Hacker News Reader

Comment by prawn | Hacker News Reader

Isn't it because a hack was involved?

The NYTimes just had a big scoop on Trump's tax returns.

Would it be considered a hack if somebody within the IRS gave those documents to the press? What if the source was a foreign entity working through an intermediary?

That is to say, what distinguishes a source vs a hack is a function of the press' investigation into the authenticity of the materials.

I'm not sure blocking the NYPost is the right call here, much as I hate to say it.

What's the definition of hack? If we believe NY Post's story, did a hack happen? Or are we assuming NY Post's story is false, and the materials came from an unreported hack?

I was just going by Twitter's statement in response. Hadn't looked into it beyond that.

"Twitter blocked users from sharing an article that indicated Hunter Biden introduced his father Joe to a Ukranian businessman — charging that “hacked materials” were used in the story."

the zimmerman telegraph and the pentegon papers could both be roughly described as 'hacked materials' i think most would agree they still fell firmly within the public interest.

The NY Post states no hacking occurred and this allegation is itself "baseless". It appears Twitter/FB simply assumed it must be hacking so they could use trigger their anti-doxxing policies, as otherwise they'd have had no policies to block it, as it's clearly journalism. But if the NY Post are telling the truth then it's actually FB/Twitter spreading misinformation.

Very, very bad move by Twitter and Facebook. The partisan rule-bending is clear.

No it’s not. Had it been leaks concerning Trump collusion with Russian to rig previous election (you know, that fake news that runned for 4 years), it would have been placed in trending topic instead. GP is right, there is a very obvious double standard at play, and this is not happening only in the IS.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com