Vkontakte Founder Flees Russia
themoscowtimes.com
themoscowtimes.com
But wait, he didn't _really_ resign. No, it was all an April fools joke! The investors didn't buy it and fired him.
He claims the site is now under the control of Kremlin because one of its shareholders is Alisher Usmanov, an alleged ally of Putin. Yet, that guy was a shareholder for awhile now and Durov never complained about him.
I don't know. Sounds like sour grapes to me. Sounds like someone is trying to stay relevant by creating controversy and generating hype for a new messaging system that's supposed to protect you from government's eyes.
Don't be surprised if there are a rash of allegations of corruption, embezzlement, etc., against Durov. The sad thing about Russia is that they could be true, they could be part of a conspiracy against Durov, or both. You'll never know.
- Winston Churchill
If in the coming years Russia takes Ukraine, and or other countries like Latvia or Moldova, it'll be due to the West being complacent. Putin - or any dictator - 'winning' the first four rounds due to other nations having an attitude of not giving a shit, would match up with what typically has happened throughout history.
Honestly, where did you get this feeling that "the West has become so dominant"? From a military standpoint, Europe is bent on disarming: not even the UK can now afford the sort of effort that a close US partnership still imposes, and the US government itself is busy cutting everything it can. In fact, only a massive threat from Putin might be able to revive European defence budgets. Most European armies are creaking, from a technological standpoint; the only European nation pumping fresh cash in their armed forces is Russia, which is why Putin can afford to be so bullish. 1995 was almost 20 years ago, the world has changed. Bin Laden and Afghanistan militias showed that "the West" is, in fact, long from being "dominant" both at the military and cultural level.
"United Capital Partners, a private company registered in Moscow that owns 48 percent of Vkontakte, disputed Durov's statements on Tuesday, saying he had been seeking to “politicize the situation” because there were “serious legal claims” against him and he was suspected of embezzlement."
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/vkontakte-founder...
Hey, the 80's called, and if you were born during or after, it's probably time to ask what you don't understand.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2014/03/...
By the way, you seem to have triple posted.
…That's only to be fair, but I'm not sure they have issues in similar realms. I don't deny it, but I'm not sure. While Snowden is some "justice warrior" fighting over the idea who is obviously not welcome in the USA, Durov is much more prosaic person. I mean, he may have some ideas and moral principles he can't neglect, but he is a businessman, clever guy prone to dramatic performances and, honestly, quite a weasel himself. And it's not even clear if he has reasons to be hated by some secret sovernment agents or something as Snowden is. He is not an owner and not even an employee of Vk anymore. He does't claim to know some government secrets or anything. And while it's possible (likely, actually) that he was forced to get rid of stocks, his company wasn't really "taken" from him. I mean, he sold it, he got his money, he didn't suddenly disappear and wasn't taken to jail like Khodorkovsky, when there possibly were reasons for that. And now he has nothing to do with Vk, and there're claims that he wasn't even forced to quit. Weird, huh.
So I'd say there's quite a probability of that thing being just another spectacle.
[1] http://www.slate.com/blogs/business_insider/2013/11/01/edwar...
All oligarchs, all politicians, all countries are the same. This is prison planet, and nobody of memory has escaped yet ever.
(The fight against free energy is not so much as to keep the oil oligarchs powerful, as to prevent people to flee out of the planet).
https://www.facebook.com/about/government_requests
Disclaimer: I don't know how much Durov actually sold. Any additional info welcome.
http://rusbase.com/news/author/benhopkins/not-going-anywhere...
Nobody was forcing him to write this. It is exactly what he thinks about Russia.
PS But sometimes people can change their opinion in a month :)
=== In recent months, more and more fashionable to get the theme of emigration from Russia. As usual, I'm going against this trend - I publish 7 reasons to stay in Russia.
Just because it was posted to his person page does not mean he wasn't coerced into writing/posting it.
All of the benefits of Russia have disappeared within a month?
All of the benefits of Russia have disappeared within a month?
Would any of you consider implementing a last-resort "self destruct system" into your startup? One that completely and totally obliterates all data (writing random data to all discs), causes massive amounts of destruction to the company, permanently dumps databases, deletes all profiles, and sabotages everything you've ever worked for. You might answer this question differently depending on what part of the world you're from. Overall, having a way to instantly invoke "if I can't have it you can't either" might come in handy when dealing with oppressive governments.
Almost everyone, Russians most of all, know that Russia conducts fearsome mass surveillance of its own population. It was Snowden's revelations about the capabilities and intentions of the U.S. that came as a big surprise to many, and so were most needed.
From the last time I heard about this, it sounded like he was bullied into selling his shares to one of Putin's buddies, and stepping down. Then he said he would like to stay in Russia, now he's fleeing?
In a democracy with a free market, if the ones holding power want to take control of an internet company which holds data about the personal lives of hundreds of millions of people, they do so by strategically adding members to the company's board who are part of the oligarchy in place.
Putin's Russia still has a lot to learn! :')
Also, people from the West have been telling Russians that Russia has a lot to learn at least since the fall of the Soviet regime, if not since the days of the tsars. Some who've given such advice have done so out of good intentions. Others did so with malice aforethought, and have brought about considerable grief in so doing, as for example during the post-Soviet interregnum, when Yeltsin let himself be swindled out of a huge fraction of his country's wealth to the enormous detriment of the Russian people -- I've seen estimates of premature and unnecessary deaths thus caused which range into the low to middle seven figures.
Part of the reason why Putin enjoys such wide approval in the nation he governs is because he's not particularly inclined to listen to Westerners bearing gifts, whatever their intentions in so doing may be.
I suppose you can argue that these events were merely part of an incredibly recondite plan on Putin's part to substantiate otherwise baseless propaganda of the sort you regard my prior comment to be. I can't imagine how anyone could make such an argument with a straight face, but that's not the same as assuming it's not possible.
Especially because most people that support Putin do so not for money, but because they are Russian nationalists and consider Putin foreign policy a good idea. That's sad, and explains nicely why Russia couldn't transform into democratic country, but whatever, it doesn't mean everybody who thinks differently is paid.
You're right on the important thing, though. It's too much to expect HN to "objectively assess a topic that is under heavy propaganda from all sides". Objective assessment requires time, calm, reconsideration, and a high ratio of information per conclusion—plus a discourse in which people respond first to what is true in others' comments rather than to what is false in them. That bar is too high for an internet forum, or at least this one.
Anyway, it is well known, that Russia is spamming online forums with propaganda: http://stratrisks.com/geostrat/7796 Honestly, I've seen many, many comments like that under any article criticising Putin and Kremlin, and I feel like I can recognise common traits of these comments - apart from the message there is also the weird, even though often very sophisticated language... Many people do not know what's going on, though, that's why I decided to say something, and I don't care about down-votes.
As a Mississippi son, though, I have the good fortune to know better. After all, I doubt there are all that many hicks, rednecks, and/or crackers who participate on HN, my own humble self aside.
You seem to be reading a great deal into my statements on the subject. A more objective reading of those statements will reveal that I have uttered no more praise for Vladimir Putin than merely that he has consistently acted in Russia's interests, as is the minimal obligation of any head of state toward his nation. That's more or less what I've said about those from the West who have purported to act on Russia's behalf in recent history, as well; while I grant some of them acted in accord with their claimed motivations, others have acted in accord with their own interests and without regard to those of Russia, a claim which seems to me rather trivially defensible.
I am a citizen of the United States, and I have no particular love for Russia beyond the basic respect which any citizen of one sovereign nation may reasonably be expected to extend to another. Where you're getting the moral weighting, which you insist upon applying to my remarks in this thread, is a mystery to me, but regardless of its origins, the interpretation which results is entirely your own, and does not well represent the facts of the matter.
Of course you're welcome to your own opinion, as is anyone who participates in civil conversation, but I will thank you very kindly to desist from further accusing me of being in the pay of the Russian FSB. Quite aside from the fact that to act in such fashion would constitute a betrayal of the nation which has commanded my lifelong loyalty, I am, as already noted, subject to the laws of the United States, and I cannot imagine any way in which I could act as you've accused me of doing without placing myself in grave contravention of those laws.
[1]: http://www.exile.ru/print.php?ARTICLE_ID=6677&IBLOCK_ID=35
I'd like to say I'm not sure how you reached such an erroneous conclusion, but that wouldn't be true. I'm pretty sure that that occurred because you are proceeding from the assumption that I'm sitting in a windowless room in a Moscow office building, earning thirty-some bucks' worth of rubles a day by sitting in front of a computer typing what my FSB manager tells me to type. As I said before, you're welcome to that assumption if it pleases you to adopt it, but it's not particularly conversant with reality, not that I expect you to take my word for that.
It's dismaying that the commenter most attempting to contribute substantive discussion to this thread would be treated like this. If you want to talk about things that HN is disappointingly "not free from ... apparently", such accusations belong at the top of the list.
(My comment does not endorse aaronem's arguments, only his right not to be treated uncivilly on this site.)
And democracy in Russia is not at all my concern (and concern of my friends here and there). If things continues like this, then after the western influence is removed, Uzbekis and others will be on the plate :( Then after all Uzbekis are gone, Armenians will need to move their patriarch to Moscow... and so on.
Seriously? I'd like you to back that up. Because honestly, that's just baseless conspiracy-mongering.
I understand people don't like Rice joining Dropbox (which is what I presume you're referring to) due to her political history and leadership role in the Iraq war -- which is totally understandable, since she's a public figure with strong political associations.
But anyone suggesting that her joining Dropbox is not in order to help their international/governmental expansion (which makes perfect business sense), but is rather part of a nefarious secret plot to undermine the privacy of Dropbox users, really has to show at least a shred of evidence for it.
And implying that the level of freedom, or rule of law, in American society is somehow comparable to the level in Russian society, shows a tremendous amount of naiveté. American government certainly isn't perfect, but it's worlds apart from Russia's.
Russians, on the contrary, _know_ that equality belongs on the same bookshelf with unicorns. That the government does not work the way the government tells kids it works.
Let me be blunt: To be a seriously profitable business in 2014 you must sleep with the government.
Those who disagree retire early. Ask PrivacyHarbor.com or that other more famous email provider who had to quit.
Let me be blunter: The public's Kardashian-Oprah-Fox-Oscar-elections megatrip must not be disturbed by the reports of how things actually work. There is simply no need for us to know, because today we can't legally act on this knowledge.
If history teaches us anything, you will agree with me very soon - but in retrospect[1]. The lines are being drawn as we speak.
As for Dropbox proper, they are wisely killing 2 birds with 1 Rice — demonstrating obedience to the ruling class and sending a clear signal to potential customers: "Choose us if you want to stay in business. We are on the right side.".
------------
1 - I am fully aware that you have no idea what I am talking about. It comes from experience, which you are only about to gain.
What company wants that in their board?
Most criticism seems emotion based but no smoking guns. See comments on http://unhandledexpression.com/2013/12/17/telegram-stand-bac... also see response to the post you linked to http://telegramteam.tumblr.com/post/70588130319/telegrams-cr...
anyway i dont work for them and Surespot also looks nice. though nodejs+coffeescript at the server worries me a bit.
Facebook is a prudish and mildly authoritarian walled garden. VK smells like freedom. ;)
Who is flagging this?
Vkontakte is larger than Facebook in Russia, and the CEO has to flee due to ugly pressure. This isn't germane technology news?
Odd. You have successfully convinced me to flag this, whereas I hadn't before.
It's not a question of it being off-topic. It's a question of it spurring shallow discussion that is high on agitation (noise) and low on reflection (signal). Consider the distinguishing features of the thread:
(1) A top comment that has no substance and is merely an internet witticism to fire up the crowd;
(2) A person attempting to contribute substantively accused of being a propagandist for Putin;
(3) A predictable Snowden argument whose only connection to the story is "Russia".
You might want to reconsider the premise of flagging topics in order to facilitate ease of topic moderation. There's more to this site than merely the user discussion.
Are there any metrics that distinguish the ratio of active thread participants, versus quiet lurkers, versus users that seldom view the HN thread at all, and only look at the lists?
On a busy day at work, I'll check the RSS feed frequently, but rarely bother with HN proper. In short, this means if an article doesn't make it into the top 30 list, a (possibly-not-insignificant) portion your user base (myself included) might be effectively disinformed of the topic.
That's kind of important.
The status quo isn't ok, because it violates HN's values of substance and civility. Not having any threads at all is not an option. Selectively shutting down threads when they go off the rails seems draconian. Banning people for making poor contributions to poor threads is wrong; the same people often make good contributions elsewhere. Thoughts?
Sometimes the acrimony and the controversy is an integral part of a news story. Without the gossip from the peanut gallery, it might not be news.
Relevant social topics often smell terrible. I think it just comes with the territory...
Well, can anyone name a single one? No? Aside from AMDOCS, which seems to have jumped ship to the US to spruce up its image, or perhaps to a limited extent (versus China Unipay's domestic, now regional, and increasingly global settlement network) Mastercard/Visa and SWIFT (for international settlements only) in China, I can't. Don't forget what happened to Google in China, and how Schmidt and his political buddy then turned around and visited that great bastion of human rights, North Korea, in a transparent snub to China. Don't forget how Microsoft's Skype hands over surveillance keys for its users' private communications to the Chinese government as a market entry strategy.
Politics (control) and business (profit) really have self-organized in to a transnational network of mutual back-scratching oligopolies the world over. Here in China, domestic alternatives to global networks are encouraged (largely by limiting international bandwidth, more rarely by outright censorship) to maximise state opportunities for control and surveillance. Russia seems the same. Perhaps it's time to re-read the preface to Cypherpunks... http://cryptome.org/2012/12/assange-crypto-arms.htm
The world is not sliding, but galloping into a new transnational dystopia. This development has not been properly recognized outside of national security circles. It has been hidden by secrecy, complexity and scale. The internet, our greatest tool of emancipation, has been transformed into the most dangerous facilitator of totalitarianism we have ever seen. The internet is a threat to human civilization.
These transformations have come about silently, because those who know what is going on work in the global surveillance industry and have no incentives to speak out. Left to its own trajectory, within a few years, global civilization will be a postmodern surveillance dystopia, from which escape for all but the most skilled individuals will be impossible. In fact, we may already be there.
Recall that states are the systems which determine where and how coercive force is consistently applied.
The question of how much coercive force can seep into the platonic realm of the internet from the physical world is answered by cryptography and the cypherpunks’ ideals.
As states merge with the internet and the future of our civilization becomes the future of the internet, we must redefine force relations.
If we do not, the universality of the internet will merge global humanity into one giant grid of mass surveillance and mass control.
The sad thing is, as hyperbolic as this can sound to the uninitiated, it's reality.