Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Ukraine Asks Zuckerberg to Discipline Kremlin Facebook Bots

samzenpus posted about 2 months ago | from the bot-breaker dept.

Censorship 254

mi writes "Ukrainian media is reporting (link in Ukrainian), that Facebook is getting increasingly heavy-handed blocking Ukrainian bloggers. The likely explanation for the observed phenomenon is that Facebook's Ukrainian office is located in Russia and is headed by a Russian citizen (Catherine Skorobogatov). For example, a post calling on Russian mothers to not let their sons go to war was blocked "Due to multiple complaints". Fed up, Ukrainian users are writing directly to Zukerberg to ask him to replace Catherine with someone, who would not be quite as swayed by the "complaints" generated by Russian bots.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Maybe, but maybe not... (4, Insightful)

Frosty Piss (770223) | about 2 months ago | (#47795977)

Ah yes, only the most reliable sources at Slashdot...

But anyway, the more likely explanation is that like many social media platforms, Facebook uses automated systems to deal with thousands and thousands of content complaints every day. Usually, after a certain number of complaints, the system automatically blocks the content, and the original poster has to challenge the block. Keep in mind that due to the volume of content complaints that these types of services get, humans rarely get involved in the beginning, it is simply all automated.

It's possible and even probable that the complaints themselves are âoeorchestratedâ by people with political aims, perhaps even government employees. But that doesn't mean that Facebook is somehow âoecooperatingâ with the Russians because the head of their Russian office is, well, Russian.

Re:Maybe, but maybe not... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796009)

OK, but isn't this like a lose-lose situation for Zuckerberg? Isn't that what people want?

Re:Maybe, but maybe not... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796011)

Not public pages Russian apologist fag. Suck dick and kill yourself.

Re:Maybe, but maybe not... (3, Insightful)

Frosty Piss (770223) | about 2 months ago | (#47796161)

Not public pages Russian apologist fag. Suck dick and kill yourself.

Why not have the balls to sign in to your account and say that, troll? I'm only pointing out the obvious, not agreeing or disagreeing with any particular political view.

Re:Maybe, but maybe not... (1)

umghhh (965931) | about 2 months ago | (#47796183)

This is a war - anywhere where Ukraine or Russia are anywhere near the subject whole bunch of trolls from both sides show up and spoil the fun in English that is much worse than mine at the end of the night coding session.

Re:Maybe, but maybe not... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796737)

People take exception to being invaded and you call them trolls? Let me guess, you hate Jews too....

Re:Maybe, but maybe not... (0)

sumdumass (711423) | about 2 months ago | (#47796839)

Except the troll in question didn't take exception to being invaded, he took exception to an explanation that voided fault on anything but abuses of automated systems for the blocking of messages.

And yes, that would make them a troll when he has no evidence or presented no evidence otherwise.

Re:Maybe, but maybe not... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796191)

Enjoy your Kremlin cock motherfucker. Kill yourself.

Re:Maybe, but maybe not... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796195)

Whew, it's a good thing to see that you're using your full real name here, Mr. Frosty Piss! Otherwise, we'd have to assume that you were using some sort of a pseudonym, thus rendering you a troll. Well, it's a real relief to see that that just isn't the case!

Re:Maybe, but maybe not... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796713)

Pseudonymity and anonymity are not the same thing, dipshit.

Re:Maybe, but maybe not... (2)

William Baric (256345) | about 2 months ago | (#47796725)

I'll agree the GP is just a troll, but unless your real name is Frosty Piss, I don't think you can talk about "having balls".

Re:Maybe, but maybe not... (2)

Frosty Piss (770223) | about 2 months ago | (#47796873)

I'll agree the GP is just a troll, but unless your real name is Frosty Piss, I don't think you can talk about "having balls".

You may call me Mr. Piss (from the great state of Washington), Mr. Baric. That's Mr. Frosty Piss.

Re:Maybe, but maybe not... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796847)

Actually that was quiet reasonable response even though I think nuking Moscow from orbit is in the best interests of humanity.

Re: Maybe, but maybe not... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47797351)

Because Slashdot has become a cesspool of moronic, racist, bigots who hide under unmoderated anonymous posts.

I rarely come here anymore because of it. This site used to be so good then Digg came along and stole most of the audience. Then when digg started falling apart they scattered into the wind.

Now we have this...

Re:Maybe, but maybe not... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796035)

I believe the issue is that the head of the Ukrainian office is... Russian.

Re:Maybe, but maybe not... (5, Interesting)

Zocalo (252965) | about 2 months ago | (#47796087)

Reading between the lines of the article I think you probably got the gist of what happens, but missed the crux of the complaint. I get the impression that Ukrainians believe something like this is happening:
  1. 1. Pro-Ukraine poster makes a post.
  2. 2. Pro-Russian bots generate complaints into Facebook's automated systems.
  3. 3. The post gets automatically blocked.
  4. 4. OP appeals to the Ukrainian office to get it re-instated.
  5. 5. OP's appeal is denied because the Ukrainian office is actually in Russia and headed by an alledgedly non-neutral Russian.

There's definitely a potential problem there, and one that will probably be repeated in similar circumstances in the future. Seems to me that the best thing FB (or anyone else) can do in this situation is to remove oversight for posts made by both sides from regional offices in the area in question and hand them off to more neutral offices, at least for posts concerning the conflict.

Re:Maybe, but maybe not... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796155)

There's really no evidence of your points 4 and 5 or even a bot (though the tinfoil hat poster suggests it).

Re:Maybe, but maybe not... (4, Interesting)

Zocalo (252965) | about 2 months ago | (#47796181)

That would be why I wrote "Ukrainians believe", but given the obvious bias shown by certain elements of the media on both sides of the conflict I don't think it much of a stretch that this could actually be happening. My point though was more about the general problem here in that most tend to be local enough to fall within the territory of the same regional office for a given company, and that office is within a country with a stake in the conflict, let alone one that has a track record for having poor freedom of the press, then accusations like this are probably inevitable. Now that the issue has been highlighted, we can only hope that FB et al think about how they might deal with such potential censorship in the future.

Re:Maybe, but maybe not... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47797291)

Is "bot" now a general term for "someone who holds an opposing political view from mine"?

Re:Maybe, but maybe not... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796089)

Shut the fuck up Russian troll.

The group behind the appeal to Zuckerberg believes the blockings are a direct result of Russian intervention and are perpetrated by mass complaints from "organized groups of fake users, registered on the territory of Russian Federation." This is a reference to the infamous "Internet Research Agency," a Russian base for worldwide internet troll operations, exposed in a Novaya Gazeta investigation in 2013, and later corroborated by leaked emails from whistleblower collective Shaltai Boltai.

Speculations are rife about the scale of Russian meddling, and some users suggest there is evidence in the form of newly registered Facebook accounts with IP addresses traced to the office of the Russian troll army headquarters, "Internet Research Agency," in Saint Petersburg. Ukrainian user Mykola Voskalo on FB quotes his 'intelligence sources' and says these accounts have little to no personal information, but, strangely, list Ukrainian cities as places of residence. He adds that the network's administrators are currently monitoring these pages for suspicious activity.

The increasing abuses of Ukrainians' free speech on Facebook, the letter notes, are enabled by the fact that the Ukrainian segment of Facebook is currently managed out of the Russian office, headed by Yekaterina Skorobogatova. This situation, Ukrainian users say, invites manipulation and censorship, since the managing party might have conflicting political interests.

Problem is Facebook locates Facebook Ukraine office in Russia.

Re:Maybe, but maybe not... (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 2 months ago | (#47796163)

Where's the problem? For the Ukraine, of course, but for FB?

Re:Maybe, but maybe not... (1)

Frosty Piss (770223) | about 2 months ago | (#47796169)

Shut the fuck up Russian troll.

Perhaps you might have the balls to log into your account and say that?

I'm not taking a political stance here, only pointing out the way that content complaints work on most social media platforms.

You need to get a grip and behave like an adult if you intend on adding anything of value to the conversation, which your childish comments do not.

Re:Maybe, but maybe not... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796689)

I was wondering why he views you as a Russian sympathizer. But then I thought about how bad he makes himself and "the other side" look with his posts and started considering if he was a Russian poster slathering stfu posts to slander other view points...reminds me of a saying.

How do you know when a politician is lying? Their lips are moving.

Re:Maybe, but maybe not... (1)

quantaman (517394) | about 2 months ago | (#47796265)

Ah yes, only the most reliable sources at Slashdot...

But anyway, the more likely explanation is that like many social media platforms, Facebook uses automated systems to deal with thousands and thousands of content complaints every day. Usually, after a certain number of complaints, the system automatically blocks the content, and the original poster has to challenge the block. Keep in mind that due to the volume of content complaints that these types of services get, humans rarely get involved in the beginning, it is simply all automated.

It's possible and even probable that the complaints themselves are âoeorchestratedâ by people with political aims, perhaps even government employees. But that doesn't mean that Facebook is somehow âoecooperatingâ with the Russians because the head of their Russian office is, well, Russian.

Do you think the censorship effort would be as successful if it were being directed against pro-rebel content?

If not, then there is a legitimate complaint to be made about the partiality of the Russian office.

Why? (4, Insightful)

koan (80826) | about 2 months ago | (#47796059)

Are you using Facebook... Stop using it and take the power from that twit.

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796153)

What do you suggest instead?

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796217)

Email ffs.

Re:Why? (1)

quantaman (517394) | about 2 months ago | (#47796231)

Would you prefer they use the Kremlin run VK [wikipedia.org] ?

Wait.... what? (3, Insightful)

QuietLagoon (813062) | about 2 months ago | (#47796111)

...Facebook's Ukrainian office is located in Russia...

Whose brilliant idea was that?

Re:Wait.... what? (4, Informative)

Opportunist (166417) | about 2 months ago | (#47796129)

Probably FB's.

Where's the problem? I mean, for FB. Why should FB care whether Ukraine or Russia is winning the media war? As long as people follow it on FB, FB is winning.

Re:Wait.... what? (2, Insightful)

quantaman (517394) | about 2 months ago | (#47796243)

Probably FB's.

Where's the problem? I mean, for FB. Why should FB care whether Ukraine or Russia is winning the media war? As long as people follow it on FB, FB is winning.

In the short term maybe, but bad PR matters.

If people start associating FB with pro-Russian censorship people will think less positively of FB. Even without any kind of boycott they'll enjoy their time on FB less due to the negative association, as a result they'll use it less and potentially even open the door for a competitor a little bit more.

It's probably not a big deal as far as FB is concerned, but it's certainly not something in their favour.

Re:Wait.... what? (2)

Opportunist (166417) | about 2 months ago | (#47796729)

I think you give the average FB user far too much credit. It's going to be as usual. Everyone will complain just what kind of un-American asshole or whatever other negative attribute can be mustered FB in general and Zuckerberg in particular is, and the indignation will last exactly until whatever browser game is currently all the craze on FB and their plants need watering, their zombies need feeding or their castles need building.

Face it. People don't give a shit as long as it doesn't cut into their entertainment. Actually, if giving shit cuts into entertainment, they'd rather not give any.

Re:Wait.... what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796951)

Not everybody here is watching this "Russia evil, Ukraine good" film, so I think it doesn't really matter at all.

Re:Wait.... what? (5, Informative)

QuietLagoon (813062) | about 2 months ago | (#47796945)

...Why should FB care whether Ukraine or Russia is winning the media war?...

I hate to be the one to break it to you, but Russia and Ukraine are engaged in a little bit more than a media war.

.
Last I checked, Russia was invading eastern Ukraine.

I suspect that may bode poorly for a FB office in Russia to properly handle Ukrainian Facebook business.

Re:Wait.... what? (0, Troll)

johanw (1001493) | about 2 months ago | (#47797037)

Last time I checked, Ukraine was fighting a separatist movement that wants to liberate the east of Ukraine after a coup occured in Kiev. If the separatists have the support of the majority of the local people, why would we oppose them? When the Serbian province of Kosovo wanted independence, the US was very quick to recognize it as a separate state...

Re:Wait.... what? (4, Insightful)

Harlequin80 (1671040) | about 2 months ago | (#47797223)

It is more than a little bit more complicated then that and I would also suggest that the US where anything but very quick when it came to the break up of Yugoslavia.

Firstly as a general rule the existing countries are very very slow to recognise a break-away province as a country in its own right. This can be seen with the Basque in Spain for example. Even Catalan, an autonomous region in Spain is extremely unlikely to become a country in its own right despite being perhaps the most capable. As a whole the status quo holds.

Add into that the fact that countries like Ukraine were meant to be buffer states. States that didn't hold too closely to the west but weren't part of Russia to give Russia a sense of security. Historically Russia has seen pressure from two major geopolitical areas, Europe and China. It has become a relatively paranoid country.

When the coup occurred in Kiev it shifted the Ukraine heavily westward. Talks of become members of NATO were even brought up. To Russia this is seen as a huge threat (whether it is or not is a different argument). The perception is also that the only reason this happened was due to western agitation. As a result there is really no question that Russia began to agitate the heavily Russian parts of Ukraine to split away. It may not quite be the buffer thickness that Ukraine whole was but it is still better than nothing from their perspective.

What we are seeing here is a return to cold war mentality. This dispute is now being split along east / west lines. US good, Russia Bad or vice versa.

Unfortunately I think it is distracting the major powers from what really is posing the biggest threat and that is ISIS in the middle east. We are running the real risk of having a large militant religious state coming into existence in an already politically fragile area. And the worst thing is that Assad if the best option to stop it.

Re:Wait.... what? (3, Informative)

jonfr (888673) | about 2 months ago | (#47797411)

That "separatist movement" was paid for by Putin and his allies. Mind you there are huge resources in eastern Ukraine that Putin needs if he wants to go into war with rest of Europe as he is clearly planning to do. I also want to remind you that Russia has already annexed Crimea from Ukraine in the most illegal way found.

Kosovo is a completely different matter.

Re:Wait.... what? (2, Interesting)

ShanghaiBill (739463) | about 2 months ago | (#47796171)

...Facebook's Ukrainian office is located in Russia...

Whose brilliant idea was that?

Lots of sensible decisions look dumb in hindsight. Until a few months ago, Ukraine and Russia were on fairly good terms. Russia is Ukraine's biggest trading partner. Nearly half of Ukrainians speak Russian as their first language. So, since FB already had an office in Russia, it made sense to let that office handle Ukraine as well. Even if there was a separate office in Ukraine, the situation would not be much different. If the office was located in Donetsk or Luhansk, it would still be pro-Russian. If it was in Kiev or Lviv, it would be just as biased in the other direction.

Re:Wait.... what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796663)

Even if there was a separate office in Ukraine, the situation would not be much different. If the office was located in Donetsk or Luhansk, it would still be pro-Russian.

If it was in Donetsk or Luhansk, I think it would most likely be closed :|
Your point is completely right, though.

Re:Wait.... what? (1)

Zocalo (252965) | about 2 months ago | (#47796235)

Hmm, the plot thickens. I suspected it might just be a regional office based in Russia covering a large area of Eastern Europe that happens to include both Russia and The Ukraine that just happens to be located in Russia, which would have been a fairly sensible choice given that it has a both a larger on-line population and better technology infrastructure. That however does not appear to be the case at all. A quick search on Google shows that FB has been looking into opening a Russian office since early 2010, well before the conflict started, but while some of the stories from 2010 talk about it in the past tense, there is speculation in the future tense about it happening from 2012, and a map of FB offices around the world shows nothing in Russia. My guess is when they say "office", they really mean "department" or "desk", and it's actually most likely based either in the EU or the US.

Re:Wait.... what? (1)

Archtech (159117) | about 2 months ago | (#47796521)

...Facebook's Ukrainian office is located in Russia...

Whose brilliant idea was that?

I imagine Facebook management, on the grounds that their people would be much less likely to be killed. Ukraine is a very dangerous place at the moment - cities are being bombarded by heavy artillery and fired on with medium rockets, people whose faces don't fit are being burned alive.

Re:Wait.... what? (1)

CrimsonAvenger (580665) | about 2 months ago | (#47796691)

...Facebook's Ukrainian office is located in Russia...

Whose brilliant idea was that?

I imagine Facebook management, on the grounds that their people would be much less likely to be killed. Ukraine is a very dangerous place at the moment - cities are being bombarded by heavy artillery and fired on with medium rockets, people whose faces don't fit are being burned alive.

Facebook decided several years ago that Ukraine would be a dangerous place in late 2014, so they avoided putting offices in Ukraine?

Wow, I would never have thought of that. Guess that's why I'm not a billionaire.

Oh, and citation on that "are being burned alive" thing? I've not been paying too much attention to the situation, but I'm pretty sure I'd have remembered hearing about that....

Rules of war (0)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about 2 months ago | (#47796175)

As Ukraine is under military assault by Russia at the moment, they should abandon any complaint monitoring for the time being.

Re:Rules of war (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796187)

Military assault by Russia - really? If the Russian army was there, they would have already taken over the whole country.

Re:Rules of war (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796489)

It *is* a military assault, and it is orchestrated by Russia... but it is still a game. For example, Russia is not attempting to gain control of the airspace over Ukraine (heaven forbid they try, there are NATO air resources all around the place and those might get involved, resulting in a far larger-scale war).

It is just that for politicians to play "chicken", thousands of soldiers have to die.

On this level of the game, Russia intensively re-supplies and re-mans rebel fighters, hoping that the Ukraininan government grows desperate and starts negotiations on very favourable terms. (It pays to remember that the Ukraininan government previously proposed negotiations, during a ceasefire, but rebels rejected this.) Meanwhile, the Ukraininan government is trying to solicit foreign financial and military aid, to outlast and push back the offensive and negotiate when very serious economic sanctions have been enacted against Russia.

For the soldiers who die, and the civilians who die from collateral damage, rest assured, this is not a game, and I (as an anarchist) would very much prefer if some helpful person would take out the trash that is called Vladimir Putin (and if it's necessary, then also Petro Poroshenko, though it must be said that he did't start this - he was hired when shit was alreadu spinning with the fan).

Re:Rules of war (0)

johanw (1001493) | about 2 months ago | (#47797049)

"It *is* a military assault, and it is orchestrated by Russia... "

And all those Blackwater (or whatever they call themselves now) mercenaries and US "advisors" fighting on the West Ukrainian government count as US milirtary assault?

Re:Rules of war (5, Interesting)

phantomfive (622387) | about 2 months ago | (#47797543)

(heaven forbid they try, there are NATO air resources all around the place and those might get involved, resulting in a far larger-scale war).

NATO will not go to war with Russia over Ukraine. None of the members of NATO have that obligation since Ukraine is not a member, and moreover, none of them want to risk lives to defend Ukraine. It's a similar situation to Hungary in the 50s......did anyone help them? Of that situation, Krushkev said:

"In a newspaper interview in 1957, Khrushchev commented "support by United States ... is rather in the nature of the support that the rope gives to a hanged man."

Re:Rules of war (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796699)

If Russia didn't care about international opinion/backlash you are probably correct except for the possible insurgency after the fact. They manifestly care about international opinion though Putin seems to really enjoy playing the game.

Re:Rules of war (1)

theshowmecanuck (703852) | about 2 months ago | (#47796849)

But they'll still get the World Cup because Sepp Blatter is a Douche (with a capital D).

Re:Rules of war (1)

jklovanc (1603149) | about 2 months ago | (#47796809)

I guess you dont know how to do a google search [google.ca] . Russia has not gone all out but they are there.

Re:Rules of war (0, Flamebait)

Archtech (159117) | about 2 months ago | (#47796561)

As Ukraine is under military assault by Russia at the moment, they should abandon any complaint monitoring for the time being.

That turns out not to be the case. The Ukrainian army - which is rapidly running out of effectives who are willing to lay down their lives for billionaire Nazi oligarchs - has been severely mauled by the militias formed to defend the area around Donetsk and Lugansk. As Americans would form militias to fight for their homes if an army trundled into their state and began bombarding city centres.

It has often been mentioned that most (if not all) of the equipment is Russian. Doh... all the ex-Soviet republics had large amounts of Soviet (i.e. Russian) weapons, vehicles and aircraft. The Ukrainian armed forces use them exclusively - and the militia have some (more every day) that they grabbed from local arsenals, or acquired after the Ukrainian troops ran away, surrendered, or went for a brief holiday in Russia.

Now some of the militiamen may have been trained in Russia, or by Russians. Thanks goodness the USA never trains armed rebels in nations like Afghanistan, Syria, Libya... or gives them sophisticated military equipment and training. The difference is that the militias in Ukraine are defending their homes, families and friends against unprovoked attacks by full-scale military forces. They talk Russian because, to all intents and purposes, they ARE Russian - like almost everyone in Crimea.

Re:Rules of war (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796613)

Get a perspective or something.

When the "local militias" chose to take over Donetsk International Airport in June, and were ousted by Ukrainian marines, the coffins were sent mostly to Russia and Chechnia. Yeah right, locals took up arms to defend themselves.

Yes, there are some locals fighting. They are not the most agressive, and their numbers are dropping. There is scarecely any equipment seized by locals left. Nearly all of the heavy equipment has been deliberately supplied by Russian state.

Re:Rules of war (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796661)

...which leads me to the conclusion: without promises by the Russian state ("go ahead, we'll help you"), without money from the Russian state ("$500 for helping in a takeover of an official building"), without initial equipment and covert operatives from the Russian state (remember that photo of the bearded GRU guys?), without subsequent heavy equipment from the Russian state, and without the latest inflush of equipment operated by flat out Russian servicemen... ...Ukrainians of all stripe might have negotiated a solution for themselves, the infrastructure of two oblasts might have been not destroyed, and many thousands of lives might have been spared.

Do you perhaps remember, what Poroshenko offered when he came to power? He offered significant decentralization and guarantees for the status of Russian language. Unfortunately, people who had been fed euphoria and bullishit from the Putinoids rejected all of those advances, and could be only approached by armed personnel. Which is bloody sad.

Re: Rules of war (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47797005)

Poroshenkio offered nothing really. No guarantees, no real federalization of Ukraine. I

Re:Rules of war (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796667)

Also, winter is coming, and they soon won't have Russian gas. If the Ukrainian coup leaders can't get US support in the next few months, their side of the country is facing economic collapse.

Which is why they keep claiming 'The Russians Are Invading!' when any sane person can see Putin has no incentive whatsoever to do so.

BTW, whatever happened to MH17? Wasn't there going to be solid proof that the rebels shot it down, thanks to the flight recorders, and all those US satellites watching the area?

Re:Rules of war (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796773)

Putin... has reaped significant benefits from this already. His popularity ratings have rosen signigicantly since the war started - unfortunately the natural reaction of people during a war is to rally behind their leaders.

(Especially if the leaders have previously seized control over mass media, dictating what kind of messages television and radio will convey. For your information, unless you are from there, only print and internet media remain contested territory in Russia. TV and radio are under firm state control.)

He had incentive to seize Crimea and tell bold-faced lies about it during the process. His image as a strongman depends on overcoming Ukraine.

Regarding winter... they don't need winter. They are already undergoing economic collapse, with infrastructure supplying a (previously) 2-million city destroyed and smaller towns unplugged too (from not only gas, but electrical and water supply). Yet I must admit, the folks in Harkiv still seem to manufacture those cheap hydraulics which I buy from them. Ukraine *is* very dependent on gas, but it also has a dozen of locally operated nuclear power stations. The latest craze in Kiev seems to be buying electric heaters.

Re:Rules of war (3, Insightful)

Carewolf (581105) | about 2 months ago | (#47796819)

As Ukraine is under military assault by Russia at the moment, they should abandon any complaint monitoring for the time being.

That turns out not to be the case. The Ukrainian army - which is rapidly running out of effectives who are willing to lay down their lives for billionaire Nazi oligarchs - has been severely mauled by the militias formed to defend the area around Donetsk and Lugansk. As Americans would form militias to fight for their homes if an army trundled into their state and began bombarding city centres.

Turns out? Turns out?

The legal government led by the newly democratically elected president of the Ukraine was winning and driving the rebels out of even their stongholds like Luhansk, before the Russians decided to openly intervene instead of just sending "soldiers on holliday" and anti-maylasia air systems.

Now, as in the latest few days the Ukraines are withdrawing, they havn't lost any engagements yet, but are moving to better prositions and waiting for international reactions before engaging the invading Russian troops.

Re:Rules of war (2, Insightful)

fnj (64210) | about 2 months ago | (#47796899)

My considered opinion is that the Ukrainian military is not motivated, not trained, not equipped, not professional, and not reliable. They are heading for the hills because they can't endure the battle which is their duty. They will have a long, long, long wait if they wait for mommy in the form of "international reaction" to punish their bullies.

My assessment does not rely on the completely unsupported phantasm of OMG Russian troops. I don't give it because it pleases me that the situation is this way, but I decline to warp my view of the situation to fit my fantasy of how things ought to be.

Re:Rules of war (2)

Carewolf (581105) | about 2 months ago | (#47796997)

My considered opinion is that the Ukrainian military is not motivated, not trained, not equipped, not professional, and not reliable. They are heading for the hills because they can't endure the battle which is their duty. They will have a long, long, long wait if they wait for mommy in the form of "international reaction" to punish their bullies.

My assessment does not rely on the completely unsupported phantasm of OMG Russian troops. I don't give it because it pleases me that the situation is this way, but I decline to warp my view of the situation to fit my fantasy of how things ought to be.

Actually it turns out I was wrong, they have been engaging the invading forces heavily and lost, though also it appears the group called "Mothers of Russia" are starting to report about missing sons and bodies coming back.

Am I the only one... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796225)

Who thinks that headline sounds really kinky?

How I know that Russian troops are not in Ukraine (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796287)

Want to point out that all this talk about a 1000 Russian soldiers in Ukraine makes me frown sceptically. As the war of 08.08.08 in Abhasia and Georgia shown, Putin is, while ruthless, in not at all stupid, would do anything to defend Russia's interests and plays for keeps.

If he wanted to invade Ukraine, it would not be a 1000 troops, it would be 100,000 troops, full backing of the Russian tanks, full air superiority, etc. Ukraine, as Georgia 6 years ago, would crumble in days. Compared to what Russia could do to Ukraine, what's going on in Ukraine right now is a tempest in a teapot.

Now, is Russia involved? Yes, same way as the NATO is involved, funneling money to one of the sides. Are mercenaries with Russian citizenship fighting in Ukraine? Yes, same as Poles, Americans, Czechs, Serbs, etc. some true dogs of war, some just idealistic and following their ideas. But all of this doesn't mean that Russia has Russian troops in Ukraine (and since for sure someone will bring up 10, or however many Russian border guards that blundered over unmarked border to Ukraine, I can't help but point out that hundreds of Ukrainian soldiers that cross over to Russian territory, regularly get handed over back to Ukraine with no penalties and no declaration of war)

Ukrainian politicians, if they want to have a hope in hell of keeping control of their own country, should stop blaming others for the deep dark hole that they got their country into, for their own internal civil war, and sort it out amongst themselves, pronto. Otherwise, Ukraine will end up being parceled out between Russia, Romania, Hungary and Poland.

Re:How I know that Russian troops are not in Ukrai (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796451)

Here's a tip, my Russian friend: if you want to pretend to be a neutral observer on the Ukrainian conflict in an internet forum, then you'd do better to proofread your post again and again until you manage to remove the little telltale signs that your native language is Russian. No informed reader of your post above is going to be convinced you don't have a significant dog in this fight.

Re:How I know that Russian troops are not in Ukrai (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796483)

lets dismiss all the logical points he made and just claim he's bias and Russian so his opinion isn't valid or discussed with a modicum of intelligence

Re:How I know that Russian troops are not in Ukrai (1)

Archtech (159117) | about 2 months ago | (#47796585)

Yes, because anyone who speaks Russian (or Ukrainian) obviously wouldn't know anything about the situation in Russia or Ukraine. Better listen to armchair pundits who never leave their easy chairs in New York.

Oh wait.

Actually Russians not well informed ... (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796707)

Yes, because anyone who speaks Russian (or Ukrainian) obviously wouldn't know anything about the situation in Russia or Ukraine. Better listen to armchair pundits who never leave their easy chairs in New York. Oh wait.

In short, Russians are about as well informed today as the German people were in 1939 when Hitler invaded Poland. You got much more accurate information out of London and New York both in 1939 and today.

A person in New York would be so better informed than a person in Russian that it would be ridiculous. Russian media and nearly all discussion is Kremlin controlled. There is no free flow of information to make reasoned judgments upon unless you are in the west. So some of the nonsense coming out or Russia is not intentional, its all its people have been told. When they refer to the Ukrainians as Nazi's its not really a historical reference. They actually think a neo-Nazi coup has taken place in Kiev. They have never hear the truth that a corrupt President feared growing calls for investigation and prosecution, that his security services used deadly force about peaceful protesters to quiet these growing calls, took his money and fled, and was replaced in new elections called for after abandoning his post.

In the West we can watch the RT network (a Kremlin controlled network) and dozens of other networks with political biases ranging from the far left to the far right. We can compare and contrast. In Russia you get RT's perspective and only the information they provide.

And for those going to more modern news sources, to social networks, well you see what is happening on facebook. More heavy Kremlin influence in the Russia.

Re:Actually Russians not well informed ... (2)

Opportunist (166417) | about 2 months ago | (#47796799)

Talking about RT, if you really want to have a laugh, watch RT back to back with your favorite European/US news network. It's amazing how the same pictures with different commentary tell exactly the opposite story.

Fuck news. Everyone lies.

Re:Actually Russians not well informed ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796835)

Funny that you mention it, but several blog sites have been discussing the situation in eastern Ukraine for weeks, including the encirclement and destruction of lots of troops, complete with locations, maps, uploaded videos and pretty decent forecasts of what they expect next, while the western media was unanimously painting a one side fiction with the Ukranian army at the verge of complete victory.

EVERY SINGLE MSM outlet has been lying through the teeth about the whole situation and taking verbatim declarations from the Ukraine government as an article of faith, including ghost columns invading at least six times and vanishing in the thin air without any evidence whatsoever and when finally the disaster that was the offensive came to its natural conclusion, all I hear is "the Russians are coming time for Ukraine to join NATO!!!"

Thats what your "informed New Yorker\Londoner" "knows" based in the garbage spouted by most news sources and is no better or worse than what you average Muscovite got from theirs, is simply painted in a different color.

Also, you are a ** idiot. Russians have the same access to on-line version of most news sources as you do and are nowhere close to the one side orchestrated brainwashing that we in the west have to endure.

Re:Actually Russians not well informed ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47797341)

Here, on this parent post, and many Western and pro-Western audiences strongly believe that their medias are free, un-bias. Then what ever the 'other-side' news, informations, special from 'unfriendly' sources will be marked 'untruthful' sources.

That is, although may be they watching/listening all these sources but they finally still believe in their 'truthful' sources only.

OTOH, people from Russia or some 'communist-bloc', from whom I've met, rather trust 'alternative' news rather than 'pro-government' medias.

Here how 'mainstream' medias in the West completely ignored the Nazi or use 'rhetoric' skill to dismiss the roll of Nazi in the Ukraine government:

http://consortiumnews.com/2014/08/13/ignoring-ukraines-neo-nazi-storm-troopers/
http://consortiumnews.com/2014/08/10/nyt-discovers-ukraines-neo-nazis-at-war/

Re:How I know that Russian troops are not in Ukrai (2)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | about 2 months ago | (#47796801)

Here's a tip, my Russian friend: if you want to pretend to be a neutral observer on the Ukrainian conflict in an internet forum, then you'd do better to proofread your post again and again until you manage to remove the little telltale signs that your native language is Russian. No informed reader of your post above is going to be convinced you don't have a significant dog in this fight.

You know, maybe some of us should complain to Slashdot about the Obama/Poroshenko-bots that reliably and consistently troll every single story about this conflict? You know, the ones who imply that anyone who even slightly skeptical about the propaganda we're all being fed, must be Russian or a paid Kremlin propagandist?

Suck on this. I'm a native English speaker from the UK, I have never been to Russia, I have been reading Slashdot for about 14-15 years, posting for most of that time too. And the Anonymous Coward tells it like it is. Poroshenko has claimed Ukraine was invaded like ten times already. He claimed he was being "invaded" by a fucking aid convoy, including after Putin's honesty about it's contents had been verified by international journalists and the Red Cross. In fact he asserted he'd shell said convoy, so the Red Cross chickened out, but the crazy Russians just drove right in there and delivered that aid anyway.

So as a native speaker, please heed my call - let's all stop abusing the English language shall we? We know what an invasion looks like. It looks like what the USA did to Iraq. It looks like Russian flags flying above Kiev and Russian tanks rolling down the streets to the parliament building. It does not look like journalists scrabbling around presenting the testimony of a milkmaid in a farcical attempt to find an army, as the Guardian did only a few days ago. Now condemn Putin for militarily supporting the rebels if you like (though the proof of this is wafer thin as well), just be aware that this is something many countries do, including the ones that are currently being most shrill about Ukraine. So such an argument doesn't have much impact, unfortunately, though I wish we lived in a world where it did.

Re:How I know that Russian troops are not in Ukrai (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47797115)

Suck on this. I'm a native English speaker from the UK, I have never been to Russia

The UK most certainly has a dog in this fight, Russian money is a significant factor in your economy.

It's not a coincidence that there also happens to be a lot of pro-Russian sentiment in England.

Re:How I know that Russian troops are not in Ukrai (3, Insightful)

fnj (64210) | about 2 months ago | (#47796929)

Here's a tip, my Russian friend, blah blah remove the little telltale signs that your native language is Russian blah blah

Funny, grandparent did not show me any "telltale signs" at all, and I am pretty sensitive to awkward phraseology one finds in non native speakers. Not that being a non native speaker is in any way naughty or evil. His post is actually well composed, thoughtful, highly cogent (unlike yours), and makes excellent points.

Perhaps you would be good enough to elaborate on these "telltale signs". You can regard that as calling bullshit if you so wish.

It is parent who strikes me as being very partisan. That's not a bad thing per se, except when you believe you are accomplished anything by spouting blather and no meaningful debate.

Re:How I know that Russian troops are not in Ukrai (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47797285)

Wow! NSA-bots are really degraded, may be effect of cutting budget?
I really missed ColdFjord, at least, this bot have basic intelligence and can make some meaningful discussions.

Re:How I know that Russian troops are not in Ukrai (1)

Carewolf (581105) | about 2 months ago | (#47796865)

100.000? I would suggest he send 200.000. Ukraine is not a small country like Georgia, a 100.000 is not enough if he wants to take all of it.

Still it would be a stupid thing to do. He needs to keep a soft hand approach to maintain whatever fig leafs that is his plausible denibilty and avoid reopening the iron curtain thereby completely destroying the modern Russian economy. When not only the US and Europe but also China and Japan strongly disapproves with your actions and are invoking sanctions, you are really setting yourself up for some serious isolation.

Re:How I know that Russian troops are not in Ukrai (1)

johanw (1001493) | about 2 months ago | (#47797081)

"Ukrainian politicians, if they want to have a hope in hell of keeping control of their own country, should stop blaming others for the deep dark hole that they got their country into, for their own internal civil war, and sort it out amongst themselves, pronto. Otherwise, Ukraine will end up being parceled out between Russia, Romania, Hungary and Poland."

Which would be probably the best solution anyway.

Does it matter (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796299)

If the head office for that part of FB is in Russia, wouldn't they just "explain" to the new person in charge how things work and the end result would be the same after a brief few hours where there was no one in place

Zuk Don't Care (2, Insightful)

felrom (2923513) | about 2 months ago | (#47796323)

Funny that the Ukrainians think Zuckerberg cares. He's the worst kind of anti-freedom, in-bed-with-the-government, limousine socialist there is. Mr. Open-All-The-Borders hides behind his armed guards at his gated mansion so he wont have to be burdened with the consequences of his actions. Appealing to Zuckerberg to stop blocking their social media efforts is going to have about as much effect as appealing directly to Putin to stop invading.

Some people might unfairly judge Ukraine (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796333)

Some people might look at all the news reports, and not being used to propaganda, paint Ukraine in a worse light that reality. The reality is that the Kremlin is putting out propaganda just like the old Tass news days when Stalin, Kruschev and Brezhnev were running the show. The brinksmanship, the threats, the aggression, coercion, and rolling tanks, armoured personnel carriers, rockets, heavy field guns, anti-aircraft guns, and airbourne troops into another country is just like what they did in Czecheslovakia or Poland or Hungary or a dozen other countries over the last 50 years (lets be more recent and not forget the 20% of Georgia they stole in 2002 or the entire Crimea they stole just 6 months ago). This is naked Russian aggression. "We are armed to the teeth with nuclear bombs and if you dare do anything to stop us from shooting up whoever we want boy will we blow you to smithereens". But they had better be careful, because they aren't the only ones with nuclear bombs, and at some point enough is enough and in the world of high stakes poker "I call". They will have to test their weapons and see if they are as good as they say, and will be looking at lots of x-rays (and by God they sure have earned it).

Re:Some people might unfairly judge Ukraine (1, Insightful)

Archtech (159117) | about 2 months ago | (#47796611)

"...rolling tanks, armoured personnel carriers, rockets, heavy field guns, anti-aircraft guns, and airbourne troops into another country is just like what they did in Czecheslovakia or Poland or Hungary or a dozen other countries over the last 50 years..."

Sorry, that's utter rubbish.

1. If Russia had been "rolling tanks, armoured personnel carriers, rockets, heavy field guns, anti-aircraft guns, and airbourne [sic] troops" into Ukraine, it would have been subdued within a week at most - just as Czechoslovakia (sp) and Poland and Hungary were subdued, despite being far better organized than Ukraine today.

2. Hello! This is Russia - which, in case you hadn't noticed, is different from the USSR. Of course, if you are desperate to have a Hideous Giant Foreign Enemy at all times, and you can't do better than Mr Putin, have at it. But do remember that he can push a button and destroy all life on earth, so the USA has no advantage whatsoever in that regard. And do, please, remember that he is human and can get angry or make mistakes. So please - for all our sakes - don't push him too hard. If you are one of those Rapture nutcases, please just go and kill yourself, and leave the rest of us out of it.

Re:Some people might unfairly judge Ukraine (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796717)

2. Hello! This is Russia - which, in case you hadn't noticed, is different from the USSR.

No, I haven't noticed. In what way?

Re:Some people might unfairly judge Ukraine (2)

Opportunist (166417) | about 2 months ago | (#47796813)

They trades socialist for fascist. In other words, now we don't need to hate them for being so different, we can hate them for showing us the ugly side of ourselves.

Only the forces necessary, then and now ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796733)

"...rolling tanks, armoured personnel carriers, rockets, heavy field guns, anti-aircraft guns, and airbourne troops into another country is just like what they did in Czecheslovakia or Poland or Hungary or a dozen other countries over the last 50 years..."

Sorry, that's utter rubbish. 1. If Russia had been "rolling tanks, armoured personnel carriers, rockets, heavy field guns, anti-aircraft guns, and airbourne [sic] troops" into Ukraine, it would have been subdued within a week at most - just as Czechoslovakia (sp) and Poland and Hungary were subdued, despite being far better organized than Ukraine today.

Your post is quite silly to put it gently. Russia has been rolling all those things into the Ukraine. What you naively fail to consider is that it is rolling them in numbers only necessary to reestablish control. None of the armed interventions in eastern europe during the soviet era were full scale invasions. They used only the forces they needed to. And so they do once again. Being far better equipped and organized means you can accomplish strategic goals with only 1,000.

Re:Only the forces necessary, then and now ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796963)

"...rolling tanks, armoured personnel carriers, rockets, heavy field guns, anti-aircraft guns, and airbourne troops into another country is just like what they did in Czecheslovakia or Poland or Hungary or a dozen other countries over the last 50 years..."

Sorry, that's utter rubbish. 1. If Russia had been "rolling tanks, armoured personnel carriers, rockets, heavy field guns, anti-aircraft guns, and airbourne [sic] troops" into Ukraine, it would have been subdued within a week at most - just as Czechoslovakia (sp) and Poland and Hungary were subdued, despite being far better organized than Ukraine today.

Your post is quite silly to put it gently. Russia has been rolling all those things into the Ukraine.

Funny, with all the surveillance tech available not a single proof surfaced yet so far, only claims made by Rasmussen, Poroshenko, and the likes.

Re:Only the forces necessary, then and now ... (1)

fnj (64210) | about 2 months ago | (#47796975)

Your post is quite silly to put it gently. Russia has been rolling all those things into the Ukraine. What you naively fail to consider is that it is rolling them in numbers only necessary to reestablish control. None of the armed interventions in eastern europe during the soviet era were full scale invasions. They used only the forces they needed to. And so they do once again. Being far better equipped and organized means you can accomplish strategic goals with only 1,000.

But you are not willing to present a single shred of credible evidence of any Russian military formations rolling into Ukraine. You also suffer from an amusing mania in which you view Russian military prowess not just in due earned respect, but positive awe as some kind of superhumans. How you expect 1000 troops with no air support to have any significant effect against a nation of 50 million is just baffling. That is, if that nation were motivated. But we all know the Ukraine military is not motivated, not trained, not equipped, and not capable, don't we?

Re:Some people might unfairly judge Ukraine (1)

rossz (67331) | about 2 months ago | (#47796765)

Now I know you are a hard core Russian. You are denying your despot government never did anything in Hungary? What happened in 1956 is so well documented that only a moron who believes his own lies could possibly deny it happened.

Re:Some people might unfairly judge Ukraine (1)

bloodhawk (813939) | about 2 months ago | (#47797083)

I don't think he denied anything, the fact you are equating the USSR and Russia is a problem though. Ukraine was part of what happened in Hungary so why are you blaming only Russia? Ukraine was as much a core of the USSR as Russia was back then.

Re:Some people might unfairly judge Ukraine (1)

Nostalgia4Infinity (3752305) | about 2 months ago | (#47797217)

With the exception of having any say in foreign or domestic policy of course.

Re:Some people might unfairly judge Ukraine (4, Insightful)

rossz (67331) | about 2 months ago | (#47796789)

2. Hello! This is Russia - which, in case you hadn't noticed, is different from the USSR

Not really. In the eyes of most of the world, the names may have changed, but you still act the same.

Re:Some people might unfairly judge Ukraine (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47797095)

They are unapologetically acting like the USSR; using the old national song as the basis of russia's national anthem is like the Germans taking up "deutchland, deutchland uber alles". The USSR was one big fucking ethnic cleansing, just wasn't as efficient as the Germans but they did manage to ruin a few neighboring countries by mass deportations.

Of course they're mad... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796399)

Nazis don't appreciate dissenting opinions.

If this was happening in or near Kiev, the posters could be tracked down and have an "accident" but the Kiev regime is quite impotent outside of their little sphere of fascist totalitarian influence.

Disciplining a bot? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47796447)

What's the point of disciplining a bot? Since when do bots respond in any useful way to being disciplined?
Even if you put a bot to death, others just like it will spring up to fill the void.

Re:Disciplining a bot? (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 2 months ago | (#47796815)

Bad bot. Bad bot. No cookie!

Why are the Ukrainians using facebook? (2)

Karmashock (2415832) | about 2 months ago | (#47796617)

Seriously, setting up a social networking site is technically very simple. We have thousands of them. Why are the Ukrainians using an American system that has been compromised by crippling political correctness, is administered by Russians... aka the enemy, and all the other crap you could possibly windge on about facebook.

Why use it? Just set up your own social network, get people to join, and let the kids send profane selfies at each other.

Problem solved.

Happily ever after.

Re:Why are the Ukrainians using facebook? (4, Insightful)

Opportunist (166417) | about 2 months ago | (#47796825)

The freedom to speak is worthless if there is nobody to listen to you. In other words, nobody hears you scream on the internet, unless you're screaming where everyone is listening.

Re:Why are the Ukrainians using facebook? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47797131)

The freedom to speak is worthless if there is nobody to listen to you. In other words, nobody hears you scream on the internet, unless you're screaming where everyone is listening.

The worthlessness is an illusion, actually. We say it now because we've tasted *network* effects, which are a thousand times "louder" for screaming in an internet that was comparatively deaf next to today (but lots more private and exclusive)

If you really think that people don't like talking to "themselves," let me refresh your membery Remember the time before Facebook where WE were learning to talk despite having nobody in the room? We the people, speaking as the less-technical masses rather than YOU self-hosting minority, did it through Geocities pages + email feedback, early Blogs + comment systems + forums. To help alleviate the feeing of "man, how empty IS this room and how weird AM I for talking or for listening in it", remember the lost relic of putting images that were webpage visit counters?

Before facebook or even google... before SEO, people felt nothing for the risk of starting out some website about nothing, or about some niche, and just speaking to the virtual nothingness... and yet people were able to find visitors with primitive search engines, webrings and word of mouth.
You may come to the realization that some people don't like sharing so much as making a lasting note that they can refer to later, because "those who forget history..." and because nobody likes keeping a pen and paper journal these days. That others can review it and comment, helping us "grow" (potentially... heh!) is just a plus. You sometimes just want to vent. I was looking for a blog system the other day and ended up just keeping a Tiddlywiki in my harddrive, even if nobody else can read it.

Re:Why are the Ukrainians using facebook? (1)

djscoumoune (1731422) | about 2 months ago | (#47797471)

Ukrainians are using VK not Facebook. The Ukrainian government -helped by the Americans- has been accusing the Russians and the anti-Kiev of pretty much anything so I wouldn't trust them too much. The brain records things as true when it recieves a quantity of information even if they're all false, as opposed to a few quality information pieces. Everyday you'll hear about something bad Putin has supposedly done but if it's true why do they need to tell small infos like that everyday ? Remember there are many American foundations behind the Ukrainian governement. And Snowden is now a Russian resident if it can help you distinguinsh in what country the freedom of speech is.

Just run your own blog (1)

rainer_d (115765) | about 2 months ago | (#47796803)

Either host yourself or use wordpress.com or whatever blog-site there is.
Seriously, who cares about Facebook postings anyway? Are these people a bunch of 12 year olds?
I don't need a FB account to know that I probably can't differentiate between official propaganda, astroturfers, shills and real eye-witness reports - on both sides.

Maybe Ukraine should buy more ads on FB - that usually helps...

obvious flaw with an obvious solution (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47797057)

facebook is always going to be biased. always. so why do people even use it? oh yeah, that's right, infinite ego inflation. the minute facebook and all these newfangled services started cropping up, the internet has taken a huge turn for the worst. and yet people worship zuckerberg for creating it. only thing that he did was debase the value of the internet and make it more accessible to people with even more fragile egos than before. never thought it was possible, but mission accomplished.

Problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47797499)

Facebook King Zuckerberg is gay. Although married to a chinese woman, for strategic interests in China, he hates women.

Sorry for that.

Uh Oh. The Politburo of China know this fact.

Self-solved (0)

manu0601 (2221348) | about 2 months ago | (#47797515)

If Kiev government does not stop soon the civil war against their own eastern region, the problem will be self solved, as nobody in Ukraine will be able to afford Internet access anymore.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?