marginalia_nu a day ago

I don't know what sort of MKUltra-esque psyop is going on with the font rendering on this website, but it is exceptionally trippy[1].

[1] https://imgur.com/fpruTB9

  • Terr_ 16 hours ago

    Perhaps it's a way to encode user and time-of-access into the document, so that even scanned leaks can be traced back to a person. :p

  • zibw a day ago

    I run into this on some other websites, I think it's just a font and Linux issue.

    • twic 13 hours ago

      Looks ok to me in Firefox on Fedora 42: https://imgur.com/a/7IQ5hwJ

      EDIT Oh, it does look busted in Chrome, though. But you can just not use Chrome.

    • bangaladore 20 hours ago

      It's terrible with Edge on Windows, not vertically misaligned terrible, but terrible, nonetheless.

      • rolph 20 hours ago

        i think thats a general case

  • Xiol32 20 hours ago

    I have been having this exact same issue across multiple websites recently, most of the time it's monospace fonts that have the issue - Github is a nightmare. It only started after I upgraded to Fedora 42.

    Haven't got to the bottom of it yet. I set Victor Mono as my Monospace font in Chrome and that has fixed it for things like the HN comment box, for instance, but Github and such still all look weird.

    • marginalia_nu 18 hours ago

      I've can't remember ever seeing this particular glitch before in my 20+ year Linux usage history. Very weird.

  • wlkr a day ago

    It's not quite as pronounced for me, but it still seems to be a bit off. The CSS suggests that the intended font is GT America Extended.

  • The28thDuck 18 hours ago

    This actually messed with my head. I now see the comments misaligned on HN.

  • LargoLasskhyfv a day ago

    They are trying to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BLIT_(short_story) you :-)

    j/k. For me that occurs only when I zoom the site on FF under Linux, but not when I leave it at normal scaling, and use the 3 letters on the upper right side to change the font size instead.

  • sunscream89 a day ago

    Hey, go grab those Gateway files, I’m sure they have copies at the desk!

    Gateway II is disappointing and the hidden plot line is that these experiences are curated by superior handlers and these are the accounts as ordinary man would interpret them.

    Btw, were you being satirical? They won.

carlcortright 14 hours ago

This should come with a warning on how dizzy it makes you before you read it. Nuked my afternoon of productivity

hoistbypetard a day ago

It's interesting that they chose to redact some of the markings on the document. (e.g. you see "SECRET" and below that there's a redacted mark.)

  • psunavy03 a day ago

    That generally means that while the document was declassified, parts of it weren't, and the still-classified info obviously gets redacted.

    Information generally gets declassified after 25 years, but there are exceptions for when arbitrarily declassifying things could jeopardize capabilities that are still in use, burn intelligence sources who are still alive, etc.

    • ricksunny 18 hours ago

      Like the fact that up to 50% of the State Department was actually CIA, as noted by Arthur Schlesinger Jr and only declassified this year, 63 years later, as part of the recent trove of JFK files releases.

      https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/2025-03-19/cia-cover...

      (Even this much was the result of decades of sustained political support for disclosure since Oliver Stone’s landmark 1991 film.)

      Key takeaway is that if the unaccountable minders thumping national security don’t want something released - ever - it won’t be releases.

    • hoistbypetard 19 hours ago

      That makes sense. I just found it interesting that the markings were considered something that could fall into that category. I thought those were usually so broad (e.g. NOFORN) that they wouldn't be.

      • psunavy03 19 hours ago

        The existence of certain programs, or the tying of certain codewords to their subjects, can sometimes itself be classified. Sometimes just the fact that a program exists under a given codeword is itself classified information.

        • buildsjets 15 hours ago

          The material is classified. Its composition is classified. Its use in the weapon is classified, and the process itself is classified. But at least we know it's called FOGBANK.

          • psunavy03 15 hours ago

            It's easy to joke about, but one of the other problems is that if Government X knows that the US has found out specific facts A, B, C, and D, they can then determine that the only person who could have provided those pieces of information is Person Z.

            And now Z (and maybe their entire family) get literally taken out back and shot in the head. Now you not only lose the source of intelligence, you disincentivize anyone else to provide intelligence to you.

            Or they find out that it could have only been gathered by obscure technique Q, they take specific countermeasures to mitigate against Q, and there goes millions or billions of dollars of R&D.

    • kevin_thibedeau 12 hours ago

      There is an Obama EO that now encourages using ten years for less sensitive material as part of an effort to let in more sunshine. The new procedures also require the declassification date to be determined upon creation so that it isn't left to a non-SME 25 years later.

  • nonameiguess a day ago

    Portion markings in the IC, at least in the modern era, will include both the classification and a compartment. The compartment is specific to the collection method, i.e. SI indicates signals intelligence, TK indicates satellite data. Since those can reveal the source of the data, that reveals capabilities that the agency may not want to reveal, even if the data itself is no longer sensitive enough to classify.

    • MrMorden 18 hours ago

      Compartments are just for SCI. IC agencies do like putting all the classification markings on cafeteria menus, but they do non-SCI as well.

      Both SAPs and SCI control systems can be unacknowledged/unpublished, and foreign releasability markings can easily be classified because they show that the country in question has an intelligence relationship with the US that covers a specific topic.

    • mschuster91 19 hours ago

      > Since those can reveal the source of the data, that reveals capabilities that the agency may not want to reveal, even if the data itself is no longer sensitive enough to classify.

      Always 'member Trump and his release of a high resolution photograph from a satellite [1]. It took mere hours for people to work out which exact satellite was used to create the photograph and established a lower bound on its imaging capabilities.

      [1] https://qz.com/1699833/what-we-can-learn-from-the-spy-satell...

lawlessone 19 hours ago

That bird drone looks cool , very similar tail to many current drones.

  • kjkjadksj 15 hours ago

    Makes you wonder about the current state of the art in the bird drone program.

dannyw 20 hours ago

This is probably done by their recruitment division.

v3ss0n 19 hours ago

[flagged]

themafia 19 hours ago

I'm not particularly interested in generating analytics for the CIA.