Slashdot Mirror
China Says It Lacks Skills To Hack US Systems
ScentCone writes "A spokesman for China's foreign ministry says that — China being the 'developing nation' that it is — he doubts that his country has the sophistication to hack foreign systems. This in response to statements by two congressmen regarding apparent probing by China-based crackers into congressional systems for information about communication between US officials and activists in China."
Yes, but it was used by Japanese, not Chinese.
For talented crackers, it would be relatively easy to cover their tracks by using several compromised machines as proxies for their attack.
China has large internet user base and the average Jin would likely secure their home machine as well as average Joe across the ocean.
There are no atheists when recovering from tape backup.
Read the fine article. Quoted from second article:
"The extent of the intrusions on Capitol Hill, which officials said began in August 2006, was unclear, although Rep. Frank R. Wolf (R-Va.), whose office had four computers affected, said that other members of Congress were targeted, as well as at least one congressional committee. "They got everything," Wolf said at a news briefing, describing the attack on his office systems.
Wolf said that after one of the attacks, a car with license plates belonging to Chinese officials went to the home of a Chinese dissident in the Washington suburbs and took photographs of it."
http://downloads.southparkstuff.com/sounds/epi310/310_settlesthat.mp3 (NSFW)
it's part of the Chinese culture. The polite way to receive a compliment is to be modest; in fact it's bad manners to receive a compliment without protest...so in this case, the Chinese foreign ministry is merely being polite
it's a polite way in China to receive a compliment
China is an amazing culture with lots of fantastic history, and racism/culturalism is bad. That does not mean that taking stereotypes and portraying them as ridiculous is, and most of your "facts" are silly.
China does get into wars (though historically with itself, and is claiming areas taken by the Mongols(Tibet is not historically part of China). Though "The Art of War" advises against fighting, it was not written because of a history of peace.
People started moving out of caves 8,000 years ago, with the advent of agriculture in the fertile crescent.
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
While the "Great Firewall" is expansive within China's borders, it isn't all that technically impressive. There are internet gateways leading in and out of the country - you already have to have hardware managing that as those pipes lead downwards to major infrastructure backbones, government networks, individual ISP's, etc. Not particularly difficult a step to add filtering/blocking/poisoning to internet requests from the subsidiary networks (not to suggest that it isn't a lot of man hours/hardware involved, but it isn't exactly rocket science - just extensions off of established filtering techniques).
Most of the filtering isn't even being handled by the "Great Firewall" but is instead handled by individual ISP's instituting their own filtering methods and complying with government issued blocklists, as well as citizen self censorship. While I don't mean to suggest that China doesn't have the programming talent to attack other nations networks (especially our American soft and squishy ones), but the "Great Firewall" is hardly a golden example of technological achievement.
(Wikipedia has a fairly good outline of China's known practices, those interested might want to take a look at it before doing some more in-depth research: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship_in_the_People's_Republic_of_China)
Extreme Programming - Redundant Array of Inexpensive Developers
You seem to be laboring under the misimpression that China doesn't have the power of life or death over us.
The United States of America: We do what we must because we can.
There, fixed it.
"And there be unix which have made themselves unix for the kingdom of heaven's sake." - Matt. 19:12
Nonsense. China banned science and innovation more than 500 years ago, and science and technology has not since been more accepted and applied than recently under the so-called communist regime.
China gets in wars/military actions like anyone else, but when they do it, the purpose is to take away freedoms.
A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
Right click it, do 'Copy Link Location', paste it in your address bar, hit alt-enter to open in new tab.. :)
"'Yrch!' said Legolas, falling into his own tongue."
There's a big difference between a phonetic alphabet and an lolograph based language.
To English and German, an "A" is an "A" and really does not mean anything in and of itself. The alphabet denotes sounds that when strung together have a meaning.
In Chinese and Japanese, each character has a specific meaning in itself. It is that meaning that carries between both languages - one does not even need to know how to pronounce the character to understand its meaning.
I tried every decent and legal way I could think of to resolve the issue w/the business before I rented the chicken suit
Here's a good site to give you an overview.
"This calls for a very special blend of psychology and extreme violence" - Vyvyan "The Young Ones"
Then what do you call the massive flood of chinese troops and equipment into Korea when the UN had pushed past the 38th parallel?
China most certainly does "get into wars"
If you can't take an opponent directly? Stir up crap between HE & his biggest opponent, & watch them BOTH "take a dive", while you end up the victor mopping up the spoils of war/walking out of the saloon with the wench over your shoulder & jug of wine in the other hand, is what I suspect this REALLY is... apkAnd guess what - the thing you describe was first used and put to paper more than 2000 years ago by Sun Tzu. It's part of "The Art of War". I'd suggest you go read it.
I've done this argument before many times.
US Congress didn't declare war, what they did was that they gave authorization for Bush to use armed forces in defense of USA and for enforcing UN policies. Thus Giving Bush under conditions, the right to send America into war.
Now heres where things get interesting.
Firstly with Iraq, you were not at peace, you simply had a cease-fire arrangement. Peace was never officially declared after the Gulf war in 1990.
Thus by UN standards, USA never started a war, they simply resumed the Gulf war many years later. Thus they were in compliance with UN requirements
As we know, Saddam broke many un policies, including allowing UN weapon inspection teams.
Because of the refusal in compliance to UN policies, and the authorization from congress a year earlier in defense of UN policies, Bush had legal entitlement to used armed forces.
Thus we find that by legal UN loopholing, and by a no balls/brains congress, Bush legally sent USA into war.
What i also find interesting, is that the USA are still at war with N. Korea, since they never made peace there either, its still a cease-fire arrangement after several decades...
I guess Bush just had his hands too full with Iraq during his terms in office.
To avoid criticism; Say nothing, Do nothing, Be nothing.
i was taught to only ask 2x, refusal once is polite.
times they are a changing?
nanking
look it up and shut your face
yes, but if you can write katakana, there is a good chance of communicating in english with someone who can't speak it in japan- if you use simple enough language most words when written with the japanese enunciation have at least a common slang meaning in conversational japanese.
I'm Chinese, and I can read Chinese without any problems.
Depending on the number of Kanji in a piece of Japanese text, I can extract the meaning sometimes better than automatic online translations. I don't know any Japanese, but experience is that most of the important words are written in Kanji, while the Japanese characters are usually there for grammatical purposes.
Usually the problem when reading Japanese is the heavy use of Katakana, due to Japanese adopting a lot of western terms (even for things not of western origin).
For meaning of the characters, I can tell you that they aren't exactly the same, but are similar enough that usually Chinese are able to extract the general idea. The fact that Kanji was introduced to Japan a long time ago isn't really relevant. With a little bit of training a person who's proficient in (modern) Chinese can read ancient Chinese texts up to 2000 years ago (in its original form) without problem. The Chinese language has been remarkably stable/stagnant in the past 2000 years...
I'm not sure whether the Japanese could read Chinese without training though, I think they learn less Kanji than Chinese learn Chinese characters, and a difficult piece of Chinese text might be indecipherable...
Don't quote me on this.