this post was submitted on 14 Dec 2024
21 points (100.0% liked)
U.S. News
2252 readers
129 users here now
News about and pertaining to the United States and its people.
Please read what's functionally the mission statement before posting for the first time. We have a narrower definition of news than you might be accustomed to.
Guidelines for submissions:
- Post the original source of information as the link.
- If there is any Nazi imagery in the linked story, mark your post NSFW.
- If there is a paywall, provide an archive link in the body.
- Post using the original headline; edits for clarity (as in providing crucial info a clickbait hed omits) are fine.
- Social media is not a news source.
For World News, see the News community.
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
... and yet, North Koreans did this work, and I addressed the money issue from the regime-level down.
Stealing Identities to get work does not imply the ruined the credit of those people. Getting worked up over this is NOT all that far off from getting worked up over immigrant laborers stealing identities so they can work and feed their families, or recieve food stamps or medical care. At least those last two kinda-sorta have victims, and yet I still prefer immigrants be able to eat.
Sorry, you're not going to be able to get me to buy into the fear-mongering hysteria-machine by apeing thier narratives. I'm not saying your arguments are invalid, just addressing them from the same surface-level reading you gave mine.
From the article
Correct me if I'm wrong, but North Korean civilians have no access to internet.
Rather spies, soldiers, whatever, work remotely for western companies than whatever other bull their government wants them doing.
There's a height of feigned ignorance. There's no chance the money goes anywhere than directly to the military government. Not to "families".
... and? Yeah, welcome to the thread. At what point do I say otherwise?
Starving the regime is not an excuse to starve the country. The regime doing anything that brings in more money than it spends is a better use of its time than other things it tries to do, and will continue attempting regardless of cash-flow.
Call me when you're ready to impiment a no-fly zone and mass air-dropping/smuggling of Starlink, Cell Phones, Cell Towers(stand-alone, like the Stinger, only in reverse), weapons, and most importantly, food.
Are you ready to do something about the problem of starving North Koreans, or do we just continue blaming it entirely on their government?
... yeah, that will show them. Meanwhile, do you even begin to understand how food is distributed within North Korea?
India and Pakistan, circa 1998 ... You're telling us the world ended because we didn't starve them all out.
These people didn't work to 'feed their families'. Their families likely didn't benefit at all from this scheme.
The presence of remote working itself exposes the flaws with the arguer's chain of comments. It is (and it is funny that I can actually make this conclusion) impossible that the money does not go directly to the North Korea regime. North Korean civilians have no internet.
How do you know?
It is directly in the article. It is impossible for civilians to do this. In an absolute sense.
Lastly, the aggressive countering nature of this comment was unnecessary if you were merely seeking clarification.
I know of nothing whatsoever that proves this. The article certainly doesn't clarify anything to that effect.
It was four words, without any emphasis. I deliberately wrote my comment to be simple and calm. Any aggression you've interpreted is on you, not me, and I suspect you only read it that way due a to a pre-existing negative opinion of me.
Yet you dispute things which reference it without trying to learn more about it yourself. Instead you ask others and dispute them like it is owed to you.
It is not anyone's problem in particular that someone doesn't know something. You could've ignored the post and comments, or you could've genuinely sought to know more if you cared. While putting in your own effort to supplement it.
Perhaps I could plaster everything you say with 'how do you know'. Not that I'm going to do it because I know how malicious doing so would be. The lack of elaboration in dispute is anything but 'simple and calm' because your question puts the obligation on the person saying anything to absolutely answer to you without the assurance that you actually care about the topic and want to know more, and not that you do not care about the topic regardless. Elaborate more. That would be simple and calm, if the elaboration were put in a simple and calm manner.
Repeating the same tired gibberish with no elabbration, much?
These aren't 'common' IT workers seeking a job but spies working for North Korea as the article says. What should I elaborate here?