Slashdot Mirror

You know, human civilization somehow made it through its first 5,000 years without any means to "digitally transfer value without central control". That doesn't seem to be a problem that's been holding back human achievement in any significant way

Money laundering is a $2 trillion industry and it's excellent for that. Or maybe you're in North Korea and you want to carry out a ransomware attack. How will you possibly get paid with all those sanctions? Wanna sell drugs on the dark web and are looking for a currency? Bitcoin certainly solves all of these problems for criminal enterprises and pariah states.

Uhhh, so you put a blood in jail and he stops being a blood?

No. It's been shown that taking nearly anyone--gang criminals, rapists, drug dealers, the lot--and putting them into a humane environment which focuses on their individual needs to maintain their sense of security and their human dignity quickly and effectively rehabilitates them. Yes, even hardened gang criminals.

By contrast, prison gangs actually rally around neglect and inhumane treatment. They use it to form a bond among their kin, reassuring themselves that The Man doesn't care about them, and thus demonstrating that they are fully-justified in being what they are. They do this because they need it. They believe that society owes them and that they're entitled to making the rest of us suffer and fear them. Think about the whole image of a violent gang member threatening you if you don't "respect" them and you'll see it.

Not because jailhouse food sucks.

It's not the food.

Read this in full. You can skip to the 4th page, the one that says "Rules of General Application".

Perhaps, perhaps not.

When a police officer unnecessarily places a suspect in a painful and potentially-injurious hold, the suspect naturally will attempt to resolve the pain by moving in a way as to reduce the pressure. This is essentially fighting with the officer and resisting arrest. I've watched police officers throw compliant suspects to the ground, drag them several meters, and then force them roughly into handcuffs--they weren't compliant after the officer initiated the use of force.

The use of such force as pulling, pushing, and running away is not harmful to the officer or the community. It may result in a few bruises and scrapes, but that's about all. Violent attack, the use of a weapon, hostage situations, theft (such as of a bicycle), and so forth are, on the other hand, escalated crimes which are chargeable and dangerous. Failure to surrender to the nearest police officer at the moment you become aware of a warrant for your arrest is essentially similar to resisting arrest without committing these dangerous crimes in the process.

It is the nature of all humans to seek freedom and liberty. Fear of arrest is common due to the current perception of police brutality and police power dynamic--that they can say whatever they want and they are de-facto unimpeachable truth--and so the nature of humans to avoid arrest is obvious. While this nature may affect the immediate likelihood of probation and parole, it seems to me that resisting arrest (and escaping prison) are not matters for which we should have the power to issue sentence.

By implementing as the standard in the United States no less than full compliance with the Nelson Mandela Rules and Dynamic Security, we will reduce the sense of insecurity among prisoners, including those facing arrest. This reduces conflict between officers of the law and those taken into legal custody, and speeds rehabilitation so as to reduce crime in total by aligning our justice system with the needs of human dignity and thus developing people as productive members of society.

As such, it does not seem sensible to me that resisting arrest and escaping prison should be criminal per se. Such things might impact your immediate likelihood for parole.

Perhaps, perhaps not.

When a police officer unnecessarily places a suspect in a painful and potentially-injurious hold, the suspect naturally will attempt to resolve the pain by moving in a way as to reduce the pressure. This is essentially fighting with the officer and resisting arrest. I've watched police officers throw compliant suspects to the ground, drag them several meters, and then force them roughly into handcuffs--they weren't compliant after the officer initiated the use of force.

The use of such force as pulling, pushing, and running away is not harmful to the officer or the community. It may result in a few bruises and scrapes, but that's about all. Violent attack, the use of a weapon, hostage situations, theft (such as of a bicycle), and so forth are, on the other hand, escalated crimes which are chargeable and dangerous. Failure to surrender to the nearest police officer at the moment you become aware of a warrant for your arrest is essentially similar to resisting arrest without committing these dangerous crimes in the process.

It is the nature of all humans to seek freedom and liberty. Fear of arrest is common due to the current perception of police brutality and police power dynamic--that they can say whatever they want and they are de-facto unimpeachable truth--and so the nature of humans to avoid arrest is obvious. While this nature may affect the immediate likelihood of probation and parole, it seems to me that resisting arrest (and escaping prison) are not matters for which we should have the power to issue sentence.

By implementing as the standard in the United States no less than full compliance with the Nelson Mandela Rules and Dynamic Security, we will reduce the sense of insecurity among prisoners, including those facing arrest. This reduces conflict between officers of the law and those taken into legal custody, and speeds rehabilitation so as to reduce crime in total by aligning our justice system with the needs of human dignity and thus developing people as productive members of society.

As such, it does not seem sensible to me that resisting arrest and escaping prison should be criminal per se. Such things might impact your immediate likelihood for parole.

Gee, if only someone would define it clearly...

The key element in human trafficking is that it involves coercion. No, visa facilitators don't necessarily fall into the "human trafficking" bucket, because they aren't forcing the Chinese women to come against their will. The gangs in Libya, if they don't rip off the immigrants but instead serve only as guides and charge only fees that are known up front, are also not human traffickers. The honest coyotes also aren't in the business of human trafficking, though they are typically breaking other laws.

The problem is that all of the situations you describe are very often involved in actual human trafficking, to the extent that it's very difficult to tell the difference. A very common tactic is that a migrant makes a deal with a guide (or facilitator) to smuggle (or otherwise move) them somewhere, but the smuggler instead takes them somewhere else (usually several hundred kilometers away), confiscates their passport and other documentation, and says that due to some unexpected bribes/fees/expenses/whatever, the migrant now owes more money, and has to work to pay off the debt. The migrant thinks they can't go to the police, because they'll get sent back with no documentation. They're usually threatened with violence if they even try to escape.

The other broad category you describe is prostitution, either underage or "simple" (whatever that means). Again, the act itself isn't the problem, but the circumstances around it. A prostitute who is not coerced in any way (including not being able to consent due to being underage) is not involved with human trafficking. Any exploitation, though, becomes a separate matter of human trafficking, completely independent of the (potentially legal) prostitution itself.

In short, It's fine for "sex" to be your product, or "relocation", or "assistance", but once your product is "unwilling people", that's human trafficking. Sure, it'd be great if we could limit discussion to only the bad folks in each of those roles you describe. While we're at it, let's make gun laws that only apply to bad folks, too. Conversely, let's only let good people have drivers' licenses, solving the problem of road rage completely!

Norway is rehabilitative, not destructive, to those who commit crimes. Michael Moore's film, Where to Invade Next explored the system in Norway, and prompted articles like this one: Why Norway's prison system is so successful. Quote from that article: "... when criminals in Norway leave prison, they stay out. It has one of the lowest recidivism rates in the world at 20%. The US has one of the highest: 76.6% of prisoners are re-arrested within five years."

At one time, The US was not so bad at the rehab concept. Folsom Prison is an example.Back in the day, they had a low recidivism rate, then the "get tough on crime" crowd took over, and now it is an overcrowded shithole with a nice high recidivism rate.

It is obvious that the get tough on crime ideal has worked about as well as the War on Drugs.

So you end up wondering why so many people still believe in an obviously failed paradigm.

Here's why - a fair percentage of the American people have deathlust. They not only don't want criminals rehabilitated, they want them killed, and preferably as early as possible, in order to save the expense of a trial. And they want them killed for any crime, as long as it isn't their family.

But we haven't reached that point, and probably won't. so there is a big dynamic tension going on. The deathlust crowd wants some things that are contradictory in nature, like more people convicted of crimes, and much longer sentences, but do not want to pay for prison expansion. That one starts to make sense when you apply the fact that they desire a lot of summary executions.

In addition, "get tough on crime" is a pretty easy sell. O the surface it almost makes sense - "If we punish harder and harder, people will eventually stop committing crimes!"

Again, that almost makes sense, until we see that at some point, people become unafraid to die. Witness the number of crimes when the perpetrator does their crime, then kills themselves. While the tough on crime crowd at first cheers the lack of a trial, and their deathlust is temporarily sated, even they must admit that they have no other tools to prevent crime. An innocent is harmed or killed, and they cannot stop it. Being destructive to those who commit crimes is another crime, a crime committed by the government. The United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime lists other issues.

You mentioned several important issues: 1) Police are sometimes "trigger happy troops". 2) Police are "under immense pressure". Yes! Difficult job. 3) "Kansas police ... training of ... SWAT teams ... is far too militaristic." 4) "... the bulk of the burden ... falls squarely upon the guy who made the false report..."

There are other issues. Putting someone in prison for years: 1) Damages that person mentally and increases the mental disturbance they have when they enter prison. 2) Costs taxpayers HUGE amounts of money. The government should be required to post on a web site the cost to taxpayers of keeping each prisoner in prison. 3) When the prisoner is released, he or she is usually less likely to be able to lead a healthy life.

Norway is rehabilitative, not destructive, to those who commit crimes. Michael Moore's film, Where to Invade Next explored the system in Norway, and prompted articles like this one: Why Norway's prison system is so successful. Quote from that article: "... when criminals in Norway leave prison, they stay out. It has one of the lowest recidivism rates in the world at 20%. The US has one of the highest: 76.6% of prisoners are re-arrested within five years."

Being destructive to those who commit crimes is another crime, a crime committed by the government.

The United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime lists other issues.

You are a liar
https://www.unodc.org/document...

Also realize the rate of gun deaths typically includes people shot in self defense protecting their life or a family member.

Well it's a good thing this particular list is for intentional homicides, defense is excluded. See here for definitions: https://www.unodc.org/document...
That being said, the US is about double Belgium, and far less than South Africa or Brazil.

I'm pretty sure that, taken across the planet and in smaller scales, you'll find humans are pretty much constantly killing one another.

There are 7 billion people. So even a very low level of violence is going to mean someone somewhere is killing someone. The chance of a human dying at the hands of another human is less than 1%. In many other species, including most apes, it is an order of magnitude more likely, and is often the leading cause of death.

I'm betting the number of people who will die today from human to human violence is probably a staggering number.

The only really big conflict in the world today is the civil war in Syria, which averages a few hundred deaths per day. The conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan are smaller. Worldwide, there are about 1200 murders per day. So the overall death toll from humans intentionally killing humans, is probably under 2000 per day. In a population of 7 billion, I don't think that is "staggering", especially compared to heart disease, cancer, or even vehicle accidents.

Codeine and Morphine are both synthesized in the US by processes patented in the 1950's and promoted in the US in the 1970's

"President's Nixon's War on Drugs made it increasingly difficult to obtain these poppies that grow mostly in areas of the world that are unfriendly to America's pharmaceutical interest, such as Afghanistan. Drug manufacturers have had to barter with heroin dealers for the purchase of this raw codeine product. This led chemist to the discovery of a method to synthesize codeine from coal tar, which eliminated the need for having the original black-tar opium and freed the drug companies from having to compete with the illicit drug cartels. "
http://www.narconon.org/drug-i...

In the US the official doctrine is to suppress the growing of poppies for opiate production:

"The United States, however, has no present intention of entering the field of poppy cultivation. On the contrary, this field was abandoned as a matter of national policy, and commercial poppy cultivation suppressed even during the war: for it is the conviction of the narcotics authorities of the United States that only by striking at the source can the opium evil finally be overcome. It may be that in some countries the poppy can be grown for seed alone, or for seed and alkaloids, without the danger of narcotic addiction spreading among the population. Certain it is, however, that, in some countries, opium is produced far in excess of legitimate needs. It is the belief of the United States that the only way to conquer the opium evil is by restricting, and, where necessary, completely abolishing, the cultivation of the opium poppy plant itself. The narcotics authorities of the United States have expressed their satisfaction that the United States can contribute, by its own sacrifice and example, to this end"
http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/...

The actual UN homicide report is at

http://www.unodc.org/documents/gsh/pdfs/2014_GLOBAL_HOMICIDE_BOOK_web.pdf

Ok, I'll call your bullshit. Do you realize the data you're pointing to does NOT validate your argument?

If you want to say that more guns = more safety, then compare more relevant data, like the number of homicides by fireweapon in countries with diferent approaches to gun control.

The UN Office on Drugs and Crime has some interesting statistics. The latest data shows there's over 3 homicides by fireweapon per 100k population in the US per year. In Canada, Australia, and every single country in Europe, that figure is way below 1.

The very definition of violent crime is so different between countries that direct comparisons are not possible. The FBI defines violent crime as one of four offences (murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault), while the British Home Office defines it as a crime "where the victim is intentionally stabbed, punched, kicked, pushed, jostled, etc. or threatened with violence whether or not there is any injury".

I would expect a country that treats a threat of violence (even without actual violence) as a violent crime to be safer, but that's just speculation on my part. Feel free to disprove me, but with relevant data, please.

@Clive Robinson

A lot of people are wondering why dragosr was the only one to run across this malware. In fact, he wasn't. The people who were before him were mocked and most threads closed and either deleted or shuffled to areas of message boards where Joe Q public couldn't see it and question this for themselves. [some] Major Anti-Virus companies included.

Users didn't want to know, companies didn't want to know. Unless you were "known" in the field, like dragosr, and even then, you are handled like you may be retarded or just need a vacation.

Here is one of dozens of reports:

LCD Monitor Broadcasts Noise To Radio! Why? (FRS)
http://forums.radioreference.com/computer/255488-lcd-monitor-broadcasts-noise-radio-why.html

Final post in that thread:

"BOTTOM LINE: No matter WHAT you do, all devices that use electricity will emit some sort of interference in the air and there's nothing you can do about it without unplugging/turning it off. "

including:

"Have you noticed any nondescript white vans or black helicopters in your neighborhood?

What do you do or have you done to make "them" take such an interest in you that "they" have to bug you?

You need a bigger tinfoil hat, perhaps a full body suit."

Another thread:

Gpu based paravirtualization rootkit, all os vulne

http://forum.sysinternals.com/gpu-based-paravirtualization-rootkit-all-os-vulne_topic26706.html

This:

U.N. report reveals secret law enforcement techniques

"Point 201: Mentions a new covert communications technique using software defined high frequency radio receivers routed through the computer creating no logs, using no central server and extremely difficult for law enforcement to intercept."

http://www.unodc.org/documents/frontpage/Use_of_Internet_for_Terrorist_Purposes.pdf

http://www.hacker10.com/other-computing/u-n-report-reveals-secret-law-enforcement-techniques/

I think this is something which has been brewing for years, but "forces" beyond our sight have managed to stifle any serious investigation into the technology. Some have announced they are retreating to ancient technology of the 70's and 80's, others are looking towards open source hardware and software combinations.

Is it time Wireshark included audio monitoring as well? Off to play with a recording device and Audacity.

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/11/friday_squid_bl_402.html#c2751193

###

Scientist-developed malware prototype covertly jumps air gaps using inaudible sound
---
Malware communicates at a distance of 65 feet using built-in mics and speakers.

by Dan Goodin - Dec 2, 2013 7:29 pm UTC

http://arstechnica.com/author/dan-goodin
https://twitter.com/dangoodin001

"Dan is the IT Security Editor at Ars Technica, which he joined in 2012 after working for The Register, the Associated Press, Bloomberg News, and other publications."

http://arstechnica.com/security/2013/12/scientist-developed-malware-covertly-jumps-air-gaps-using-inaudible-sound/

--------------------
Topology of a covert mesh network that connects air-gapped computers to the Internet:

@Clive Robinson

A lot of people are wondering why dragosr was the only one to run across this malware. In fact, he wasn't. The people who were before him were mocked and most threads closed and either deleted or shuffled to areas of message boards where Joe Q public couldn't see it and question this for themselves. [some] Major Anti-Virus companies included.

Users didn't want to know, companies didn't want to know. Unless you were "known" in the field, like dragosr, and even then, you are handled like you may be retarded or just need a vacation.

Here is one of dozens of reports:

LCD Monitor Broadcasts Noise To Radio! Why? (FRS)
http://forums.radioreference.com/computer/255488-lcd-monitor-broadcasts-noise-radio-why.html

Final post in that thread:

"BOTTOM LINE: No matter WHAT you do, all devices that use electricity will emit some sort of interference in the air and there's nothing you can do about it without unplugging/turning it off. "

including:

"Have you noticed any nondescript white vans or black helicopters in your neighborhood?

What do you do or have you done to make "them" take such an interest in you that "they" have to bug you?

You need a bigger tinfoil hat, perhaps a full body suit."

Another thread:

Gpu based paravirtualization rootkit, all os vulne

http://forum.sysinternals.com/gpu-based-paravirtualization-rootkit-all-os-vulne_topic26706.html

This:

U.N. report reveals secret law enforcement techniques

"Point 201: Mentions a new covert communications technique using software defined high frequency radio receivers routed through the computer creating no logs, using no central server and extremely difficult for law enforcement to intercept."

http://www.unodc.org/documents/frontpage/Use_of_Internet_for_Terrorist_Purposes.pdf

http://www.hacker10.com/other-computing/u-n-report-reveals-secret-law-enforcement-techniques/

I think this is something which has been brewing for years, but "forces" beyond our sight have managed to stifle any serious investigation into the technology. Some have announced they are retreating to ancient technology of the 70's and 80's, others are looking towards open source hardware and software combinations.

Is it time Wireshark included audio monitoring as well? Off to play with a recording device and Audacity.

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/11/friday_squid_bl_402.html#c2751193

@Clive Robinson

A lot of people are wondering why dragosr was the only one to run across this malware. In fact, he wasn't. The people who were before him were mocked and most threads closed and either deleted or shuffled to areas of message boards where Joe Q public couldn't see it and question this for themselves. [some] Major Anti-Virus companies included.

Users didn't want to know, companies didn't want to know. Unless you were "known" in the field, like dragosr, and even then, you are handled like you may be retarded or just need a vacation.

Here is one of dozens of reports:

LCD Monitor Broadcasts Noise To Radio! Why? (FRS)
http://forums.radioreference.com/computer/255488-lcd-monitor-broadcasts-noise-radio-why.html

Final post in that thread:

"BOTTOM LINE: No matter WHAT you do, all devices that use electricity will emit some sort of interference in the air and there's nothing you can do about it without unplugging/turning it off. "

including:

"Have you noticed any nondescript white vans or black helicopters in your neighborhood?

What do you do or have you done to make "them" take such an interest in you that "they" have to bug you?

You need a bigger tinfoil hat, perhaps a full body suit."

Another thread:

Gpu based paravirtualization rootkit, all os vulne

http://forum.sysinternals.com/gpu-based-paravirtualization-rootkit-all-os-vulne_topic26706.html

This:

U.N. report reveals secret law enforcement techniques

"Point 201: Mentions a new covert communications technique using software defined high frequency radio receivers routed through the computer creating no logs, using no central server and extremely difficult for law enforcement to intercept."

http://www.unodc.org/documents/frontpage/Use_of_Internet_for_Terrorist_Purposes.pdf

http://www.hacker10.com/other-computing/u-n-report-reveals-secret-law-enforcement-techniques/

I think this is something which has been brewing for years, but "forces" beyond our sight have managed to stifle any serious investigation into the technology. Some have announced they are retreating to ancient technology of the 70's and 80's, others are looking towards open source hardware and software combinations.

Is it time Wireshark included audio monitoring as well? Off to play with a recording device and Audacity.

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/11/friday_squid_bl_402.html#c2751193

@Clive Robinson

A lot of people are wondering why dragosr was the only one to run across this malware. In fact, he wasn't. The people who were before him were mocked and most threads closed and either deleted or shuffled to areas of message boards where Joe Q public couldn't see it and question this for themselves. [some] Major Anti-Virus companies included.

Users didn't want to know, companies didn't want to know. Unless you were "known" in the field, like dragosr, and even then, you are handled like you may be retarded or just need a vacation.

Here is one of dozens of reports:

LCD Monitor Broadcasts Noise To Radio! Why? (FRS)
http://forums.radioreference.com/computer/255488-lcd-monitor-broadcasts-noise-radio-why.html

Final post in that thread:

"BOTTOM LINE: No matter WHAT you do, all devices that use electricity will emit some sort of interference in the air and there's nothing you can do about it without unplugging/turning it off. "

including:

"Have you noticed any nondescript white vans or black helicopters in your neighborhood?

What do you do or have you done to make "them" take such an interest in you that "they" have to bug you?

You need a bigger tinfoil hat, perhaps a full body suit."

Another thread:

Gpu based paravirtualization rootkit, all os vulne

http://forum.sysinternals.com/gpu-based-paravirtualization-rootkit-all-os-vulne_topic26706.html

This:

U.N. report reveals secret law enforcement techniques

"Point 201: Mentions a new covert communications technique using software defined high frequency radio receivers routed through the computer creating no logs, using no central server and extremely difficult for law enforcement to intercept."

http://www.unodc.org/documents/frontpage/Use_of_Internet_for_Terrorist_Purposes.pdf

http://www.hacker10.com/other-computing/u-n-report-reveals-secret-law-enforcement-techniques/

I think this is something which has been brewing for years, but "forces" beyond our sight have managed to stifle any serious investigation into the technology. Some have announced they are retreating to ancient technology of the 70's and 80's, others are looking towards open source hardware and software combinations.

Is it time Wireshark included audio monitoring as well? Off to play with a recording device and Audacity.

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/11/friday_squid_bl_402.html#c2751193

#badbios - probing for deeper looks at
----
@Clive Robinson

A lot of people are wondering why dragosr was the only one to run across this malware. In fact, he wasn't. The people who were before him were mocked and most threads closed and either deleted or shuffled to areas of message boards where Joe Q public couldn't see it and question this for themselves. [some] Major Anti-Virus companies included.

Users didn't want to know, companies didn't want to know. Unless you were "known" in the field, like dragosr, and even then, you are handled like you may be retarded or just need a vacation.

Here is one of dozens of reports:

LCD Monitor Broadcasts Noise To Radio! Why? (FRS)
http://forums.radioreference.com/computer/255488-lcd-monitor-broadcasts-noise-radio-why.html

Final post in that thread:

"BOTTOM LINE: No matter WHAT you do, all devices that use electricity will emit some sort of interference in the air and there's nothing you can do about it without unplugging/turning it off. "

including:

"Have you noticed any nondescript white vans or black helicopters in your neighborhood?

What do you do or have you done to make "them" take such an interest in you that "they" have to bug you?

You need a bigger tinfoil hat, perhaps a full body suit."

Another thread:

Gpu based paravirtualization rootkit, all os vulne

http://forum.sysinternals.com/gpu-based-paravirtualization-rootkit-all-os-vulne_topic26706.html

This:

U.N. report reveals secret law enforcement techniques

"Point 201: Mentions a new covert communications technique using software defined high frequency radio receivers routed through the computer creating no logs, using no central server and extremely difficult for law enforcement to intercept."

http://www.unodc.org/documents/frontpage/Use_of_Internet_for_Terrorist_Purposes.pdf

http://www.hacker10.com/other-computing/u-n-report-reveals-secret-law-enforcement-techniques/

I think this is something which has been brewing for years, but "forces" beyond our sight have managed to stifle any serious investigation into the technology. Some have announced they are retreating to ancient technology of the 70's and 80's, others are looking towards open source hardware and software combinations.

Is it time Wireshark included audio monitoring as well? Off to play with a recording device and Audacity.

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/11/friday_squid_bl_402.html#c2751193

@Clive Robinson

A lot of people are wondering why dragosr was the only one to run across this malware. In fact, he wasn't. The people who were before him were mocked and most threads closed and either deleted or shuffled to areas of message boards where Joe Q public couldn't see it and question this for themselves. [some] Major Anti-Virus companies included.

Users didn't want to know, companies didn't want to know. Unless you were "known" in the field, like dragosr, and even then, you are handled like you may be retarded or just need a vacation.

Here is one of dozens of reports:

LCD Monitor Broadcasts Noise To Radio! Why? (FRS)
http://forums.radioreference.com/computer/255488-lcd-monitor-broadcasts-noise-radio-why.html

Final post in that thread:

"BOTTOM LINE: No matter WHAT you do, all devices that use electricity will emit some sort of interference in the air and there's nothing you can do about it without unplugging/turning it off. "

including:

"Have you noticed any nondescript white vans or black helicopters in your neighborhood?

What do you do or have you done to make "them" take such an interest in you that "they" have to bug you?

You need a bigger tinfoil hat, perhaps a full body suit."

Another thread:

Gpu based paravirtualization rootkit, all os vulne

http://forum.sysinternals.com/gpu-based-paravirtualization-rootkit-all-os-vulne_topic26706.html

This:

U.N. report reveals secret law enforcement techniques

"Point 201: Mentions a new covert communications technique using software defined high frequency radio receivers routed through the computer creating no logs, using no central server and extremely difficult for law enforcement to intercept."

http://www.unodc.org/documents/frontpage/Use_of_Internet_for_Terrorist_Purposes.pdf

http://www.hacker10.com/other-computing/u-n-report-reveals-secret-law-enforcement-techniques/

I think this is something which has been brewing for years, but "forces" beyond our sight have managed to stifle any serious investigation into the technology. Some have announced they are retreating to ancient technology of the 70's and 80's, others are looking towards open source hardware and software combinations.

Is it time Wireshark included audio monitoring as well? Off to play with a recording device and Audacity.

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/11/friday_squid_bl_402.html#c2751193

Unfortunately, your "statistic" to "shut people ... up for good" isn't actually true.

Suicide and Murder Rates for the US and Great Britain are about the same

According to the United Nations (warning, .xls file), the intentional homicide rate in Great Britain (the UK collects different data for England and Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland, so I've combined the E+W and Scotland data to get a GB one) in 2011 was 1.1 per 100,000. In the United States it was 4.7. The suicide rates are similar, but the intentional homicide rates are way off; over four times as high.

That said, according to the FBI about 69% of homicides in the US in 2012 involved the use of firearms. So ignoring all firearm-related homicides, the US's homicide rate is about 1.4 per 100,000, so still higher than Great Britain's.

But none of this means anything on its own, as far as policy implications go. Working out whether bans on certain classes of firearms are necessary and/or proportionate is a very complex task, and a couple of statistics are hardly conclusive.

Your "statistic" was still wrong, though.

-----------------------

On the murder of Lee Rigby, there are a few subtleties you may have missed. First the assailants killed him by hitting him with a car, and then stabbing him with knives (apparently unable to decapitate him) before anyone could react, even if they were armed - it's unclear if there were even people nearby at the time (one of the first 'witnesses' got involved after thinking it was an accident and trying to give the victim first aid). The assailants had a revolver, so it wasn't just knives; it is possible that if they had anticipated resistance from someone with a firearm, they would have shot him (rather than stabbed) and may have shot others nearby.

The suggestion that anyone would have "kicked the shit" out of them is rather ludicrous in any event. As it happened, after their attack the suspects waited calmly for the police to arrive (talking to passers-by); when the police did approach, they charged them ineffectually, were shot, and taken into custody.

I fail to see how widespread access to firearms would have made the situation any better, or how passers-by beating them up would have furthered the interests of justice.

Seems to me that America still has WAY more crime, violent crime especially, than other 1st world countries.

It may SEEM that way to you, but the data does not support your theory, it's a fraction the crime rate of other 1st world countries.

Incidents in the year 2010 per 100,000 population
Rape:
U.S. 27.3
UK (England and Wales) 28.8
Australia 88.4
Sweden 63.5

Assault
U.S. 250.9
U.K. (England and Wales) 664.4
Australia 766
Sweden 936.6
Scotland 1449.7
source: https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/statistics/crime.html

That's a nice theory. In practice what happens is one special interest or another does their own research that tries to demonstrate that something is harmful. Then they go lobby politicians who go "ooh err a study shows $X is harmful, maybe should ban it". Then the other side lobbies to try and undermine that study or convince the politicians not to go ahead. You can call this process the government proving something if you like, but that's not really correct.

To demonstrate this point, please find me a serious, government-sponsored cost/benefit analysis of anti-money laundering laws. I've yet to find one. Wikipedia's take. There are various attempts by academics and accountancy firms, but they are all hobbled by the fact that nobody can even measure how much money laundering takes place (heck even defining what it actually is, can prove troublesome).

Here's a statistic for you to chew on. The concept of money laundering was first invented by the USA in 1970, so about 40 years ago. It has been constantly ratched up since then. Yet in the last 20 years the street price of cocaine has more than halved (page 81, adjusted for inflation and changes in purity). In other words, despite the massive effort put into the war on drugs and all the effort put into AML, it hasn't been enough to even balance increased efficiency of the drug cartels. We can perhaps consider that the price would be even lower if it were not for AML. But that hardly seems to matter against a backdrop of such utter failure.

Even when it comes to murder, there are a number of European contries with higher rates.

Yes. Greenland. A country where most people own a firearm. Also Estonia and Lithuania. Poor countries.

All other european countries, even countries who where in civil war a few years ago have murder rates a factor of 2 to 8 lower than the US.
http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/homicide.html
The link you posted ranks the US, one of the richest nations in the world, at place 103 of 180 countries in murder rate. Something you can be proud of!
Virtually all countries at comparable development to US have murder rates much lower than the US.

That doesn't address my comment on the nature of the "demand".

There's a demand for substances, because people like to get "high";
There's a demand for guns, because people are afraid of other people with guns.

Disarm everyone, and you stem the demand. The problem is when each side tries to out-arm the other, and you just end up with a big lethal mess with everyone's finger on the trigger (literally).

The belief that possessing a firearm makes you safer is a fallacy.

For comparison, the homicide rate per capita is 5x higher in the US than in the UK. (source, UN)

If I were to have a confrontation with somebody, my chances would be far better than if we were faced with an "I'll shoot you before you shoot me" situation.
American Journal of Public Health:

people who carried guns were 4.5 times as likely to be shot and 4.2 times as likely to get killed compared with unarmed citizens. When the team looked at shootings in which victims had a chance to defend themselves, their odds of getting shot were even higher.

(source)

And it's not even a case of law abiding UK citizens being defenceless. Because of the tight restrictions, there are less guns in circulation, and because less people are armed, crimes are far less lethal.
If a shop keeper were to be targeted here, no one would get shot, the perp'd just get hit upside the head with a chair & chased down the street.

How many men have to deal in a daily battle of sexist, matriarchal social norms that cause them to be members of the poorest classes in society

It is true that there tends to be more men then women on the top societies. However, it is also true that there tends to be more men than women on the very bottom of societies. Just look at the prison population in ... well ... anywhere. Look at who gets to die in battle for their country, or for their clan, or for their family. Look at who lives on the streets, at least in western societies.

For a woman to succeed in science she has to work 3 time harder than a man, undergo 3 times as much critical scrutiny by a male dominated peer review and sweat 3 times harder about getting it right in the first place.

There was a study done on all new Danish professorships some years ago (I think i covered 5 years). Only 25% of them were given to women. However, for 50% of the positions, there were no female applicants. When the number of applications were taken into consideration, female applicants were around twice as likely to get the job (I don't remember the exact number). This was before the Danish universities started discriminating against male applicants by giving the departments an economic bonus for hiring a female professor.

Mind you, the US seems to have much more sexism than Europe*, at least from what I can gather in comments online, so that could be the reason for the differences in outlook.

* OK, at least Denmark. Given how long time it took me to figure out how different it was in the US, I can't really talk about any other countries.

This is entirely the wrong issue to focus on. Rampage killers are a rarity: a mere seven in 2012 was considered unusually high. Compare that to the number of homicides in 2010: 14,748. If you ignore firearms, that number is still almost 5,000 -- 700 times higher than an unusual cluster of rampage killings. Source: https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/homicide.html

Why is New York focusing on rifles anyway? Just before the Newtown massacre, a man was shot execution-style on one of New York City's streets with a handgun in broad daylight: http://pix11.com/2012/12/12/mystery-behind-execution-style-shooting-in-midtown-deepens-even-as-investigators-learn-more/

Handguns are the preferred weapon of criminals, and there is a huge black market for handguns. Why should we distract ourselves with the occasional massacre when we have a very real problem with criminal gun use? Criminals almost never use rifles -- rifles are too big to conceal easily, they make too much noise, and their accuracy at long distances is useless for the kind of fights criminals deal with. People need to stop wasting their time being terrified of guns that look scary and start focusing on the guns that are routinely used to murder people.

2 - If anybody actually thought that the eqyptian government was going to be all good now because of the uprising clearly has not been paying attention. Id love to visit but not until there is another revolution there.

There's a few things about Egypt you should probably know. For one thing, the poverty rate there isn't much worse there than the United States (15% versus 20%) despite the radically different size of the economy and median income ($6k versus $40k). And before you jump down my throat on "proving that", I sourced that information from the CIA World Factbook. They have a significantly lower violent crime rate than here as well -- almost four times less (and yes, I can back that up too from a reliable source, The UN Office on Drugs and Crime. And when it comes to jailing people, the United States ranks #1. Egypt? #165. (Oh yes, sourced that too).

So when you get all uppity about how they're jailing a blogger for three years for publishing something anti-muslim, I want you to remember the terror watch lists. I want you to remember Guantanamo Bay. I want you to think of the hundreds of political prisoners (Citation? Got you covered. I assume Harvard Law School is prestigious enough?) we ignore. You talk about media control and manipulation in other countries like Egypt like they're somehow worse than those of the west.

The truth is... they're better. Three years for pissing off the government here is a comparatively light sentence: We put people in jail for at least a year for just being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Don't ask for a revolution before considering visiting Egypt. Chances are good, your country needs one more.

"If you can't get the message get the man" - Mel Gibson from an interview

I like how, in the previous RMS post to Slashdot, people were attacking him, even pointing out some disgusting behavior in the first few posts. It makes me wonder how many shill accounts exist just for this purpose, for Linux and FOSS articles a lot of the time sock puppets are the first to post and are usually OT and/or trolls.

The message is what matters, and in this matter I support what RMS has said.

Most people of high intelligence are also a bit eccentric somewhere in their lives. It's when they're very smart but poor we call them crazy.

âoeThe worst thing you can call someone is crazy, itâ(TM)s dismissive.â
- Dave Chappelle from inside the actors studio

Calling RMS crazy is a little bit like calling Hawking disgusting because he isn't sexually attractive to most and lacks something because of the way he delivers his speeches.

More and more people are driven today to admire the rich, pretty looking, but stupid vs. the eccentric ones with the wisdom and intelligence. It's like high school all over again.

IMO, Ubuntu is headed in the wrong direction. While they had or have money from Shuttleworth and/or others, they should buy up some companies selling proprietary software and liberate it by making it FOSS, in areas where Linux is weak, one example of something lacking is a good video editor, and I've tried them all, they all feel like shit and some crash often. There are many other proprietary programs of different function(s) which they could benefit from by buying and liberating. But instead they've gone the way of Unity and now this so-called spyware issue.

Thankfully Distrowatch points us to many other choices, Mint being one of them, for those of us who have had enough of these changes in Ubuntu while feeling the developers, or those who micro manage them are out of touch.

So goodbye, Ubuntu. I'll miss you. Maybe we'll see another rich individual put their money behind a distro and launch some real advertising in the media to awaken the sleeping Windows users.

OT:

U.N. report reveals secret law enforcement techniques

        "Point 201: Mentions a new covert communications technique using software defined high frequency radio receivers routed through the computer creating no logs, using no central server and extremely difficult for law enforcement to intercept."

http://www.unodc.org/documents/frontpage/Use_of_Internet_for_Terrorist_Purposes.pdf

http://www.hacker10.com/other-computing/u-n-report-reveals-secret-law-enforcement-techniques/

You and sib's miss the GP's point. Sythetic opiods 'Fentanyl' and 'minor regulatory tweaks' (making addiction a prescribeable condition) could crash the world opium market.

I'm guessing the worlds opium exporters have more cash reserves then we have will to pay for Fentanyl for the worlds junkies. According to http://www.unodc.org/documents/wdr/WDR_2010/1.2_The_global_heroin_market.pdf heroin use is relatively evenly distributed worldwide. Hard political problem. Rich countries would have to start first. I don't see it happening.

People there don't plant marijuana there

That Afghan black hash you must be smoking would beg to disagree with you.

Does SEC, or anyone in the U.S. for that matter, have jurisdiction over supposedly illegal acts outside of the country?

Yes, in this case there are international treaties in place. Corruption has been recognized as an international problem and thus the need for international laws became obvious - and was addressed. See http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/treaties/CAC/index.html

Unfortunately these questions can only be answered by Japanese. The statistics come from the UN and do state that it often shows willingness to report the crime. I would state one thing however, the difference between the #1 spot (South Africa) and and #54 (Japan) is quite substantial. The difference isn't quite as much between #9 (US) and #54, but still a marked difference. NB: This data is from the 1998-2000 survey, the 2008 data can be found here, but it's not as easily readable and is not ranked.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_rap_percap-crime-rapes-per-capita

Not much comes from Afghanistan?

In 2007, 93% of the opiates on the world market originated in Afghanistan
http://www.unodc.org/pdf/research/AFG07_ExSum_web.pdf

If you think something is a sin, (alcohol, for instance) why can't Muslims simply choose to not drink alcohol and leave everyone else alone?

Funny, that, isn't it? The Taliban had absolutely no qualms about cultivating opium poppies to make heroin, partly to sell to the West, but also to be used by "good Muslims" in Afghanistan.

There was a BBC report a while ago about the use of opium amongst the native Afghans while the Taliban were in power. Things were so bad there that mothers used to give it to their babies to pacify them when they were hungry.

So pop-pickers, when you smack your bitch up, Johnny Taliban gets some dosh.

The UN Food and Agricultural Organization has the missions of "helping to build a world without hunger": that is their motto. So imagine my surprise when I needed some stats for a paper but they wanted me to join as a GOLD MEMBER ($15K) or a SILVER MEMBER ($1.5K) or instead suffer restricted public access: http://faostat.fao.org/site/372/default.aspx

Personally I think it's pretty disgusting an organization claiming they are "helping to build a world without hunger" charge so much for data. I suspect that money is being used to build Dascha or pay for convention junkets to tropical island resorts, rather than being turned into third-world aid. The UN receives $$$ in member donations. They should not be trying to scam money off the people it supposedly represents.

Same with their reports. e.g. Their World Drug Reports make all sorts of claims complied from statistical data BUT DOESN'T BACK THEM UP, and you CANNOT get the raw data to verify what they are saying: http://www.unodc.org/

UN needs to lift its game.

To be fair, banning AK-47s is somewhat related to preventing terrorism.

Based on what? Name one terrorist incident that involved AK47s.

...the latest research indicates that the pendulum (of opinion) may have swung too far in the opposite direction. There are serious mental health consequences associated with cannabis, including a significant risk of dependency, precipitation and aggravation of psychosis, and acute dysphoric episodes. These risks appear to be higher for people who start consuming cannabis during adolescence. Each year, thousands of people seek medical attention for problems related to their cannabis use, and this number appears to be growing. Cannabis is not the harmless herb often portrayed, but a psychoactive drug that deserves to be taken seriously.

if you are going to start using words that actually mean something, check their definitions first.

Your defintion of terrorism is an interesting one. Where'd you get it from? It's especially interesting to claim that terrorism cannnot be funded or trained by any recognized government or nation; sounds like a defintion of convenience by some government entity to dodge accusations that there's no real difference between terrorism and state action.

There is no internationally agreed-upon definition of terrorism. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter, from the American Revolution to the Zionist movement.

And, by the way: I definitely prefer a society where things were stolen from me 5 times and I were killed 0 times, to one where I only lose 1 item to theft while being killed in the process... but that kind of argument is quite inflammatory, so I should immediately apologize for it :-)

The blog you point to seems to choose the figures that back its theory up. From the same papers it cites as source[1], you can read:
Homicides / 100.000 inhabitants 1999
US: 4.55
France: 1.63
Germany: 1.22
Italy: 1.4
Switzerland: 1.25

[1]http://www.unodc.org/unodc/crime_cicp_survey_se venth.html

This site seems to disagree with the differences in crime rates you stated. I followed some of the supportijng links and it also apears to be acurate. Well i guess interpool only wants you to know about the stats if you are a police angency. This site hereandhere seem to back it up. It is amazing that switzerland apears to have a larger crime rate then the US. This site http://www.gunowners.org/sk0703.htm apears to say that gun ownership has the oposite effect in crime then what is popularly taunted too.

I've heard this misinterpretation about the crime rates in Europe compaired to america before. I'm not sure it is something like the chicken and egg concpet were some one thinks it should be logical to have that outcome so they just spout it or if the EU news agencies under report the crimes unlike in america were it is a guarentied ratings.

"cocaine doesn't grow very well in the Middle East. They grow opium poppies instead"

According to this report (a pdf) produced by the United Nation Office on Drugs and Crime:

No licit or illicit cultivation of narcotic plants is reported to have taken place in the territory of the I.R. of Iran. No reports indicate the existence of illicit drug manufacturing in the I.R. of Iran.

Of course, since the fall of the brutal Taliban regime in Afghanistan, opium poppy production has exploded in that country. I don't think you can blame the Iranians though.

Why? Because the US (and Australia) signed a UNITED NATIONS TREATY that said they would.

General Link

The Treaty (PDF)

Why? Because the US (and Australia) signed a UNITED NATIONS TREATY that said they would.

General Link

The Treaty (PDF)

God Bless America, with the worst crime levels in the first world

Except for Sweden, New Zealand and Denmark. In fact, the US has about an average per capita crime rate as the rest of the world, according to the UN

God Bless America, where "democracy" means a rich, white male as President

Who serves by the will of the population, is limited in the length of term and whose powers are tempered by two other branches of government. A president who transfers power peacefully, something that has been done every four or eight years for over two hundred years. Incidentally, America is a democratic republic. When did China have its last free presidential election?

God Bless America, the biggest consumer of the world's natural resources

Actually, the "problem" is a first world issue, not an American issue. Per capita, America is not a leader. Look to Japan.

God Bless America, so happy to violate international laws

Riiiiiight. Let's see. America violated international law by...uh...hmmm. By...hmm. Oh, you mean by invading Iraq? The one that appears to be authorized by UN Resolution 1441? Hmmm...

God Bless America, where "freedom of speech" means race-hate groups like KKK

Yes, and the ACLU and the Sierra Club and the NAACP and Greenpeace and any other organization that criticizes the government. Freedom of speech is not freedom to act. You clearly do not understand what freedom of speech means. To limit one organization's speech because you do not agree with it is to open the door to limit anyone to make the same claim about any organization. Of course, China doesn't have that problem. When you disallow freedom of speech, you only have to worry about the hate groups that keep quiet.

God Bless America, and its massive and ever-growing poverty gap

America's poverty rate in 2000 was the lowest in 26 years. It has only slightly increased, from 8.7% to 9.2%. Recently, NPR reported that instead of people spending vast periods of time in poverty, they tend to move out of poverty in a period of a few years, but others, due to a variety of reasons, move into poverty, again, generally, to move out in a few years. This, of course, is in contrast to China's poverty rate...11.2% in urban areas, darn near 100% in rural areas.

God Bless America, with barely 300 years of dire history and culture

The world's oldest, continously functioning representative democracy. America has managed to overcome, in less than 300 years what China, with over a thousand years of history has not.

God Bless America, all its appalling "sitcoms" with no grasp of irony

OK, I guess I can accept this as a strike against America...

God Bless America, with the highest obesity levels in the developed world

One of the pitfalls of freedom of choice is that one is free to make personal choices that are bad for you.

God Bless America, because corporations should be allowed to run amok

Actually, corporations are not allowed to do that. A tiny bit of research will show you that in the end, they do get caught.

God Bless America, wasting billions to attack foreign countries

Like Tibet? Like Nepal?

God Bless America, and thank God I don't have to live there.

And the final difference between the US and China? In the US, nobody has to live here!

-h-

>there are quite a few intangible
>benefits, like social services
>and less violent crime.

Just a side note... I had a look at the ICVS last year and Canada appears to have a slightly higher rate of violent crime than the US. The most violent countries are Australia and the UK--that's been the trend for the past several years but most people (even Australians & Brits) have grew up with America's violent 1980's reputation and carried that with them since.

The UN has been publishing the ICVS (International Crime Victim Survey) every so often. You can download it in PDF format from http://www.unodc.org/unodc/crime_cicp_survey_seven th.html among other places. It's about 4MB. I think it's the one at the very bottom of the page called "Responses to the Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Survey as of 3 December 2002". One will probably get the clearest international picture with the "Sorted by variable, rates" file.

NEWSFLASH
Dateline: State of Improbability.
This just in from Redhat CEO Matt Szulik:

All earnings from the Open Source Defence fund will go to a special foundation which we are setting up to purchase new keyboards for Nigerian spammers. We have all been getting awfully tired of seeing those Nigerian scam spams, and having every one of them in all caps was just making it worse.

We used to think that the stupid spammers thought that they couldn't be traced if they typed in all caps, but extensive research by graduate anthropology students at the Nigerian University shows that the real problem is that all the spammers think that their keyboards look prettier with all the LEDs lit. So, we're going to give them new keyboards with more LEDs, and no capslock key.

With one stroke, this will solve the Nigerian spam problem. Oh, did I mention that none of the keys will be functional?