this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2024
402 points (85.0% liked)
NonCredibleDefense
6625 readers
1035 users here now
A community for your defence shitposting needs
Rules
1. Be nice
Do not make personal attacks against each other, call for violence against anyone, or intentionally antagonize people in the comment sections.
2. Explain incorrect defense articles and takes
If you want to post a non-credible take, it must be from a "credible" source (news article, politician, or military leader) and must have a comment laying out exactly why it's non-credible. Low-hanging fruit such as random Twitter and YouTube comments belong in the Matrix chat.
3. Content must be relevant
Posts must be about military hardware or international security/defense. This is not the page to fawn over Youtube personalities, simp over political leaders, or discuss other areas of international policy.
4. No racism / hatespeech
No slurs. No advocating for the killing of people or insulting them based on physical, religious, or ideological traits.
5. No politics
We don't care if you're Republican, Democrat, Socialist, Stalinist, Baathist, or some other hot mess. Leave it at the door. This applies to comments as well.
6. No seriousposting
We don't want your uncut war footage, fundraisers, credible news articles, or other such things. The world is already serious enough as it is.
7. No classified material
Classified ‘western’ information is off limits regardless of how "open source" and "easy to find" it is.
8. Source artwork
If you use somebody's art in your post or as your post, the OP must provide a direct link to the art's source in the comment section, or a good reason why this was not possible (such as the artist deleting their account). The source should be a place that the artist themselves uploaded the art. A booru is not a source. A watermark is not a source.
9. No low-effort posts
No egregiously low effort posts. E.g. screenshots, recent reposts, simple reaction & template memes, and images with the punchline in the title. Put these in weekly Matrix chat instead.
10. Don't get us banned
No brigading or harassing other communities. Do not post memes with a "haha people that I hate died… haha" punchline or violating the sh.itjust.works rules (below). This includes content illegal in Canada.
11. No misinformation
NCD exists to make fun of misinformation, not to spread it. Make outlandish claims, but if your take doesn’t show signs of satire or exaggeration it will be removed. Misleading content may result in a ban. Regardless of source, don’t post obvious propaganda or fake news. Double-check facts and don't be an idiot.
Join our Matrix chatroom
Other communities you may be interested in
- !militaryporn@lemmy.world
- !forgottenweapons@lemmy.world
- !combatvideos@sh.itjust.works
- !militarymoe@ani.social
Banner made by u/Fertility18
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
🤨
🤨🤨🤨🤨
Careful. I heard about this guy on the news. Apparently he's a famous hacker, goes by the name Four Chan.
Oh shit I think we finally found Lim Fao!
Very cute but there are reports of people analyzing the pagers and not finding any evidence of explosives. This is a developing story so maybe this will come to not but your incredulity doesn't change these facts in the ground.
And if you were even a little familiar with lithium battery fires you'd know such reports don't match up with the reports of exploding pagers killing people. So which is it?
We've had numerous cases of phones catching on fire in people's pockets and resulting in horrible burns throughout the years, but how many of these have killed people? A lithium battery is an incendiary device under the right circumstances, not an explosive one. And you need a bigger battery than one in a pager to cause enough damage in a short enough timeframe to kill a person before they can save themselves.
Not to mention that it's not a simple matter to make a lithium battery catch on fire remotely. What are they gonna do, try to draw more current than the battery can provide? That's not going to make a battery catch on fire.
Without compromised hardware even igniting a battery is pretty implausible (unless the phone was on charge, and obviously these weren't) as you'd need to basically short it out and this would be hard even with full bare metal access.
Pagers are famously hard to hack as well since all they do is display strings. And they aren't on the public net, they don't even have IP addresses as they communicate hub and spoke with a big slow RF transceiver.
Much more likely triggered by a message or long time fuse.
Reports of batteries in the past exploding were unintentional. So if one were purposely causing the batteries to explode then it's logical that you could make it a lot more potent.
The idea that it was a hack is more prevalent outside the west. No doubt because western intelligence is trying to stop the story of any electronic made by them being a potential bomb under their control.
Link the reports or GTFO
depending on particular noises made by their favourite rumor mill, they might have heard that pagers contained 0, 1, 3, less than 20, or 30 to 60g of explosives. these might have been in battery or in extra (fake) element. nobody knows shit as of now
taiwanese manufacturer denies involvement and directs to a hungarian subsidiary, but that hungarian subsidiary is only nameplate on a residential address. their pagers contain different chips and are overall different model compared to what taiwanese make and sell. it might be very well that israelis didn't have to intercept shipping of pagers, because they made them and routed through a few cutouts, one in hungary, another in bulgaria. israelis have a policy of not telling anything and i haven't seen anywhere internals of the alleged pagers. it will take some time until anything will be known with any certainty