) and low education and assuming there is a very thin „Mittelschicht“ (with a higher pricepoint/significantly higher share of assessing life as being „priceless“) one would hope, that recruiting options have mostly dried out…
The rich for sure will not want to take part in meat assaults with a high risk of ending as a „Wildschwein“…
IMO Durov made a good PR for himself. Telegram is cooperating with crime prosecution e.g. in Brazil and others. Durov knew he will must do it in EU sooner or later, too. So, he came for this spectacular arrest to make PR and collect more support for the future legal and PR battles.
Every offensive has come to end. Hopefully, now ZSU will dig on comfortable frontline and kill a lot of Russian who will try to recapture Kursk region (with eventual retreat)
Regarding Pokrovsk, I found strange your statement about that even 10 Patriots won't help. Their guaranteed-hit zone is about 110 km for Su34, so they would have to be in approximately 50 km from front, where main problem are recon UAVs. Hence, they can help if Ukranians protect them from UAVs(not fully at least mostly) and have enough launchers and radars to spare(where 10 Patriots would help).
Anyway, for Ukraine missle and air war has to be priority, because only serious damage to VKS can stop Russian (not just slow down on direction that they decided to push ). And there are positive tendencies like SAM FPV and Neptune cruise missiles (Zelenskyi claimed tests of ballistic missile today. It is for PR obviously, but still means some progress)
Tom, as an FYI, Telegram is not an encrypted messaging service by default. It has the ability to encrypt individual chats, but the chatters have to enable it in every individual case. Group chats cannot be encrypted.
As for what are they talking about.... well, seems that's not the AN/ALQ-131 jamming pod, because that's a US-design. So, must be some other sort of an ECM-pod - or internally-installed system - and then something made in the EU only.
...though if so; then why have the Danish and/or Norwegians required the US help...?
Yeah, it's curious, as it's probably a product from Terma, as we've seen their pylons on displayed Ukrainian F-16.
But then again Terma's jamming solution on that pylon is from Northrop Grumman so should have been known to the 68th EW Squadron, yet they call it an "unfamiliar EW system"
Having read 2-3 additional articles to this topic, meanwhile, my impression is that somebody there is either 'discovering hot water', or the entire story is just pointless babbling about a 'no-affair'.
Essentially, for unclear reasons, the Danes and the Norwegians tasked a USAF-unit to modify a system that's already installed on their F-16s - and then so that this had to be adapted to latest Russian threats deployed in Ukraine?
For the start: if neither air forces of European NATO-partners, nor the USAF are doing this with their own systems all the time (see: upgrading these on basis of intel from Ukraine) - even more so at the times half NATO is crying 'Putin ante portas' and 'Putin's going to attack us in 3 years' - then they're BS-itting around, and the responsible generals belong all being fired on the spot.
And, secondly: if they have really required the Americans to do this for them... sigh... then the state of the EU-part of NATO's arms industry is even poorer than generally assessed.
My guess is, that USAF didn't want to tell some secrets Terma (or Danish government) so they did this upgrade and probably would did this upgrade to all EU F-16 owners interested in it, not only to those send to Ukraine. (Or, maybe only those sent to Ukraine are using that specific Terma ECM). Or whatever, nothing extraordinary, just jurnos baking sensation where it none.
That comment about Specter is dead on. The idea of one world together can be a great idea, until you start thinking about what could mean and who exactly would run what.
I read Andrew Tanner's latest, and he is talking about stuff I wonder about too. Namely the next shoe to be dropped by the Ukrainians. It is obvious they have something else planned, and I hope it's a good one. I'm not as pessimistic as you on the Seim River fight, I think the UA can pull it off, but I am wondering if maybe they want to pull more troops in. Bagging a BDE is nice, bagging two is nicer.
I deeply disagree with the paragraphs regarding "free speech". It is a crucial freedom, regardless of whether it helps the bad guys or the good guys in some specific context.
Also, you either have free speech or you don't. If you start banning things like "hate speech" and so on, then you don't have free speech. And on top of that, you're on a slippery slope leading to more and more restrictions. Nope. Absolutely not.
Freedom to babble whatever nonsense or hate speech on public forums is really just freedom from consequences for the person who has decided to take that route of spewing bile into the public arena don't you think ? . There has to be some form of guide rails or moderation because people are people .
Each chat or forum has moderators from within its members. As those belong to the community, they set the guidelines: whoever likes the guidelines remains in the community, whoever does not agree - leaves. That makes a stable group.
There is no need for platform-wide moderators, unless you are going to suppress some communities, not persons.
That requires platform moderators. They need salaries. That means the platform should have means to collect much money. While Telegram is widely used because it's free and ad-free.
One of the reasons for Pavel's arrest is the refusal to provide this kind of information to the courts. In its usage settings, chapter 8.3, it is stated that the data will only be communicated if the user is suspected of terrorism (not child rape, not drug trafficking...), and it is specified that so far this has never happened : https://telegram.org/privacy/eu#2-legal-ground-for-processing-your-personal-data
I'm administering an online community and I made only one rule: there are no rules on free speech. Anything goes and it became a great community with free clashes of ideas. I wish my country and social media would work like that.
I had to forbid insults (except when both parties enjoy the exchange) in the chats I admin to make people feel safe. The punishment is wiping chat history - that removes the topic to quarrel about. Dislikes are also disabled to encourage posting crazy ideas and novice questions.
I think both you and Tom have a point, but we should keep in mind that we are social creatures that depend on empathy through physical proximity to others. The internet mucks with that. Free Speech on the internet will necessarily look different to free speech in other forms, such as Radio talk back, letters to the editor and physical engagements.
And because of my age, I remember the last decade of the commie regime here, when the privacy of correspondence etc. existed only on paper, and then I was at risk of being kicked out of high school (thank God, it was September 1989, just 2 months before the end).
Never again. I will always actively oppose anyone who seeks to curtail these freedoms, regardless of their claimed justification.
Ok, so you would in Voltaire style also fight for the freedom of communists to openly advocate to go back to a Stalinist regime including things like praising Stalin, declaring democracy as an oppression of the elite to exploit the working class, restricting free speech as the will of the people is best put into power by a technocratic politbureau, lying about everything the opposition does, calling openly for a revolution against the democratic government, announcing that killing policeman, soldiers and bureaucrats is righteous and everyone that does so is a good person that is rewarded in the coming communist paradise.
I repeat the last paragraph of my previous comment: "Never again. I will always actively oppose anyone who seeks to curtail these freedoms, regardless of their claimed justification."
Emphasis on "never" and "will always actively oppose"; this should fully answer all your questions.
Also, please be kind enough to leave me out of these "gotcha" efforts, you can try them on someone else.
This as not a "gotcha" approach. I merly trying to explain, why we see things different and for that it is important, which social surrounding you are in and how far you went down the rabbit hole so far.
Coming to the explanation: Tom and I are both from Austria and hence we are from a german speaking background. Austrian history had after WWI a society that was deeply split between conservatives and socialists. That to an extent were small towns had two football clubs to go to. You wouldn't talk to the other side , only about it. That led to all forms of lies, blatant lies and false accusations. In this form of environment you can say basically anything about your politically opponent and it is believed. With that hate is growing and in the end you start armin yourself, as the others are doing that to and that's how we ended up in a civil war with a catholic authoritarian or church fascist government.
This government was then taken over by Nazi Germany and the leaders of the parties met each other in the concentration camp of Dachau. Austrians prosperity came from learning from that mistake and those two sides talking to each other, to let that never happen again.
Simply coming from the Hapsburg monarchy with its fairly good bureaucracy going into that of past WWII with also its fairly good bureaucracy, Austrians have more of trust into the executive branch to crack the right people down.
You obviously don't have that and growing up right next to the Czech border I totally understand that. We had a couple of Czech refugees with two kids that are my friends which told me nice horror stories about communist government.
There is no difference in the goal between us. It is just that there is more emphasis on self preservation on our side, as Austria got into this mess on its own, while you don't have that, as it came from abroad.
Nevertheless, lies lead to people doing things that they won't do if they hear only the truth, including taking lethal actions to change the form of government and my country had that on its own, before we got the German version of it, that was even more built on lies., and we ran with it anyway into known final victory.
What you described is exactly what democracy is about. If people want communism - let them run for communism. Or fascism, or whatever. It's up to them to decide.
People, that want that, will lie to you to so that you come to their side and take action. You want get back from there then.
Most recent example was the government of the Muslim brotherhood in Egypt. There the army stepped in and there is no choice about the freedoms there now.
What a bunch of crap. Truly free speech, where you leave every racist spill its bilge everywhere? Sorry, but the Iron Curtain fell a long time ago, and Europe cannot and does not tolerate such excesses. Whether you come from behind the Iron Curtain is your problem, the EU has laws and values, and tolerating hate and racist speech is NOT amongst them. And the overwhelming majority of the population will simply think the bunch of you as crazy as those weird MAGA fanatics to say otherwise. If you're not happy with it, go to some libertarian wet dream in the US, since you clearly do not belong to the European civilization...
Ah, the rambling of an authoritarian maniac, always ready to pounce on any "excesses" that doesn't fit his tightly measured way of correctness, already ready to deport those who he thinks are too liberal.
Sorry man, but free speech is a core value of Europe, no matter how offended you are by "hate speech".
Free speech is also taking the responsability of what you write. Your libertarian view IS NOT EUROPEAN. So get lost. You're as dangerous as those communists you talk about.
Then nobody has "freedom of speech" and nobody ever did. In every country on this planet in any given historical moments, there were always some limitations.
I see that most of the reactions are about freedom of expression, which of course is the best defense used by these site or messaging leaders who have decided that they are above the law. Anton Pavel was arrested by the French justice system as part of a judicial investigation opened on July 8 against X on 12 offenses relating to organized crime, complicity in the dissemination of illegal content (child pornography, narcotics, etc.) and refusal to answer to justice "for the realization and exploitation of interceptions authorized by law". French criminal law applies to offenses committed or deemed to have been committed on French territory, as well as to acts of complicity. From the moment that offenses of terrorism, pedophilia, drug trafficking and others are committed using Telegram, it is normal that the French justice system is concerned about it and this does not call into question freedom of expression. Complicity consists in particular in providing means to criminals, the site managers can hide behind ignorance of what is being done because of their lack of moderation, which is a guarantee of freedom of expression but as soon as justice has required them they can no longer hide behind this very convenient ignorance and if they persist they then knowingly become accomplices. That said, we can clearly see that the justice of a country is often helpless against these international octopuses and it is very difficult to say how this indictment of Pavel will evolve.
"although his Instagram is one of biggest platforms for exploitation of children pornography – he’s granted the Western governments a backdoor access to that system…."
To be fair: if Zuckerberg is cooperating with law enforcement, he may have done his duty. Durov usually ignored any requests by governments, but the Internet is not a law free zone. If crime happens there it must be prosecuted too - just like any other place. He had better stayed in Abu Dhabi. Nice tax haven, but perhaps in the end not the best place to live.
Crime is punishable. Crime in privacy is still crime. If you beat your wife at home it's private, but crime. People believe that just because it's internet and they are anonymous (which they actually aren't) laws don't apply. In fact, it doesn't matter where it happens. It only matters what happens and if it's a crime.
The programmers just created a tool that makes it nearly impossible to track its user. Should they be punished for their work? Should they be forced by the government to add backdoors for the government to break their own program - because it is *too secure* right now?
Cryptography is not a crime, but if you know who uses your cryptography to commit crimes, you have to cooperate. You don't have to break your code either. You have to be a responsible person.
So it sounds like Russia is finally starting to get it’s act together in Kursk?
Partially, yes. After all, Spetsnaz is even now still better than the average VSRF.
This might be off topic, but it's getting harder and harder to see Russian casualties as less of a tragedy, and more of an annoyance. Don't get me wrong, I know that it's a cruel and tragic thing, but every time I look at reports of 'heavy losses', I just think to myself that the numbers not high enough. That more of them should be dead.
And that's just it. It's a dark thought, but what else am I supposed to think? How can everyone involved in this war allow it to reach to this extent? Putin and Russians justifying this as a 'necessary war' while chest thumping about how their willing to throw millions of bodies away for the sake of advancement? The collective West dragging their feet on giving the needed weapons in a volume that could have ended this damned war? Ukraine's progress at reforming themselves to meet the changes? Just feels maddening to read these reports more and more while everyone argues over the most inane details instead of the larger picture
What shall I tell you? It's shocking alone to become indifferent towards the Russian losses., not to talk about wishing yet more of... 'that'.
I'm counseling myself with the hope that this is what the mass of them are said to have wanted to do...
Welcome to politics as it really is, I'm afraid. There's a reason that Clausewitz said war is a continuation of politics (policy, depending on translation). This wasn't just military theory, but social. Welcome to life among humans. It's why I much prefer cats.
First of all, Russian losses are not that high as reported, especially in 2024. Of course, from time to time high-ranked idiots cause unjustified losses like the notorious destruction of trucks of reservists this August in Kursk region. Otherwise, losses are more or less on par, no matter what pro-UA sources report.
Contrary to UA losses, when dellusioned patriots or forced conscripts are dying, RU losses mainly consist of paid volunteers or former prisoners. Such losses are bearable for society, no matter how cinycal it may sound. You can't see on the streets of Russia the scenes of horrow and despair of people hunted on the street by UA recruiters. Hundreds of videos surge each month. Strange that neither Tom nor Don notice them.
You are a real bot. The Russians are attacking on motorcycles, having increased payments to contractors by as much as 2000000 rubles. Strange, but the losses are less than the AFU, but there are captured conscripts, and there are hundreds of them. You want to convince Tom and Don of something just by writing that they are wrong. Are you some kind of OSINTer?) Is there any analysis, but not from Russian propagandists? )
A paid volunteers is like what?)
Ex-convict like murderers, pedophiles, cannibals who then get pardoned and go back to peaceful life and then they are heroes) And look into the eyes of relatives of their victims. It's so beautiful)
Ты реальный российский пиздабол)
There are captured conscripts, so what ? They all took an oath, haven't they ? Do you remember the words of the oath ?
And what's the problem with attacking on motorcycles ?
"And what's the problem with attacking on motorcycles ? "
You get shot down like clay pigeons. Russians seem to love that way of fighting. They did it already under Stalin. It's all so heroic.
I've seen some pretty successful attacks of this type. They can be useful in certain situations but not as replacements for armored vehicles.
I wouldn't do it. I would rather kill my officer and change sides. Russians should do exactly that.
How could you say so? Stupid Russians are dying "in hordes, en masse, whole RU brigades are decimated, all cruise missiles are downed, thousands of prisoners, and etc..."
However, the reality is different. There's absolutely no panic about Kursk incursion anymore, most of RU sources are happy about best UA brigades being exausted while step by step, kilometre by kilometre RU troops are advancing in Donbass.
Putin promised that conscripts would not take part in the Strategic Defense Forces. But they were never withdrawn afterwards, even when the AFU was already in the Kursk region.
Yeah, nothing, I just wanted them to attack on bicycles. Hopefully they'll get around to it soon. Bikes are quiet, cheap to run and you can buy a lot more of them than motorcycles.
Strategic Defense Forces ? I am not familiar with the term, what is that ? I think he promised they will not take part in the fighting in Ukr. , but I might be mistaken, I am not a Russian language speaker.
Bikes, tricycles even rollerblades if they think it helps them.
Strategic Defense Forces is a google translator) So translated special military operation
Dear Юра! You promised a while a ago to go to the front to fight orcs! Why are you spending your precious time for battling at forums and blogs? Or you are simply a reservist of Krakow , Sevillia or Lion brigades that prefer to defend Ненька far away from it?
I'm already there) And if I have time to read Tom's blog, so what? Or you bot, specify the brigade number and send the geolocation. You better tell me about your prisoners, murderers, rapists. About the 155th brigade of their videos. So who are these hired volunteers? There will be answers. Or is that all you can say blah-blah-blah
And by the way, you are participating in the defense of your homeland. You were kind of attacked)
My dear парубок! I don't know at what kind of front you are (probably at WW2 analogue of Tashkent front), still it's a well known fact that most of RU troops in Ukraine are hired volunteers. There was a huge % of former prisoners when Wagner was at action. Now the percentage of guys from jail is much lower.
Just for a change some recent videos of UA citizens caught by UA recruiters in a Frederich the Great's style. The first video shows how one UA "volunteer" died out of heart attack:
https://t.me/rezident_ua/24084
https://t.me/ASupersharij/31816
https://t.me/ZE_kartel/9151
https://t.me/boris_rozhin/133942?single
There are dozens of videos like that. And it is a kind of a vogue in Ukraine to burn down military recruiters minibuses.
I asked you questions, and you're telling me some nonsense, about paid arson attacks on minibuses, heart attacks in the ТЦК. Guys from prison - that's so cute) So you're defending your homeland?
Come on: you can better. Try to answer at least one of his questions.
Noticed and reported. But then you're trying to construct your own reality because of your support for Russian aggression. The fact that "such losses are bearable" for the kind of society that you love speaks of your humanity.
What's going on says a lot about russian mentality, families and alcohol abuse. Probably wives are happy their husbands get killed and earn them a small fortune. Otherwise I cannot imagine why russian men would allow to be led to slaughter simply for the money. Are they all so misinformed or hate their lives so much? I assume latest after arriving in Ukraine they learn about the massive number of casualties. Perhaps they all just follow the herd. I don't know what to make of "modern russians".
What about US army then? Thousands died in Iraq&Afganistan to get more bucks? Misinformed ones?)))
Americans made meat grinder attacks in Iran and Afghanistan? Certainly not.
That's the Russian way.
Studies show that people that live under state ideologies that deprive the individual to think freely and suppresses its ability to express itself becomes largely despondent over time. When it comes to certain matters that the individual can’t affect due to the separation between state and people and state retribution, people become largely apathetic to these matter. They might function normally as a smaller social group but they haves no future to control in sense of their own fates as this is limited by the state or the intellectual (or social) poverty they live in. They might oppose the war and do not want to die but they simply cannot do anything about it. Which by ‘western standards’ is the goal of any dictatorship.
After some generations of this, it can lead to uncomprehension of other ways of thinking and reasoning, or other styles of living except their own, just as any isolated population far from main society. Westerners are so blinded to their social level that they associate most Europeans as having the same perspectives, but a large population (outside St. Moskva-Burg) in Russia live by 1930’s European (~social) standards, cut off from any type of cultural influence or evolution for more then a hundred years (or simply stuck in the plain formatted Stalinistic model). This cause problems with communication. We simply don’t understand each other because we have not lived in each others countries.
In sense we might want them to reflect, but they might not be unable to, be it pride, ideology, fear, educational deprivation or simply they don’t care much because they know nothing about non Russian Europe (and how it functions [What is the pillars of democracy and why do we have them? What is critical thinking? How do you do fact checks? What is fact?]). Or the most common for those russians connected to internet - point fingers but never look into the mirror (as that is “Verboten” in their country).
There is also a hypothesis of the cultural/geological influence between Christen-Jewish perspective and the Confuciusistic of human value of the individual where eastern world tend to...
...to go more towards the Confuciusistic traditions/values where people are more dead tools of the state and the opposite where it is the individual persons value matters (and principles of the 10 commandments). Hence a (chocking) tendency of letting people die in droves (that is not really related to evolution of modern warfare tactics) and the state being completely snow white of care.
I feel sympathy for some of the "Russian" soldiers, mainly the enslaved ethnic minorities being forced to die in the cause of the slavic Moscow inhumanity. But for the genuine volunteers, the buthcers, the rapists, the looters, I celebrate the higher the casualty figures go.
Tom, you write that Telegram was "heavily targeted until successfully cracked by the FSB . . ."
Do you have a source for that? That's big if true, but I've never seen anything but speculation, which seems to be contradicted by the fact that Telegram continues to be used by Russian dissidents and Ukrainian soldiers and even the Ukrainian government. I'm glad to be corrected if there is some actual concrete information, but if not, it would seem rather reckless to present that as an established fact.
There are quite a few criminal cases that went through Russian courts in which FSB submitted private chat information as evidence.
They used other means, for example it was recorded that they broke SMS authentication by using a device that behaved like a cell phone provider. It switched the opposition member's phone to itself, re-registered it as in roaming in Africa, intercepted the SMS with access code to their account, and switched the phone back.
Also, if they have physical access to the phone, they may download the history of chats. And some phones are easy to hack.
At the very least, we know that:
* The Russian government blocks Telegram (and some other Internet services) in the whole region when something bad (like riots) happens. This means they have no means to finely control it.
* The Ukrainian MOD was advertising its Telegram accounts for Russians to send information about movement of troops, etc. If FSB had access there, that would only bring every informer to the jail.
And those informers are being rounded up in quite a few cases. Unfortunately.
SIM spoofing is definitely a thing, but it is a very labor intensive method that is used for high value targets.
For my money, the best indicator of RF having TG under some sort of control is the story of the 2017 attempted blocking. They announced that they would block it, there were some protests, and some negotiation with Durov, after which they did a 180 degree turn and instead of blocking it started promoting it as the preferred messenger for RF government and citizens. Don't know about you, but that smells very fishy to me.
There is some collaboration with FSB, for example the TG account of wives of the mobilized men is marked as "fake" though it is very public and they wrote to Durov multiple times.
On the other hand, it does not look like he gave them admin access (unlike Yandex and VK which are totally moderated). They cannot even block the messenger without making lots of other web services unavailable.
I don't know how much access they have, but my hunch is they have "enough" to make it a problem (see my comment above). As far as blocking groups, TG was blocking Navalnys groups for "smart voting" wholesale. So they do have cooperation.
A contact working in the industry.
There are lots of rumors in the Ukrainian IT community, but no facts I know of. If you mean IT under the "industry".
Yes, IT-industry (indeed: cyber security).
Ukraine’s top general Oleksandr Syrskyi said that Ukraine had captured 594 Russian servicemen during its operation in the Kursk region, disclosing that figure for the first time.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2024/aug/27/russia-ukraine-war-live-ukrainian-air-defence-systems-activated-to-repel-further-russian-drone-attack?page=with:block-66cdb5ab8f086e571c8713a5#block-66cdb5ab8f086e571c8713a5
Syrsky has become very vocal lately. Seems like he îs required to prepare the public opinion about the real war situation.
Damned lier Syrsky! There were more than 2 thousand of them!!!)))
Seriously speaking, the Go Pro cameras of UA soldiers killed/captured in Kursk region showed that civilian males were also captured in Russian villages. So, real number of militaries/paramilitaries captures was less, as US newspaper stated "just" 247.
It looks quite a small amount to me, after the various glowing reports posted around
If you are "fiercely pro free speech" but would like to see "hate speech" or "misinformation" to be banned, then you are not pro free speech at all.
OK, then I'm fiercely against free speech. Better now?
I remember you loved Medium for their moderation rules
One thing is when 'moderators' think they can moderate without actually reading and comprehending the content of my post, and another is to intentionally spread BS.
The intentional BS is spread by such users as you and me while the moderators are away.
The creator of the platform has nothing to do with that - just as the manufacturer of your phone or Google that programmed Android should not be sued if somebody calls you and threatens to kill you - in the end the threats are distributed by Android that runs on your Samsung Galaxy, thus the CEOs of Google and Samsung go to court for helping to threaten your life. Or even for murder, if the killer used a cell phone.
Aw please... so, you are ready to tolerate racism, greed, genocide, ethnic cleansing, fanaticism, and destruction of environment (just a few examples) - all for the sake of free speech?
Well, sorry: I'm not.
The sheer idea of 'unlimited tolerance' is as paradox as the idea of limitless capitalism. It's leading to the extinction of tolerance (just like there can be no limitless capitalism on a planet with - actually - very limited resources).
Defending tolerance requires not to tolerate the intolerant.
Therefore, the creator of any platform is very much responsible for the content. Even more so if he/she is then also neck-deep into creating intolerance. Of course, it's on state to conclude this (if not 'on time', then 'better late than never'), and develop corresponding jurisdiction.
One should draw the border for unlawful behavior. Racism and hate speech may be tolerated if it does not result in violence. If it does - attackers go to jail.
BTW, Bible is racist and calls for genocide. Should it be banned?
While I mostly agree, in the US at least regulation of speech doesn't work because there is no unified definition of anything in a practical sense - including tolerance. People believe what they want. Most will insist that any speech they dislike is hateful and whatever they like is science.
Hence Islamophobia and Sinophobia being totally okay, but antisemitism not.
In theory that's fine. In practice, that means giving someone the right to decide what's BS (censorship power). And humans being humans, that power will always be abused for the benefit of those who hold it.
Yes. The question is who, though.
That's where private persons are simply wrong for such positions. That's why we have the state: the purpose of the state is the protection of society through the rule of law and order (which, between others, is putting any persons, groups of persons, or movements out of law, as soon as they are preaching intolerance and persecution).
Well, then the next step is to put the traditional religions out of law as most of them are intolerant of each other.
Having grown up in the USSR, I do remember "fondly" how the state used its power to decide what's "right to be said" and what's "wrong to be said" with unbelievably repressive consequences for those who said the "wrong thing".
So, please color me sceptical that any other state, given the power for its bureaucracy to decide what is correct and wrong thinking/speech to have a different outcome.
I know that all the European and American bureaucrats built their careers for nothing but love and charity for their fellow citizens, carry a tiny flag on their breast and pray to the God of liberty every morning in the mirror after showing....
But we both know that BS, and whatever powers that the humans in the bureaucracy are given will be abused to the fullest extent of their capabilities.
I've seen it.
This is pretty hypocritical. "I support censorship except when I don't agree with the censorship"
No one is really for total free speech. The costs are too high. Everybody wants censorship. They just want it in different places, at different levels, convicted by different groups, following different rules etc. Such discussions are meaningful and important. Chesthumping free speech «uber alles» is stupid posturing.
That's simply not true. I am for total free speech and I abhore any and all kind of censorship. And I think the Bill of Rights is one of the greatest human achievements ever. There's a reason limiting free speech is the first thing illiberal powers are attempting when they have the power to do so.
Unlimited freedom of speech is impossible, no country ever tried it. Neither English Bill of Rights or American First Amendment provide it.
Why would it be impossible? Do you think there are sentences that cannot be physically pronounced? It's absolutely possible, all speech are free by default, but most of the time there are powers that want to curtail it.
You're right though, the First Amendment doesn't provide free speech. However that's because free speech is a basic human right and the First Amendment doesn't need to grant it. On the other hand, it prevents the government from abridging it in any way. Therefore any rules curtailing free speech is unconstitutional.
There are limits on free speech and the limits have changed over the years. The phrases, "shouting fire in a crowded theater" and "imminent danger" have been used in rulings that supported limitations, whereas the phrase "marketplace of ideas" was used to support expression.
https://sutherlandinstitute.org/the-history-behind-shouting-fire-in-a-crowded-theater-and-other-free-speech-phrases/
You can limit speech in your own private home or a private workplace. Obscenity can be limited and speech in schools can be limited, and you can be sued for defamation in civil court.
https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/law-and-life/not-so-free-speech-5-limits-on-1st-amendment-rights/#:~:text=The%20First%20Amendment%20prohibits%20the,as%20she%20does%20so%20without
There's a long history of the US government limiting speech although that line has moved over the years.
I'm aware of all of these, but none of these points make unlimited freedom of speech impossible. These are just examples of the government infringing on basic human rights. It could have happened the other way, but unfortunately the state will always try to chip away rights that they perceive as a limitation to their power. That's why the US Bill of Rights is so important, it's a strong limit against the abuse that keeps coming from the state.
Dear Tom.
May be, Do You have info about reserves of russian troops? How do You think, how long russian can make their offensive with such big casualties?
Not really. Just caught some assessments (online) that the number of new recruits is in (sharp?) decline. So much so, they've multiplied the 'bonus' for new contracts, and still: ever less people are volunteering.
No idea how reliable is that.
They say that has changed after Kursk https://meduza.io/news/2024/08/27/verstka-v-moskve-posle-nastupleniya-vsu-v-kurskoy-oblasti-v-dva-raza-chasche-stali-zaklyuchat-kontrakt-s-minoborony
The same article says the numbers of volunteers jumped up before Kursk and after the Moscow Mayor increased the signing cash bonus
Dear Tom. Many thanks for answer.
It would be interesting, if somebody has the data and skills to reconcile the development of signing bonus to Russian distribution of income/education.
Assuming there is a large share of individuals in Russia with a low income (I.e. low „price point“ to sign up) and low education and assuming there is a very thin „Mittelschicht“ (with a higher pricepoint/significantly higher share of assessing life as being „priceless“) one would hope, that recruiting options have mostly dried out…
The rich for sure will not want to take part in meat assaults with a high risk of ending as a „Wildschwein“…
IMO Durov made a good PR for himself. Telegram is cooperating with crime prosecution e.g. in Brazil and others. Durov knew he will must do it in EU sooner or later, too. So, he came for this spectacular arrest to make PR and collect more support for the future legal and PR battles.
Either that, or he sensed he is about to be made 'a head shorter' by the System Putin.
Every offensive has come to end. Hopefully, now ZSU will dig on comfortable frontline and kill a lot of Russian who will try to recapture Kursk region (with eventual retreat)
Regarding Pokrovsk, I found strange your statement about that even 10 Patriots won't help. Their guaranteed-hit zone is about 110 km for Su34, so they would have to be in approximately 50 km from front, where main problem are recon UAVs. Hence, they can help if Ukranians protect them from UAVs(not fully at least mostly) and have enough launchers and radars to spare(where 10 Patriots would help).
Anyway, for Ukraine missle and air war has to be priority, because only serious damage to VKS can stop Russian (not just slow down on direction that they decided to push ). And there are positive tendencies like SAM FPV and Neptune cruise missiles (Zelenskyi claimed tests of ballistic missile today. It is for PR obviously, but still means some progress)
You mean "cuddle orcs"
Tom, as an FYI, Telegram is not an encrypted messaging service by default. It has the ability to encrypt individual chats, but the chatters have to enable it in every individual case. Group chats cannot be encrypted.
This is a unfortunately a common misconception.
Hi Tom. Here an article you might find interesting: https://www.350sww.af.mil/News/Display/Article/3884560/dominate-the-spectrum-350th-sww-enables-ew-capabilities-for-ukrainian-f-16s/
For me as a non-expert it's rather cryptic which EW capabilities they are talking about.
Thx. Indeed, that's very interesting.
As for what are they talking about.... well, seems that's not the AN/ALQ-131 jamming pod, because that's a US-design. So, must be some other sort of an ECM-pod - or internally-installed system - and then something made in the EU only.
...though if so; then why have the Danish and/or Norwegians required the US help...?
Yeah, it's curious, as it's probably a product from Terma, as we've seen their pylons on displayed Ukrainian F-16.
But then again Terma's jamming solution on that pylon is from Northrop Grumman so should have been known to the 68th EW Squadron, yet they call it an "unfamiliar EW system"
Having read 2-3 additional articles to this topic, meanwhile, my impression is that somebody there is either 'discovering hot water', or the entire story is just pointless babbling about a 'no-affair'.
Essentially, for unclear reasons, the Danes and the Norwegians tasked a USAF-unit to modify a system that's already installed on their F-16s - and then so that this had to be adapted to latest Russian threats deployed in Ukraine?
For the start: if neither air forces of European NATO-partners, nor the USAF are doing this with their own systems all the time (see: upgrading these on basis of intel from Ukraine) - even more so at the times half NATO is crying 'Putin ante portas' and 'Putin's going to attack us in 3 years' - then they're BS-itting around, and the responsible generals belong all being fired on the spot.
And, secondly: if they have really required the Americans to do this for them... sigh... then the state of the EU-part of NATO's arms industry is even poorer than generally assessed.
My guess is, that USAF didn't want to tell some secrets Terma (or Danish government) so they did this upgrade and probably would did this upgrade to all EU F-16 owners interested in it, not only to those send to Ukraine. (Or, maybe only those sent to Ukraine are using that specific Terma ECM). Or whatever, nothing extraordinary, just jurnos baking sensation where it none.
That comment about Specter is dead on. The idea of one world together can be a great idea, until you start thinking about what could mean and who exactly would run what.
....especially the idea about 'privately-owned state' - is just a different designation for dictatorship.
I read Andrew Tanner's latest, and he is talking about stuff I wonder about too. Namely the next shoe to be dropped by the Ukrainians. It is obvious they have something else planned, and I hope it's a good one. I'm not as pessimistic as you on the Seim River fight, I think the UA can pull it off, but I am wondering if maybe they want to pull more troops in. Bagging a BDE is nice, bagging two is nicer.
Hey Tom, the machine gunner did not hit the missile, he actually confirmed it himself in voice: "the AD took it down"
Yup, have corrected that, meanwhile.
I deeply disagree with the paragraphs regarding "free speech". It is a crucial freedom, regardless of whether it helps the bad guys or the good guys in some specific context.
Also, you either have free speech or you don't. If you start banning things like "hate speech" and so on, then you don't have free speech. And on top of that, you're on a slippery slope leading to more and more restrictions. Nope. Absolutely not.
Freedom to babble whatever nonsense or hate speech on public forums is really just freedom from consequences for the person who has decided to take that route of spewing bile into the public arena don't you think ? . There has to be some form of guide rails or moderation because people are people .
Each chat or forum has moderators from within its members. As those belong to the community, they set the guidelines: whoever likes the guidelines remains in the community, whoever does not agree - leaves. That makes a stable group.
There is no need for platform-wide moderators, unless you are going to suppress some communities, not persons.
Some things are clearly platform wide not acceptable free speech like videos of extremists beheading people or rape of pre-teens
That requires platform moderators. They need salaries. That means the platform should have means to collect much money. While Telegram is widely used because it's free and ad-free.
BTW why does not police investigate those videos?
One of the reasons for Pavel's arrest is the refusal to provide this kind of information to the courts. In its usage settings, chapter 8.3, it is stated that the data will only be communicated if the user is suspected of terrorism (not child rape, not drug trafficking...), and it is specified that so far this has never happened : https://telegram.org/privacy/eu#2-legal-ground-for-processing-your-personal-data
I'm administering an online community and I made only one rule: there are no rules on free speech. Anything goes and it became a great community with free clashes of ideas. I wish my country and social media would work like that.
I had to forbid insults (except when both parties enjoy the exchange) in the chats I admin to make people feel safe. The punishment is wiping chat history - that removes the topic to quarrel about. Dislikes are also disabled to encourage posting crazy ideas and novice questions.
I think both you and Tom have a point, but we should keep in mind that we are social creatures that depend on empathy through physical proximity to others. The internet mucks with that. Free Speech on the internet will necessarily look different to free speech in other forms, such as Radio talk back, letters to the editor and physical engagements.
Are you an US citizen?
I'm a Czech citizen.
And because of my age, I remember the last decade of the commie regime here, when the privacy of correspondence etc. existed only on paper, and then I was at risk of being kicked out of high school (thank God, it was September 1989, just 2 months before the end).
Never again. I will always actively oppose anyone who seeks to curtail these freedoms, regardless of their claimed justification.
Ok, so you would in Voltaire style also fight for the freedom of communists to openly advocate to go back to a Stalinist regime including things like praising Stalin, declaring democracy as an oppression of the elite to exploit the working class, restricting free speech as the will of the people is best put into power by a technocratic politbureau, lying about everything the opposition does, calling openly for a revolution against the democratic government, announcing that killing policeman, soldiers and bureaucrats is righteous and everyone that does so is a good person that is rewarded in the coming communist paradise.
All that you would fight for?
I repeat the last paragraph of my previous comment: "Never again. I will always actively oppose anyone who seeks to curtail these freedoms, regardless of their claimed justification."
Emphasis on "never" and "will always actively oppose"; this should fully answer all your questions.
Also, please be kind enough to leave me out of these "gotcha" efforts, you can try them on someone else.
This as not a "gotcha" approach. I merly trying to explain, why we see things different and for that it is important, which social surrounding you are in and how far you went down the rabbit hole so far.
Coming to the explanation: Tom and I are both from Austria and hence we are from a german speaking background. Austrian history had after WWI a society that was deeply split between conservatives and socialists. That to an extent were small towns had two football clubs to go to. You wouldn't talk to the other side , only about it. That led to all forms of lies, blatant lies and false accusations. In this form of environment you can say basically anything about your politically opponent and it is believed. With that hate is growing and in the end you start armin yourself, as the others are doing that to and that's how we ended up in a civil war with a catholic authoritarian or church fascist government.
This government was then taken over by Nazi Germany and the leaders of the parties met each other in the concentration camp of Dachau. Austrians prosperity came from learning from that mistake and those two sides talking to each other, to let that never happen again.
Simply coming from the Hapsburg monarchy with its fairly good bureaucracy going into that of past WWII with also its fairly good bureaucracy, Austrians have more of trust into the executive branch to crack the right people down.
You obviously don't have that and growing up right next to the Czech border I totally understand that. We had a couple of Czech refugees with two kids that are my friends which told me nice horror stories about communist government.
There is no difference in the goal between us. It is just that there is more emphasis on self preservation on our side, as Austria got into this mess on its own, while you don't have that, as it came from abroad.
Nevertheless, lies lead to people doing things that they won't do if they hear only the truth, including taking lethal actions to change the form of government and my country had that on its own, before we got the German version of it, that was even more built on lies., and we ran with it anyway into known final victory.
What you described is exactly what democracy is about. If people want communism - let them run for communism. Or fascism, or whatever. It's up to them to decide.
People, that want that, will lie to you to so that you come to their side and take action. You want get back from there then.
Most recent example was the government of the Muslim brotherhood in Egypt. There the army stepped in and there is no choice about the freedoms there now.
Ah, another fellow from behind the Iron Curtain :)
No wonder we get it, while many Westerners don't really understand how important truly free speech is.
What a bunch of crap. Truly free speech, where you leave every racist spill its bilge everywhere? Sorry, but the Iron Curtain fell a long time ago, and Europe cannot and does not tolerate such excesses. Whether you come from behind the Iron Curtain is your problem, the EU has laws and values, and tolerating hate and racist speech is NOT amongst them. And the overwhelming majority of the population will simply think the bunch of you as crazy as those weird MAGA fanatics to say otherwise. If you're not happy with it, go to some libertarian wet dream in the US, since you clearly do not belong to the European civilization...
Ah, the rambling of an authoritarian maniac, always ready to pounce on any "excesses" that doesn't fit his tightly measured way of correctness, already ready to deport those who he thinks are too liberal.
Sorry man, but free speech is a core value of Europe, no matter how offended you are by "hate speech".
Free speech is also taking the responsability of what you write. Your libertarian view IS NOT EUROPEAN. So get lost. You're as dangerous as those communists you talk about.
Then nobody has "freedom of speech" and nobody ever did. In every country on this planet in any given historical moments, there were always some limitations.
I see that most of the reactions are about freedom of expression, which of course is the best defense used by these site or messaging leaders who have decided that they are above the law. Anton Pavel was arrested by the French justice system as part of a judicial investigation opened on July 8 against X on 12 offenses relating to organized crime, complicity in the dissemination of illegal content (child pornography, narcotics, etc.) and refusal to answer to justice "for the realization and exploitation of interceptions authorized by law". French criminal law applies to offenses committed or deemed to have been committed on French territory, as well as to acts of complicity. From the moment that offenses of terrorism, pedophilia, drug trafficking and others are committed using Telegram, it is normal that the French justice system is concerned about it and this does not call into question freedom of expression. Complicity consists in particular in providing means to criminals, the site managers can hide behind ignorance of what is being done because of their lack of moderation, which is a guarantee of freedom of expression but as soon as justice has required them they can no longer hide behind this very convenient ignorance and if they persist they then knowingly become accomplices. That said, we can clearly see that the justice of a country is often helpless against these international octopuses and it is very difficult to say how this indictment of Pavel will evolve.
"although his Instagram is one of biggest platforms for exploitation of children pornography – he’s granted the Western governments a backdoor access to that system…."
To be fair: if Zuckerberg is cooperating with law enforcement, he may have done his duty. Durov usually ignored any requests by governments, but the Internet is not a law free zone. If crime happens there it must be prosecuted too - just like any other place. He had better stayed in Abu Dhabi. Nice tax haven, but perhaps in the end not the best place to live.
When will the programmers behind the TOR browser be imprisoned?
Does Tor require a registration?
No
As soon as the governments ask them to cooperate - and they refuse.
So privacy is punishable?
Crime is punishable. Crime in privacy is still crime. If you beat your wife at home it's private, but crime. People believe that just because it's internet and they are anonymous (which they actually aren't) laws don't apply. In fact, it doesn't matter where it happens. It only matters what happens and if it's a crime.
The programmers just created a tool that makes it nearly impossible to track its user. Should they be punished for their work? Should they be forced by the government to add backdoors for the government to break their own program - because it is *too secure* right now?
Cryptography is not a crime, but if you know who uses your cryptography to commit crimes, you have to cooperate. You don't have to break your code either. You have to be a responsible person.
Holy cow of false equivalences!
Thanks for this report Tom