

US to increase funding for 'hackivists'; aiding Iranians - fuzzmeister
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2009/07/26/us_to_increase_funding_for_hackivists_aiding_iranians/

======
jacquesm
I wonder how long it will take before the US will learn that every dollar they
have ever spent 'aiding' the 'good guys' behind the scenes has in the long
term boomeranged back tenfold or more in damage done to the US or its allies.

\- korea

\- vietnam

\- afghanistan

\- iraq

Besides giving the Iranian hardliners another reason to claim rightfully that
the US incites trouble within its borders I find it hard to see how money will
empower the populace. What will change the tide in Iran is another revolution,
and it should be manufactured by the Iranians to avoid a repeat of history.

Iran could only become the state it is today because of the foreign support
for the Shah.

~~~
biohacker42
Right, but all intervention is not equal. The US in striving to stop the
"reds" has helped some awful people and it's amazing there are no Chilean or
Argentinian terrorist, god knows there are people from Latin America that
could claim good cause.

And maybe this will fire back too, but at it's core it's decentralizing,
anonymizing tech, used against government control. And I happen to think
that's a good thing.

~~~
biohacker42
Don't mind being down voted, just curious:

1.Isolationists disagreeing with my "not all intervention is bad" position?

2\. Against anything that might weaken government control?

3\. Outraged by my suggestion that someone who's family was disappeared by
Augusto Pinochet might turn their anger at the US?

~~~
jacquesm
Foreign policy is not HNs visitors strong suit. Corrected the downvote, but
I'm sure it won't last :)

------
lallysingh
1) It's "Hacktivist," not "hackivist."

2) I appreciate the sentiment, but this is a bad idea on a few fronts. It's
more proof that we (as in the US as a state) don't know how to engage,
manipulate, or antagonize an opponent properly.

It's very tempting to just go ahead cowboy-style with technology, as it's
politically pretty innocuous. No soldiers in harms way and no collateral or
even property damage make for very few apologies. But, they're still playing
with fire they don't understand (and in capitol hill's case, can't even see or
hear).

Then again, outside of a full-on war, state actions seem to follow an
"everybody do their own thing and only worry when we conflict between
departments" pattern that's depressingly familiar.

------
christopherolah
My first instinct is: ``Physician, heal thyself.''

It's great that the Obama administration sees Freedom on line as important.
They can begin by making sure there is no online censorship in the US...

