News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Former WSJ reporter says law firm used Indian hackers to ... by swores on Sunday October 16, 2022 @02:11AM (#33221435)
You've misunderstood what racism is if you think it's defined by whether or not the victim is aware of racism. Of course that's often very relevant but absolutely not necessarily.

If I walk into a friend's business, and say "woah, I did not know you hired a <derogative racist term>, they're all stupid you should fire him" and the friend immediately goes "ooh I forgot to be racist, yea I'll fire them immediately" then their firing would absolutely be racist despite the person being fired not witnessing the racist logic that causes it.

Equally with voter ID laws, they're not racist because they put mean racist message onto the ID cards or something, and whether or not victims of that sort of racist politics notice doesn't mean racism isn't involved. If somebody says "I don't think we need voter IDs, but in my district only the <some race of people> don't have photo IDs and they would all want to vote for my opponent, so let's require ID to vote!" then those people have had a racist and very unfair thing happen against them, regardless of whether they are "thinking of racism".

edit: and as a slightly easier example, if I edited a newspaper and decided that for every negative story about one skin colour would get front page billing, and every negative story about my own skin colour would get binned rather than published, then all my paper's readers might be able to look at every single article without seeing any racism in them - but their not knowing doesn't change that my theoretical editing was racist.

Re:Former WSJ reporter says law firm used Indian hackers to ... by fareesh on Sunday October 16, 2022 @02:26AM (#33221512)
- Indian is not a race (see my other comment)

- Even if you use the broader definition to include nationality, in this case, the "hackers" are physically located in the geopolitical boundaries of India

- Nearly every major country with a large enough population has people in whitehat/blackhat infosec professions. It is an incredible reach to suggest that newspapers should not identify the national origin of these individuals because of what some racist readers might start to believe or become biased towards, by drawing non-existent lines to patterns that don't exist except in their own bubbles. Editorial standards and responsibility should not be driven by the weakest minds.

Re:Former WSJ reporter says law firm used Indian hackers to ... by watwut on Sunday October 16, 2022 @02:38AM (#33221559)
Definition of racism that includes nationality is not "broader". It is the definition of racism. It is also very common form of racism worldwide.
Re:Former WSJ reporter says law firm used Indian hackers to ... by fareesh on Sunday October 16, 2022 @03:21AM (#33221784)
The only prominent definition one could cite which includes national origin is the one used by the United Nations

Popular dictionaries (Webster/Oxford) don't include national origin

Re:Former WSJ reporter says law firm used Indian hackers to ... by alex_smart on Sunday October 16, 2022 @03:19PM (#33226390)
"Indian" is not just an national identity but also an ethnic one. A person of Indian origin born in America or the UK is still very easily identifiable and is identified by their Indian identity.

The usage of the word "racism" to include xenophobia is common enough in a casual context that I cannot believe that you are simply not aware of that usage. By choosing to argue over the semantics of the word racism over usage you probably already are familiar with, you are diverting attention from what really matters here: that said racism or xenophobia exists and negatively affects real human beings.

Re:Former WSJ reporter says law firm used Indian hackers to ... by fareesh on Sunday October 16, 2022 @11:29PM (#33229565)
It is not an ethnic identity (see my other comment)
Re:Former WSJ reporter says law firm used Indian hackers to ... by alex_smart on Tuesday October 18, 2022 @09:08AM (#33246548)
Did you read my justification for saying that it is also an ethnic identity. It was literally the next sentence.
Re:Former WSJ reporter says law firm used Indian hackers to ... by P5fRxh5kUvp2th on Monday October 17, 2022 @01:04AM (#33229978)
If you need such a broad term, use the word 'bias'. Racism has a specific meaning, people are holding to account for a reason.
Re:Former WSJ reporter says law firm used Indian hackers to ... by alex_smart on Wednesday October 19, 2022 @07:28AM (#33260545)
Good luck trying to control how people use language. I was just saying that it was already a common enough usage that you should be aware of it, even if you disagree with that usage.
Re:Former WSJ reporter says law firm used Indian hackers to ... by mananaysiempre on Sunday October 16, 2022 @03:58AM (#33221947)
Has common usage subsumed any geography-based xenophobia into the word “racism”?

(Not that any xenophobia is particularly better than any other, but it’s difficult to talk to people when they use broader meanings for words you thought meant very specific thing. See also terrorism vs insurgency, genocide vs occupation, etc.)

Re:Former WSJ reporter says law firm used Indian hackers to ... by alex_smart on Sunday October 16, 2022 @05:08AM (#33222278)
Yes
Re:Former WSJ reporter says law firm used Indian hackers to ... by watwut on Sunday October 16, 2022 @08:10AM (#33222982)
Racism as something based on skin color only would make Nazi basically not racists in their worst acts. Cause their racism was literally Aryan race against all other races - Slavic, Jews (European Jews where white, the physical features were like somewhat bigger nose), British, French. With Jews on the bottom, as the wort enemy worst then blacks. And they would not care a bit about different kind of Indians either.

If anything, attempts to redefine racism as only American variant where it is all about shades of color is redefinition.

And obviously, ethnicity and geography goes with races.

Re:Former WSJ reporter says law firm used Indian hackers to ... by swores on Sunday October 16, 2022 @04:27AM (#33222073)
I wasn't making any argument about this specific case (which I didn't mention at all), just pointing out that "recipient of racism (or anything similar like sexism or xenophobia) doesn't notice = there was no racism" isn't a valid argument.