Yandex Takes a Second Data Center Hit in 48 Hours
united24media.com
[19 comments hidden]
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/techland/drone-and-data-ce...
[5 comments hidden]
[4 comments hidden]
we want a safe a decentralized infrastructure
[3 comments hidden]
Also, attack on a nuclear station is such a drastic and severe thing that it counts as the use of nuclear weapons. And if we are at that stage, it's a bit silly to worry about small things.
[3 comments hidden]
[2 comments hidden]
[hidden]
>I think most of the opposition really wants is stability and a return to normality. Blowing shit up is diametrically opposed to that goal.
So there isnt terrorism because most opposition dont want to blow up data centers? You are identifying opposition as potential domestic terrorists. As opposed to saying there just arent these type of domestic terrorists. Which have nothing to do with normal opposition.
And then you seem to imply there may be reason to resort to domestic terrorism?!
>Maybe only once most people realize that normality isn't coming back will that change.
[2 comments hidden]
When I used to work with US bank and financial institutions we used to do "disaster recovery tests" and it effectively meant they shut off a whole site and ran on their backups to see what happened.
[hidden]
Now that you can stuff an entire room with only high-G-resistant solid state drives, there should be fewer excuses for losing machines before determining a fire suppression system to be either inoperable or insufficient (but never tested and measured under realistic conditions).
[22 comments hidden]
[21 comments hidden]
And the quality of targeting is almost entirely because of extensive USA intelligence sharing:
> According to American and Ukrainian officials familiar with the operations:
> Ukraine selects targets, although American intelligence reportedly also helps identify high-priority facilities.
> The US identifies vulnerabilities at Russian energy installations.
> American intelligence assists with mission planning, including routes, altitude, and timing to help Ukrainian drones evade Russian air defenses.
> US involvement extends across multiple stages of planning, according to three people familiar with the operations.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/us-intelligence-helps-u...
[hidden]
[15 comments hidden]
Translated, we give them the missiles, we give them the intelligence, we give them the target, we set it up… we let them push the red button.
[11 comments hidden]
[10 comments hidden]
They're just using USA as political cover, which is how it has always been been. USA warned Europe for decades not to become reliant on cheap Russian gas because it would be weaponized against them. The Biden administration even sanctioned German companies [1] building Nordstream 2 because it was a Russian geopolitical project.
We see how it all turned out.
[1] https://2021-2025.state.gov/nord-stream-2-and-potential-sanc...
[2 comments hidden]
It's too bad Eastern Germany never managed to deruzzify itself properly after DDR fell.
[hidden]
[hidden]
[6 comments hidden]
Europe is most certainly not doing this. Trump isn't even serious, he's just "telling them to stop" in order to aid European anti-Trump propaganda which is used in Europe ironically to support US interests. Trump doesn't care that diesel is going up, especially because his friends are selling it. Cutting off Russian ability to join in this smorgasbord by causing a local diesel shortage for them also cuts off any concern he could possibly have about diesel prices.
Notice that he didn't end US diesel exports, he entertained the idea.
If Europe thinks they're "in this alone," and Europe is the "only one left" who will "defend" Ukraine, then Europe has to rearm in fear and figure out how to send more support to Ukraine, like to cut social services and ignore their heat/power bills to do it (and to steal from Russian accounts, which is being debated again.)
They will buy the weapons from the US, they will shore up the Ukraine war for the US, the will buy more LNG from the US, they will destroy local anti-US politicians for the US in favor of NATO, all to own Trump. Remember, Trump "hates" NATO. Not that he doesn't support everything they're doing, he's just threatened to stop paying for it i.e. they'll serve us for free. He's going to build a Ukraine War, and Europe's going to pay for it.
As a tactic, it was obvious why the US/Ukraine had to be aggressive right now; not only is Russia doing exceedingly well financially due to what the dumb Iran War did to prices, but winter is coming. For Ukraine, they were convinced that this was their last chance to make an impact before they were frozen. For the US it was an opportunity to burn weapons (so we can grab US taxes to make more), to get Russia to stop exports (because LNG goes up in Europe, and US oil goes up in general) and lastly and maybe most importantly to raise political support in Russia for strikes to civilian infrastructure. Putin is the conservative in Russia, and the politicians who are against him are demanding that he escalate rather than continue to bleed Russian lives forever.
If the US can convince Russia, who has been very gentle with Ukrainian civilian infrastructure, to destroy Ukrainian power going into the winter, the misery and death that will hit Ukrainians will be talked about for the next century (barring an big warming effect of the extreme El Niño.) That might fire up Europe even more into a delusionally belligerent frenzy (European NATO elites are losing the population), and possibly shore up support for more spending on Ukraine in the US itself. The US has suffered through a distinct lack of Russian atrocities in Ukraine, and this would be a great time to get some.
[5 comments hidden]
https://www.eurointegration.com.ua/eng/news/2026/09/25/72462...
[3 comments hidden]
[2 comments hidden]
> Europe is asking Ukraine to halt destruction of Russia's oil infrastructure.
> Europe is not asking for this.
> France is asking Ukraine to halt destruction of Russia's oil infrastructure.
> No true European is asking for this.
[hidden]
You are correct that indeed France made the proposal that Russia stops destroying Ukrainian energy infrastructure and Ukraine would do the same thing. France as a country has that right to make such proposals. That doesn't make it a request or proposal at the EU level.
I have no idea how the no true scotsman fallacy applies to this. Maybe I'm missing something here
[hidden]
Are you sure the missiles are support?
[hidden]
The ones hitting the data centers are I think https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_Point_FP-1
I don't think the US even has any like that to give.
The long range strikes only started after Trump's "you have no cards" oval office shindig where he basically told Zelensky to surrender and cut aid. After that Trump lost a lot of influence to protect Russia.
[3 comments hidden]
[2 comments hidden]
[hidden]
When the Soviets went into Afghanistan, the mujahideen did not have the domestic capability to build Stinger missiles themselves...
[4 comments hidden]
https://old.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/1x1q...
[3 comments hidden]
[2 comments hidden]
[hidden]
Morelli explains this principle or commandment as follows: "With rare exceptions, people tend to join the victorious cause. In the case of war, the preference of public opinion depends very much on the apparent results of the conflict. If the results are not good, the propaganda must disguise our losses and exaggerate those of the enemy." [0]
It's the same in Russia, if you are wondering
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Basic_Principles_of_War_Pr...
[24 comments hidden]
[hidden]
Also unlike in Ukraine local organizations are required to run on infrastructure inside country by law and even major peering points are very centralised. Connections between Russia and other countries are even more centralised.
So it doesnt matter in what order datacenters going to be destroyed. Ukraine just need to take down enough of them.
[9 comments hidden]
The most serious disruptions were reported in Moscow and St. Petersburg, where users also experienced problems with T-Bank, internet provider SkyNet, and the Mango Office cloud service... Yandex Disk, Yandex Documents, and other company services... online bus-ticket sales in the Moscow region [via] MosTransAvto... Several major Russian media websites, including RBC, RIA Novosti, Kommersant, Vedomosti, Interfax, and Vesti... Russian Railways...
And all that's before this attack. We'll see what the extent is, I guess.So I'd say the goal here is to intimidate and/or inconvenience the Russian public and general economy, which is the main way they'll advance a war against a country they are forbidden from invading to any semi-meaningful degree (due to nukes). Permenantly destroying data would be nice, sure, but service interruption is already such a huge win that it'd be a marginal improvement only, IMHO.
That is, unless there are cloud-native banks without backups, which... yikes! Possible, I suppose?
[5 comments hidden]
[3 comments hidden]
[2 comments hidden]
Adding 200ms of latency wont affect anyone living much and China will happily sell datacenter capacity to it's vassal state.
[2 comments hidden]
Nope, the Russian public is mostly entirely checked out of politics and will roll with any inconvenience. You won't see any rioting in the streets due to this.
The point is to inflict economic harm on the elite around Putin--the owners of Yandex, the other companies using those datacenters, etc.
The point is not to take out the average Russian's internet search index.
A more important goal is for these strikes to get headlines and serve as Western-facing propaganda, with "hitting Russia's Google" and "hitting Russia's Amazon" being easily digestible for those in Europe and America. That still beats the effect this will have on the average Russian.
Russia isn't a Western Democracy.
[3 comments hidden]
[2 comments hidden]
[hidden]
That's a pretty tall assumption when every other customer is trying to copy their own data at the same time through the same tiny pipes and off the same spinning rust.
The typical customer also doesn't do their own backups, but rather relies on the infrastructure provider (that's a major selling point after all).
If we take the damaged Amazon data center in SA or the OVH fire as data points, the timeline appears to be measured in weeks and months, rather than hours.
In any case, I doubt that in 2 days most larger companies could even figure out where their data is and develop a strategy to copy it.
[hidden]
[7 comments hidden]
[2 comments hidden]
[hidden]
Ukraine only has limited number of more capable missiles/drones like Flamingo FP-5 and Neptune, although now the FP-7 is about to hit volume production, followed by the FP-9, as well as Europe-supplied missile and anti-missile systems, so it remains to be seen if this will change Ukraine's strategy ... I tend to doubt it - they will have firepower to retaliate much harder, and at further distance, when they want to, but I expect they don't want to unilaterally escalate.
[4 comments hidden]
Also why I think governments should mass-produce & subsidize blow-molded 25L plastic gas cans instead of building centralized storage tanks/caverns. No way those things cost anywhere near US$25 to make.
[100 comments hidden]
[29 comments hidden]
Not just for datacenters either - warehouses, refineries, power stations, you could sell to anybody with a building full of expensive stuff.
[2 comments hidden]
[22 comments hidden]
[2 comments hidden]
[18 comments hidden]
Drone attacks on US soil are (hopefully!) not happening anytime soon.
[hidden]
So...the west if we go by the recent statements of chancellor Merz
[6 comments hidden]
[5 comments hidden]
[4 comments hidden]
[3 comments hidden]
[2 comments hidden]
[hidden]
[8 comments hidden]
This would be incredibly stupid. An attack on American soil could be met with a literally nuclear response against Iran or whoever perpetrated it.
[6 comments hidden]
(We did nominally succeed in regime change in the country that didn't attack us, though...)
[5 comments hidden]
It wasn't Afghanistan (as a nation) that directly carried out 9/11. The government did have close ties with Al Qaeda and sheltered it though.
[4 comments hidden]
[3 comments hidden]
[2 comments hidden]
[hidden]
https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2026/05/28/russia-lets-privat...
[3 comments hidden]
[2 comments hidden]
[hidden]
We felt a lot of it was… unnervingly believable in multiple aspects. As in, what parent mentioned.
I do not look forward to the “Seretech Decision” (https://shadowrun.fandom.com/wiki/Seretech_Decision), “Shiawase Decision” (https://shadowrun.fandom.com/wiki/Shiawase_Decision) or similar sorts of judicial rulings in the real world. True nightmare fuel.
——-
Somewhat… prescient, is the Shiawase Decision.
This was the result of what unfolded after regional electricity prices spiked (550%) after a corporation decided to take a lot of local power for itself.
After local opposition began forming, Shiawase Corporation made a false flag attack against itself to influence a future ruling where it could then defend itself similar to a sovereign nation in a foreign land. So full corporate “extraterritoriality”, to where maintaining its own regulated militia/defense force would be legally free and clear.
[18 comments hidden]
I'd invest in digging equipment for the next war.
[14 comments hidden]
[hidden]
[10 comments hidden]
[8 comments hidden]
[3 comments hidden]
[2 comments hidden]
No reasonable amount of quadcopters could match a bunker-buster. Surface explosions are not very effective against buried targets.
The weight and density of the bunker-buster is extremely important to its operation. When dropped from a high altitude, it breaks into the bunker with sheer kinetic force, and then explodes once inside.
[hidden]
[4 comments hidden]
[hidden]
That said, I’m in agreement in principle. A lot of what you’re asking for is statecraft, and doing that with a profit model is brittle to corruption. But I’d greatly prefer to see folks trying to build things on hope then on bloodshed.
[7 comments hidden]
If your strategy assumes you can succeed against Iron Dome (which, I argue, is the state of the art for available air defense system), you should always be able to win as an attacker. Just have to test defenses ahead of time to understand level of effort required (munition capabilities, cadence, and quantity required, broadly speaking).
https://missilethreat.csis.org/countermeasures-penetration-a...
[3 comments hidden]
Obelisks from Command and Conquer pinned to the roof of the DC would be amusing although personally I'm leaning towards prism towers.
[hidden]
If someone wants to take out a data center, they will likely succeed assuming they have the resources (probably military drones, but perhaps more traditional ballistic artillery). The world has become a more dangerous, volatile, and unpredictable place, for gestures broadly at everything reasons.
(thoughts, opinions, and threat model always my own)
[3 comments hidden]
[3 comments hidden]
[hidden]
[hidden]
[2 comments hidden]
[hidden]
Whatever isn't used/destroyed could be recovered wherever it lands after a day or two.
It should be less expensive a possibly more effective in certain circumstances because of increased carrying capacity.
[hidden]
The US State Department will throw everything at you if you dare tried to build or possess your own guided guns and rockets, even if you were not from or in the US - because there was a US ally that exported a near-orbital solid motor sounding rocket to a Balkan nation with full factory setup and manufacturing training services without asking anybody in particular, which resulted in the recipient nation achieving prototype production and successful live fire tests of an indigenous surface to air missile system comparable to Soviet S-75 strategic SAM that was eventually selected.
If it weren't for those pile of laws and leverages... building a SAM was doable since 1950s.
[2 comments hidden]
[15 comments hidden]
Though someone like Amazon will have to calculate, is the 50-year cost of protecting all facilities less than the 50-year cost of rebuilding the ones that are destroyed?
[2 comments hidden]
[hidden]
Apparently not all AWS resources/services are redundant - some are advertised as single location, and then it's up to the customer whether they choose to pay to make backups elsewhere (e.g. in a different region) or not.
[11 comments hidden]
[6 comments hidden]
As for the satellites they can be jammed and there's not much you can do about it.
[2 comments hidden]
I feel like China and US are the only ones in the next 50 years who'll have launch capability cheap enough to hit satellites.
[3 comments hidden]
[2 comments hidden]
I don't get the defense argument for space data centers.
[hidden]
There is value in hardening critical data centers. Whether that means placing them in orbit or underground or equipping them with air defenses remains to be seen.
[3 comments hidden]
[2 comments hidden]
[hidden]
An event at one orbital altitude is also not confined to that altitude; debris can reach higher altitudes and affect satellites in those orbits.
[2 comments hidden]
[23 comments hidden]
[22 comments hidden]
[7 comments hidden]
[hidden]
I'm not a fan of wars, regardless of where they happen. OTOH, I still believe you can fight relatively clean or be an unethical bully. If the war is unavoidable, I prefer to be the former.
I also commend Ukraine's ingenuity and bravery, as well.
[5 comments hidden]
[4 comments hidden]
[6 comments hidden]
I haven't seen any site I frequent mention this once. The PR bubble is very real.
[hidden]
[hidden]
[hidden]
[8 comments hidden]
Whatever is happening now is payback for Putin's birthday present to himself from 2 days ago, firing a missile into a Ukrainian apartment building that killed 22 civilians (mostly women & children).
[7 comments hidden]
[hidden]
[5 comments hidden]
[4 comments hidden]
[hidden]
Cutting off the enemy supply line is a classic and obvious military strategy. Ukraine didn't choose to be attacked, nor did they choose for Wildberries to become part of the supply line. They are playing the cards they were dealt, and I would say doing so with remarkable restraint.
[2 comments hidden]
What's supposed to be the argument against it, inconvenience for American shoppers during a war of aggression?
[6 comments hidden]
“Data centers” need not be hyper-centralized. There’s an economy of scale of course, both in the building itself and in very local transmission. But all scale curves have knees, and one is survivability.
It’s possible a bunch of smaller 10 MW DCs might be faster to build, more survivable, and easier to get approved while being perfectly acceptable for most workloads.
[2 comments hidden]
[hidden]
In the current climate I think the less project approvals you need to get the better
[2 comments hidden]
This is a revolutionary concept that you've discovered in 2026 that was more or less universally observed until the 21st century.
It's what I've been saying all along. Data centers are only an evolutionary, external manifestation of things which have existed all along.
When computing resources became accessible to the average company, average companies introduced machine rooms. Below-average companies stashed computers in a closet or non-dedicated space, but the point is, that for decades, ordinary businesses had an ordinary complement of on-prem compute.
The whole point of data centers is economy of scale, consolidation, and centralization. The whole point of "cloud services" is to aggregate services where they can be provided to dozens, hundreds, thousands of tenant companies and individuals, rather than everyone federating their machine rooms and closets in every location everywhere.
It is the ultimate paradigm shift of "thin client connects to time-share servers" being recapitulated. Instead of TN3270 and IBM's mainframes, we have AWS, Chromebooks, and mobile apps.
Why do you think there is a crisis in commercial properties and office space. Many companies have gutted their capex servers and networking gear because they moved to the cloud. New companies basically don't need to build out an enormous, resilient physical plant to support those resources, if they're cloud-based.
So if you believe that the entire tech industry is gonna reverse course, just because of the threat of some DCs being reduced to slag and melted rare earth, you live in a fantasy world, my friend.
[hidden]
I remember datacenters being close to the humans and then migrating to be close to the power supply (check out The Dallas, OR, for example) to now locating where they can and scrambling for power, which has become the bottleneck.
At this point I think there’s a diseconomy of scale with the need for all these ad hoc power systems.
I’m not suggesting a return to the captive “machine room”. I’m saying that instead of a mega-plant, smaller, distributed ones might actually be a local optimum.
(Oh, and I have had a rack full of hardware in a data center for my personal compute for more than a quarter century. So yes, I have some experience in history)
[2 comments hidden]
[hidden]
It's a totally different situation - they're at war.
[15 comments hidden]
[3 comments hidden]
[2 comments hidden]
Nebius which is basically was out-of-Russia part Yandex is now larger than what left of Yandex in Russia.
[7 comments hidden]
[4 comments hidden]
[hidden]
As is often the case, embargoes don't make things impossible - but they do add friction. Longer lead times, "grey market partner" premiums. People who supply Russian companies with hardware get to pad their pockets - and while they have ties in Russia, for obvious reasons, they prefer to keep those padded pockets outside Russia itself.
It's even worse for bleeding edge in-demand extra-controlled hardware like modern AI systems.
[hidden]
But how many of them exist and how easy is to replace, I have no idea
[hidden]
[2 comments hidden]
[2 comments hidden]
[hidden]
[4 comments hidden]
[2 comments hidden]
[hidden]
https://united24media.com/world/yandex-hides-all-four-cloud-...
[9 comments hidden]
[4 comments hidden]
[3 comments hidden]
[3 comments hidden]
It's probably one of the safest places on the planet.
[hidden]
[hidden]
[2 comments hidden]
Here's a better source: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/russias-yandex-says-sec...
[hidden]
(looks like they changed "center" to "centre")
[5 comments hidden]
[2 comments hidden]
[hidden]
>Scottish independence accounts go dark after Iran internet blackout
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2026/01/12/scottish-ind...
[hidden]
[60 comments hidden]
The ideal is turning on Putin, but what does that even look like? The guy has 9 layers of isolation, a carefully curated and frequently culled leadership, and a robust propaganda department.
So at the breaking point, will Russians storm the capital or storm Ukraine?
[6 comments hidden]
It seems to have somehow escaped your notice that Russia has been storming Ukraine for almost 5 years.
[4 comments hidden]
There is a (massive) difference between soldiers there to get a paycheck, and soldiers there to avenge their communities.
[hidden]
[hidden]
Second, the opinion of citizen does not count in russia anyway. It is an opinion of oligarchs and people in control that matters. Putin and his cronies are in their 70s and will go away soon. Whoever replaces the fuhrer and his clique needs to understand that messing with Ukraine is very costly affair. The more destruction is unleashed on russia now, the less bellirigent it will be in the future.
[4 comments hidden]
In which ways does the situation where "most Russians turn on Ukraine" differ from the current reality?
[3 comments hidden]
https://wciom.ru/analytical-reviews/analiticheskii-obzor/spe...
[11 comments hidden]
[10 comments hidden]
After Nord Stream, we all know what those maniacs are capable of.
[2 comments hidden]
All for some messed up sense of ethnic superiority.
[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crimes_in_the_Russo-Ukrain...
[6 comments hidden]
[5 comments hidden]
[4 comments hidden]
Or you're going to okay the card that every organization is in cahoots in the big American conspiracy to control the world?
Could it be that it's maybe you the victim of propaganda?
[3 comments hidden]
So, where this facts in YOUR honest Wikipedia?
[2 comments hidden]
Most like because they thought Ukraine was going to capitulate in few days, and they could hide the crimes of genocide, like it was done in the past.
That's how sickening this was, because Russia thought they were going to get away with it, they were just executing civilians for fun.
The whole world watched this in real time.
It's evil in at it's worst, for some sick illusion of ethnic superiority.
History will not forget this.
[5 comments hidden]
As opposed to right now where they are the best of friends?
[4 comments hidden]
So my fear is that Ukraine attacking Russian societal pillars will begin to manifest animosity.
[hidden]
[2 comments hidden]
Or they are anti-war but helpless to stop it, in which case retaliation to defend yourself is also good.
Either way if your country's existence is threatened and your people are being killed you don't sit back and do nothing because you are scared it'll make the attacker unhappy.
[hidden]
Sure, but there are many different ways of making your attacker unhappy, and some of them might decrease your chances of winning, so you might not want to do those.
Not saying that's the case here (I don't think it is), but the concept is sound.
[hidden]
[7 comments hidden]
[4 comments hidden]
yes if you could magically organize 10_000 people they could overthrow anyone. But organizing is hard. Starting from a fact that they need some secure comminution channel, and the government fights VPN quite actively. How would you reach these potential people? You could do sort of broadcast a public message "if you don't like tsar let's take a walk tomorrow" but this signal would also be received by the police, so they can prepare. And we don't have the beautiful gun ownership culture of America.
And if you do something alone you just perish in prison.
[2 comments hidden]
[hidden]
[hidden]
[2 comments hidden]
[hidden]
Yet they closed their eyes to everything, from the destruction of freedom of press, to corruption, even to political alternatives not being allowed, even to the war.
[hidden]
Russians may believe a lot of bullshit from TV, but when it comes to decisions that impact their own life, they act surprisingly rationally, and become very skeptical of anything the government says.
[12 comments hidden]
Who cares. Their government started this, and by all accounts most of their population supports, or is indifferent to it. They made their bed and they can now lie in it.
> So at the breaking point, will Russians storm the capital or storm Ukraine?
They've been storming Ukraine for the past 4 years now.
[3 comments hidden]
[8 comments hidden]
It never amazes me to encounter people who still don't know that Russia is not a democracy, that Russians have no voice and can't influence the direction of the country, that Russia has no elections and Putin (self-proclaimed President) is not a democratically elected leader.
Seems like the majority of people are uneducated to this extreme degree. Including the very highest leaders of the EU and the USA.
[2 comments hidden]
What are we Europeans supposed to do anyway? Negotiate about peace with leadership that isn't interested in peace? If history teaches us anything, it is that Russia's leadership respects only military force.
I'm not blaming ordinary Russians who indeed have very little power over anything, except that significant portion of them who support the war. But I am blaming the oligarchy, the elites who actually have some power, and yet let things continue like this.
[hidden]
1. Russia's military is not independent. FSB is above them. This "cutting the balls of the military" has been a long-term strategy. This is not comparable at all with the USA, let alone Turkey.
2. Military, power, strength resources are purposefully divided between different players, military does not have a monopoly on power. There are also FSB (with their own forces, judges, prison, killing teams), National Guard (have tanks), Private Companies (decreased/fractured after the Wagner debacle). Heck, Kadyrov's thugs are part of that equation as well.
3. There really aren't examples of successful coups from the bottom only.
4. No, I do not suggest negotiations with Putin, quite the opposite. Way more should be done to get rid of him and his family personally, and not pussyfoot around it.
5. EU's problem was and still is anemic, slow and stupid action (lack of). Damn morons.
6. No, a significant portion of the population does not support the war. Do North Koreans truly support their regime as witnessed by the voting results and by the fact that people are not protesting and are not organizing a coup?
7. Russia had Oligarchs, but doesn't have anymore. Oligarchy means that rich people can influence politics. In Russia they can't. The typical western "money brings political influence/power" does not apply in Russia. In Russia the rule is "political position (given by Putin) brings money (as long as Putin allows)". Businessmen have no independence. Check what happened to Tinkov (Tinkov bank). And he is the lucky one.
[hidden]
> It never amazes me to encounter people who still don't know that Russia is not a democracy, that Russians have no voice and can't influence the direction of the country, that Russia has no elections and Putin (self-proclaimed President) is not a democratically elected leader.
And none of this matters, because Russia has no tradition of democracy and has always been ruled by dictators who derive their legitimacy through other means; mainly through their success in expanding the empire. The more you steal and the more people die in the process, the greater leader you are. Putin is a continuation of that tradition and enjoys widespread support among a population that shares the same vision: that Russia is a chosen nation and that being conquered by Russia is a privilege.Russian history offers an excellent counterexample in the downfall of the USSR when Gorbachev and others lost their legitimacy. Formally, they remained the top figures in the government; in practice, people gradually stopped following them over a period of a few years as everything was disintegrating (shortage of basic products, pointless war in Afghanistan, disasters like Chernobyl, etc). The people simply chose new leaders from among themselves and turned their backs to Moscow.
For example, a police station might've simply ignored orders from the ministry of internal affairs and instead followed the recommendations of a popular local figure (often a factory manager, uni professor, journalist, artist or writer). As districts increasingly acted this way, Moscow gradually lost control over the police force, which became decentralized and locally run. In the end, bosses in Moscow could yell all they wanted into a phone, but that did not move a single police officer on the ground.
Russian central government is currently nowhere near such loss of legitimacy. Tens of millions of people carry out the orders of their Führer every day. Some have stepped into a foreign country while carrying a gun. Others are milling artillery shells or programming cruise missiles. Some are sitting on HN trying to convince the world how their Führer has no other option than to murder Ukrainian children every night.
There is no pushback worth mentioning. Last year, out of 140 million people living in Russia, only 38 were arrested for anti-war protests. Add a few hundred more for anti-war posts on the social media. Completely insignificant numbers. Russians on HN will gladly explain how oppressive the climate in Russia has become and how difficult (gasp!) it is to protest, but they fail to recognize the downstream effects: that Ukrainians have to pay with their lives every single day for the cancer that the cowardice of Russians has unleashed. Hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians are in mortal danger right now on the frontline, trying to stop what Russians are too afraid to confront themselves.
[2 comments hidden]
[hidden]
[2 comments hidden]
It doesn't matter, just like it didn't matter to British citizenry who endured the blitz that the Nazis had self-couped, and Germans couldn't vote Hitler out. The only 2 choices available are to roll over and be occupied, or fight back against the aggressor state.
[hidden]
[hidden]
That's too late for that fear. Ukrainian strikes on refineries and "Russian Amazon's" warehouses have already changed the sentiment. That's a great gift from Zelensky to Putin.
[hidden]
I don't think that's the primary goal here anyway, it's to disrupt the Russian economy so that it becomes harder to recruit, provision and rearm their war effort.
Though, like the Wildberries attacks, it's likely that these datacentres are also being used by the military for data processing too. The Russian military certainly aren't as worried about US/Europeans about using civilian infrastructure for their military efforts.
RomanPushkin[4 comments hidden]
April 27, 2020:
"Yandex highlighted negative articles about Navalny in its search results; the company called it an "experiment."
https://zona-media.translate.goog/news/2020/04/27/navyandex?...
throw-the-towel[2 comments hidden]
sam_lowry_[hidden]
secondary_op[hidden]