Slashdot Mirror


Evidence Aside, FBI Says Russians Out To Steal Ideas From US Tech Firms

v3rgEz (125380) writes "It sounds like a scare from 1970s Cold War propaganda or a subplot from the popular TV series "The Americans," but the FBI says the threat is real: Russian investment firms may be looking to steal high-tech intelligence from Boston-area companies to give to their country's military. Many of the firms under scrutiny are in the Boston area, including those partnered with a number of area biotech companies and with ties to MIT." And while the FBI says this could be happening, as the article points out, this pronouncement seems to be based on plausibility rather than specific incidents of such theft. One relevant excerpt: "The FBI warning comes as the Obama administration has increased pressure on Russia for its annexation of the former Ukrainian territory of Crimea by levying sanctions on some business leaders close to President Vladimir Putin. In March, the US Commerce Department banned new licenses for the export to Russia of defense-related products and “dual-use” technologies that could have military applications."

132 comments

  1. I've worked with many Russians... by Kenja · · Score: 2

    what they'll do is take the design, and implement a very cheap poorly implemented knock off. No real threat in my opinion...

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    1. Re:I've worked with many Russians... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      Are you sure you're not thinking of the Chinese?

    2. Re:I've worked with many Russians... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Are you saying that this linux can run on a computer without windows underneath it, at all ? As in, without a boot disk, without any drivers, and without any services ?

      That sounds preposterous to me.

      If it were true (and I doubt it), then companies would be selling computers without a windows. This clearly is not happening, so there must be some error in your calculations. I hope you realise that windows is more than just Office ? Its a whole system that runs the computer from start to finish, and that is a very difficult thing to acheive. A lot of people dont realise this.

      Microsoft just spent billions of dollars and many years to create Windows 8, so it does not sound reasonable that some new alternative could just snap into existence overnight like that. It would take billions of dollars and a massive effort to achieve. IBM tried, and spent a huge amount of money developing OS/2 but could never keep up with Windows. Apple tried to create their own system for years, but finally gave up and moved to Intel and Microsoft.

      Its just not possible that a freeware like the Linux could be extended to the point where it runs the entire computer fron start to finish, without using some of the more critical parts of windows. Not possible.

      I think you need to re-examine your assumptions.

    3. Re:I've worked with many Russians... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Kim, take your pills, will ya?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re:I've worked with many Russians... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's precisely what people said about the Chinese and now so many people buy from them that China will be surpassing US economically and militarily. Lol

    5. Re:I've worked with many Russians... by gnick · · Score: 1

      The Chinese produce at least some very adequate imitations of foreign inventions, but the quality is inconsistent unless you're looking very closely at it. The French openly admit copying tech from the US (and presumably others). The Chinese may not openly admit to copying foreign designs, but it's readily apparent. I have no reason to believe that US companies don't have similar practices. And that counts double when it comes to military. As for a solution, I wish I had a friendly one, but practically the Chinese seem to be doing it right. Copying is cheap, manufacturing is cheap, inventing is expensive.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    6. Re:I've worked with many Russians... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Joseph McCarthy, is that you?

    7. Re:I've worked with many Russians... by Archtech · · Score: 3, Informative

      If you're old enough, you can distinctly remember when exactly the same thing was said about Japanese products. (I refer to the post-WW2 period, roughly from 1950 to about 1970). Then Japanese products suddenly became synonymous with quality so high that most US companies couldn't begin to match it.

      --
      I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
    8. Re:I've worked with many Russians... by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The Chinese may not openly admit to copying foreign designs, but it's readily apparent. I have no reason to believe that US companies don't have similar practices

      No, that shit is for fools. Instead, we let someone else do the copying, and then we remarket the results at a massive markup. Or, we actually invent the shit that gets copied, and sell that at a massive markup over the massive markup until it gets copied too much, then we invent the next thing.

      Granted, we import the inventors, but there's no reason that shouldn't be sustainable.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    9. Re:I've worked with many Russians... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a hipster photographer who uses old Soviet-made lenses, I can attest that they're almost -- but not quite -- entirely unlike their western equivalents.

    10. Re:I've worked with many Russians... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hubris... considering Yanks stole many great ideas from the Brits and French.

      Boeing vs Airbus?
      Steam train?
      Supersonic flight?

      I can go on.

    11. Re:I've worked with many Russians... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lean manufacturing - Toyota.

      Nuff said.

    12. Re:I've worked with many Russians... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AK47, yeah jealous much that they got more customers for their gear than you have?

    13. Re:I've worked with many Russians... by smooth+wombat · · Score: 1

      I do remember that time but the difference is the Japanese actually did implement better products. Witness the historic rise of Honda (and their recent epic fall) in the auto industry.

      The same with camera lenses. Even today there are people who ask where a lens is made for Nikon or Canon, preferring those produced in Japan over those in China. Whether there is a true qualitative difference is debatable, but the perception remains. On this same subject, I'll leave out Zeiss and their lenses because they explicitly design high-quality lenses and the costs reflect that.

      The difference, however, is that the Japanese do make quality products whereas Chinese made products are, for the most part, of inferior quality with either shoddy parts or lax quality control. Or both.

      The same with Russia. While they might now be able to mass produce products, their quality is nowhere near what the rest of the industrialized world produces (with few exceptions).

      --
      We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    14. Re:I've worked with many Russians... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Not really, some of the early computer tech they copied ended up being better than the original equipment. It's not like the west didn't get hints from Soviet designs either.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    15. Re:I've worked with many Russians... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Japanese products were initially low quality too. There have been a few interesting books on the subject of the change. In particular, several Japanese companies focussed very heavily on quality control processes for about a decade, which allowed them to dramatically improve their quality. Over the same time, the Japanese people who had been responsible for copying the designs became sufficiently familiar with them that they were able to initially improve them and then produce better ones.

      The main factor stopping Russia or China going through the same transition is institutionalised corruption. It's hard to implement good quality control if you can't trust the people doing the inspections not to take bribes...

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    16. Re:I've worked with many Russians... by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

      not only is it possible to run linux without Windows, the live-CD version lives with no hard drive (where Windows exists) AT ALL.
      Computers without Windows exist NOW and are sold NOW. BUT, and you knew there was one, the PC vendors have no choice but to buy a license for each or else pay per-install prices (typically 240% - 400% of OEM pricing) for ALL their product.
      Weep for free enterprise, that a Micro$ can force such a contract on providers.

    17. Re:I've worked with many Russians... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      As opposed to the US, which does a far better idea of stealing ideas from other countries (especially these days with the NSA)

    18. Re:I've worked with many Russians... by JasonGoatcher · · Score: 1

      Your view of Russian programmers is the exact opposite of mine. Admittedly, we're both stereotyping Russians, but all the Russian programmers I've encountered have been top notch, or at least impressive in ways that influence me. There was a distributed computing project years ago called Find-a-Drug which simulated potential medicines. I don't remember precisely what blackbird's program did, but I remember people with large computer farms thought he was one of the best things to happen to the project. He basically allowed them to track all their various instances from one place. Doesn't sound like much, but he was the only one that did it properly, and it worked pretty well from what I heard. Then there was a second Russian I heard of that managed to simulate awesome water graphics back when water looked like crap, and he'd had no exposure whatsoever to English/American influences, really any influences, he was about as independent as you can get.

    19. Re:I've worked with many Russians... by oursland · · Score: 1

      This isn't the 1960s, the world is quickly becoming entirely digital, and infinite reproduction of digital data can be bit-perfect.

    20. Re:I've worked with many Russians... by doccus · · Score: 1

      You have 5 weeks to re-examine your assumptions or no more patches for you anymore before bed!

    21. Re:I've worked with many Russians... by spectrumlogic · · Score: 1

      This cavalier approach to the protection of rights of industry does not account for the potential that careful, specified products could be accomplished by a well funded adversary. Or do you believe these groups do not exist? Makes me sad and tired.

    22. Re:I've worked with many Russians... by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

      Are you saying that this linux can run on a computer without windows underneath it, at all ? As in, without a boot disk, without any drivers, and without any services ?

      That sounds preposterous to me.

      If it were true (and I doubt it), then companies would be selling computers without a windows. This clearly is not happening, so there must be some error in your calculations. I hope you realise that windows is more than just Office ? Its a whole system that runs the computer from start to finish, and that is a very difficult thing to acheive. A lot of people dont realise this.

      Microsoft just spent billions of dollars and many years to create Windows 8, so it does not sound reasonable that some new alternative could just snap into existence overnight like that. It would take billions of dollars and a massive effort to achieve. IBM tried, and spent a huge amount of money developing OS/2 but could never keep up with Windows. Apple tried to create their own system for years, but finally gave up and moved to Intel and Microsoft.

      Its just not possible that a freeware like the Linux could be extended to the point where it runs the entire computer fron start to finish, without using some of the more critical parts of windows. Not possible.

      I think you need to re-examine your assumptions.

      Microsoft stole (cloned) the best parts of OS2. IBM was there, as was Zerox, before MS. Linux started as a clone of a Unix derivative. Please do not heap praise on MS. Their past is not without stealing ideas.

      --
      Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
  2. FBI dislikes competition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What do i care who steals my idea, the FBI or the russians? It is stolen either way

    1. Re:FBI dislikes competition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. I have no doubt russia is trying to steal high tech secrets, just like i have no doubt that america is trying to do the same.

  3. Big Whoop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    All governments use (or would if they were sufficiently large enough) their intelligence agencies to steal business intelligence from corporations located in other countries in order to help their own economy. The Russians didn't just start to do this now because of the Ukrainian crisis and US sanctions.

    1. Re:Big Whoop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All men rape (or would if could get away with it) in order to satisfy their sexual needs. The Indians didn't just start to do this now because :whatever:.

      Therefore men should continue raping, everybody does.

    2. Re:Big Whoop by jythie · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I do not believe anyone is saying it should not stop, but outrage over any specific country that 'might' be doing it is rather silly. It is a bit like a front page story about a some celebrity everyone loves to hate going 50mph in a 45 zone. Yeah they shouldn't be speeding, but pretending that them doing it is something special is not terribly realistic.

    3. Re:Big Whoop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No they don't. Their agents would be prosecuted in the homeland for crimes, if the host country wouldn't prosecute them first. Corporations, on the other hand would, if they could somehow import legally to the, say EU market, without summary confiscation and the destruction of the products. All in all, there is no point destroying the trust of your clients (citizens) and so losing them (having them turn to mafia) for short term advantage. Except when the mafias of Saint Pertesburg, excuse me, Leningrad and Moscow gives a model of how to conduct your domestic and foreign policies.

    4. Re:Big Whoop by timeOday · · Score: 2

      The issue is that deteriorating relations reduce the negative consequences of negative actions. You don't have much incentive to play nice any more. Like how an employee who was trusted yesterday can be escorted from the building today, because he was let go.

    5. Re:Big Whoop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seems like all Americans think "All governments use their intelligence agencies to steal business intelligence from corporations located in other countries in order to help their own economy".

      Trivially false... Some countries haven't any intelligence agencies. Most have a so low budget for military expense or intelligence agencies that this can only be anecdotal.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures if there are some spying the biggest share is on US but it's definitely not "all governments" and for most negligible.

  4. Nothing to worry about lads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ivan is drunk all the time!

  5. looks like someones relevant again. by nimbius · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Either we're looking to justify 2014's budget, reduce inquiry into the CIA, or keep americans in agreement with the narrative that america should do something, anything, about russian foreign policy that in no way concerns us ever.

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:looks like someones relevant again. by Immerman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, we are bound by multilateral treaty with Ukraine to defend their territorial borders from Russia. But hey, that's just some piece of paper from years ago, not like we should have to take it seriously today.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    2. Re:looks like someones relevant again. by Mr+D+from+63 · · Score: 0

      Due to Russia's activities in the Ukraine, the US is going to start giving all Russian enterprises a hard time, any way they can.

    3. Re:looks like someones relevant again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No, we're not. It's just a memorandum of generalize assurances, specifically the Budapest Memorandum of 1994. The only clause of the memorandum that remotely binds the signatories take any action (which is non military) is the fourth one:

      The United States of America, the Russian Federation, and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine, as a non-nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used.

      Well, the US/Europe submitted a resolution to the UN Security council calling for a Russian withdrawal and got vetoed by Russia. That's all it can do using the Memorandum as a legal justification for UN action. Of course, the US and Europe can unilaterally take action, but there's no treaty in place with the Ukraine to legally obligate it.

    4. Re:looks like someones relevant again. by clarkkent09 · · Score: 2, Informative

      We are not bound to defend Ukraine. That's a complete myth. Here are the 6 clauses of the Budapest Memorandum: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/... Where does it say we are required to defend Ukraine?

      --
      Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
    5. Re:looks like someones relevant again. by swb · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Russia is only as powerful as their economy, and the best way to counter them is to hobble them economically. It also is politically destabilizing internally.

      Putin has a firm political grip, but the bargain is based on oligarchs making money and staying out of politics. If his foreign policy ambitions hurt enough economically it may begin to cost him political power. Even during the Soviet era leaders were eased out.

    6. Re:looks like someones relevant again. by s.petry · · Score: 1

      A mix of all of those things is the most obvious, and add some more to that list. Make the citizens 'fear' some country and dilute any alternative opinions on what's really happening are a couple to add.

      It's foolish to think that Russia is a new threat, or bigger threat than China. China has a huge budget for espionage, Russia does not. Working in IT you will quickly find that the most sophisticated attacks are from China. Russia has a few but seem to focus primarily on black market and illegal activities, not espionage. I.E. Human trafficking, porn, pyramid schemes, and gambling content commonly comes from Russian servers for Botnets. These botnets are not also trying to break into Boeing's networks for schematics. China on the other hand has teams constantly trying to break in to Boeing.

      The article sums itself up as someone spreading FUD over and over again, which is the most telling thing you should get reading the piece.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    7. Re:looks like someones relevant again. by Immerman · · Score: 1

      And skimming the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons nothing there would seem to obligate us to intervene either.

      I stand corrected, thank you for clarifying that for me. In fact, the clause you quoted could easily be read such that we were not even obligated to seek UN action since nuclear weapons were not used. It seems like the whole memorandum is little more than a toothless declaration of intent. Russia clearly violated it's assurances under the memorandum, but there doesn't appear to be any explicit consequences associated with doing so.

      In fact - considering that the accepted wisdom is that the primary benefit of nuclear weapons is that the threat of mutually assured destruction dissuades conflict between nuclear powers, it seems to me that there is precisely zero benefit to any non-nuclear power acceding to a non-proliferation treaty without defensive clauses unless it is doing so in exchange for concessions in other political arenas.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    8. Re:looks like someones relevant again. by Arker · · Score: 1

      1.) Simply not true, as another poster already pointed out adequately.
      2.) Even if it were true, the legitimate successor government which has standing to invoke that treaty was just deposed in a putsch and it's clear that no one with standing to invoke that treaty has any desire to do so. (The fact that the US has been exposed standing behind that Putsch just makes it even less legitimate.)

      Face it this is just a ginned up confrontation that does not need to be happening. The US is in such a dominant position today that our politicians feel free to wander around the world picking fights to boost their poll numbers.

      --
      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
      Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
    9. Re:looks like someones relevant again. by TubeSteak · · Score: 1

      Russia is only as powerful as their economy, and the best way to counter them is to hobble them economically. It also is politically destabilizing internally.

      The difficulty is that Russia's economy is based on natural gas, which Europe doesn't have any alternatives for.
      Welcome to the global economy.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    10. Re:looks like someones relevant again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As Russia's neighbors are fond of pointing out, Russia has a long history of enduring hardship and 'outlasting' it's opponents.

      The best way to counter Russia is to strengthen their economy so they have 'something to lose' that's worth playing nice for.

    11. Re:looks like someones relevant again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Either we're looking to justify 2014's budget, reduce inquiry into the CIA, or keep americans in agreement with the narrative that america should do something, anything, about russian foreign policy that in no way concerns us ever.

      Blaming America. The new hipster movement.

    12. Re:looks like someones relevant again. by swb · · Score: 1

      Russia might want to consider making friends to the West, their recent history with their neighbor to the East hasn't been friendly, and this neighbor is in a much better position now than they were then..

    13. Re:looks like someones relevant again. by MobSwatter · · Score: 1

      Welcome to the collapse of the global economy, what you are seeing is post USSR fall activity with states fighting over territory and resources. Same will happen here as everything that was taking place pre USSR collapse is presently happening in the US. Many of us refuse to see it and believe in the powers that be, but those same powers a long time ago chose to bring it down be selling future to pad their pockets of their day, the pattern repeated and it's effects have compounded, this is the damage they say is irreversible. In the US is a bit different though, the government has armored up with military grade hardware to tend to the population in obvious anticipation of bloodshed.

  6. Fox News has taken over slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    WTF is "based on plausibility"? Many things are plausible, like the OP is an anime android using AI to submit this article?

    1. Re:Fox News has taken over slashdot by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      WTF is "based on plausibility"? Many things are plausible

      Yes, many things are plausible, but not all of those things will lead to an increase in the FBI's budget.

    2. Re:Fox News has taken over slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Plausible as in "We, the US are spying on / stealing IP from everybody"

      Thus it is plausible that the Russians are doing the same.

      But not everybody is a boundless A*hole like the US (commercial/political) leadership.

    3. Re:Fox News has taken over slashdot by RightSaidFred99 · · Score: 2

      Yeah, it's not like the Russians _just got fucking busted_ for doing this.

      Dipshit.

  7. Pot, Kettle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obama ain't fooling anyone. One of the purposes of his global spy aparatus exposed by Snowden is industrial espionage.

  8. based on plausibility by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

    The truthers have infiltrated the FBI! Well "based on plausibility", J. Edgar Hoover was buried in his favorite dress.

    My only question is, Will any of this affect space station operations? Will the taxis raise their fares?

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  9. Smart move! by Opportunist · · Score: 2

    Instead of stealing from everyone else, let the US do that work and then simply lift it from them.

    Never would've thought that Russia would be teaching us a lesson in efficiency...

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  10. Uh huh. by rmdingler · · Score: 1
    See. It's not only the terrorists we're keeping you safe from, those damn evil Russkies are out there with a renewed vengeance fighting to foil your wholesome existence.

    Fudmuckers.

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

    1. Re:Uh huh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      See. It's not only the terrorists we're keeping you safe from, those damn evil Russkies are out there with a renewed vengeance fighting to foil your wholesome existence.

      And the political dissidents. And the churches. And students who disagree with government policy. And people who would point out how unjust your financial system is.

      The FBI (and the rest of the TLAs) are rapidly devolving into propaganda arms for state security, who will lie, cheat, steal, break the law, and otherwise do anything they damned well feel like.

      They're rapidly becoming everything the US used to fear about the soviets ... because, quite frankly, the US looks more and more like cold-war USSR in terms of their "whatever we say goes" and "anything in the name of state security and secrecy".

      America is fucked.

    2. Re:Uh huh. by geekoid · · Score: 1

      Your post would seem plausible if Putin wasn't saber rattling.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    3. Re:Uh huh. by RightSaidFred99 · · Score: 0

      Don't be a dumb asshole.

      This is beyond plausible - it already fucking happened, you cynical hipster. Try educating yourself.

    4. Re:Uh huh. by RightSaidFred99 · · Score: 1

      And if they hadn't just done it a few years ago. We caught them (Anna Chapman et al.) but how many have we not caught?

    5. Re:Uh huh. by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      Right. Because if the FBI says they apprehended real live dangerous Ruskies we can believe them. They have a reputation for honesty, and would never lie!

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    6. Re:Uh huh. by RightSaidFred99 · · Score: 1

      Shrug. If you're going to go all paranoid delusional on me and deny everything then I don't know what else to say. Maybe they are out to get you, who knows.

    7. Re:Uh huh. by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      " If you're going to go all paranoid delusional on me ..."

      You could get away with saying that in 2012. Alas, it is 2014, and not considering the very distinct possibility that they are lying is the insanity in 2014.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    8. Re:Uh huh. by RightSaidFred99 · · Score: 1

      Yes. They lied. It's a huge conspiracy and Anna Chapman is a poor victim, as are the other 9. Nevermind that Russia traded US spies for their spies. Oh, and the UK must have been in on it too.

      Get a fucking grip, you sound ridiculous.

      Or...maybe that's just what 'they' want us to think, right? Lolzers.

    9. Re:Uh huh. by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

      Maybe they lied. Maybe they didn't. You don't know if they did or didn't and I don't know if they did or didn't. You are a straight friggin idiot if you can't understand that.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    10. Re:Uh huh. by rmdingler · · Score: 1
      I maintain the grandparent is onto something here, men. One would have to be paying attention to come to the conclusions the two of you have proffered.

      Most folks get the sound bites. Russian's misuse Olympic money. They invade Ukraine. Bastards have spies. We need another pretext for big government surveillance programs because the terrorists are so fucking inept. ( No box office blockbusters since '01 and counting.)

      If you don't see Machiavelli in successful modern government, and yes, success = obedient subjects, you're just not looking too good.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

  11. Thanks to the NSA this is much easier by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well since the NSA has basically weakened a lot of the security protocols, it is very easy to steal company secrets.

  12. Point the finger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When you own NSA is in the spotlight, use a time honored tactic and point the finger the other way.
    We would NEVER stoop so low.

  13. wait... by jeff13 · · Score: 1

    U.S. tech firms have ideas? Last I saw it was just a lot of - "how can I completely manipulate, patent troll, and keep an iron grip on this market"?

    Really, if you think Facebook or Google is somehow a wonderful idea, you don't understand markets. It's also a major reason the US top tech firms are failures, really, and why they have to maintain those markets so no one notices. It's a self destructive cycle.

    1. Re:wait... by FuegoFuerte · · Score: 2

      When I think "tech firm" in this context I don't think Facebook or Google so much as companies like Cisco and Juniper.

  14. So let's help them out... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    By indescrimately weakening Internet security.

  15. oh no problem there by globaljustin · · Score: 1

    what they'll do is take the design, and implement a very cheap poorly implemented knock off.

    Oh...psssht....that's **all**

    wtf FBI? /sarcasm

    "no real threat"....you're a moron

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
  16. "evidence aside" by globaljustin · · Score: 1

    WTF the summary is biased..."evidence aside" says the headline...then the summary continues, drawing paralells between this and the Cold War

    criminals do this **routinely**

    to think otherwise is foolish and naive

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
    1. Re:"evidence aside" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Granted, but the point is that the FBI is raising a warning about the *possible* and the routine but not yearly routine nor specially relevant by recent criminal acts. Hence, "evidence aside" which would be that as much a Russian tech firms may be out to grab data from US tech firms, well, we have evidence that China has *actually* done so in recent years and the whole mess with the NSA is strong evidence the US is doing the same to other countries.

      In fact, story after story is that intelligence agencies in many countries are engaged more often in economical "warfare"--more economic pie increasing to their advantage, unlike the normal warfare broken window syndrome--to further enrich "their"--preposterous for most multinational companies--tech firms than any real military "cyber warfare" to in some fashion attack the government or the people of other countries. To that end, the truth is closer to the point that each government is engaging in fascist rent-seeking on the part of corporations to indemnify themselves against any actual blame--again, multinational companies don't want to get punished for their activities in the country they're by proxy engaging in espionage on a rival company--and in part to have the tax payers bear the cost and general burden of all the infrastructure, espionage, etc that are very hard to do as a private company but very doable at the hand of the government*.

      tl;dr FBI announces water wet, sky blue, US govt and companies doing the same thing--specific evidence not important since it's the Federal Bureau of [Obvious] Information, not the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

      *And yea, in some places criminals also do it directly as well if the government can or will (if paid a small bribe) look the other way, but that's in many ways a point of the structural organization and I don't think any more "fair" to anyone no matter how warped some might view it as only important on how much the tax payer is paid or paying to support such "criminal" acts.

    2. Re:"evidence aside" by Sarten-X · · Score: 1

      TFA is just as bad. The short version is that the FBI releases a general warning about Russian espionage, and a bunch of Russian VC firms swear they're not spying and have never heard of anyone doing such things.

      I've spent my share of time in counter-intelligence briefings. I was never warned about mass surveillance, firmware backdoors, or any other high-tech techniques. Instead, what seemed to be the biggest threat was the risk of foreigners listening in on casual conversations, or picking up organizational details to find good targets to bribe. They're probably not trying to corrupt company executives (further) or researchers directly, but it's amazing what poorly-paid janitors have access to.

      It's not just "plausible", but in fact likely, that the FBI has a lead that there are Russians operating in Boston. It's a general warning, because it's a general threat. It's not some specific VC firm or some specific technology that's being targeted. Rather, there's probably just evidence of somebody in the area looking for any tech information they can get.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
  17. Sounds like a fair trade to me by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

    Industrial secrets for sex with hot Russian spies. Where do I sign up?

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
  18. Politics aside, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is of course more than plausible. But the lack of evidence is more likely a function of our ridiculous "backdoors in everything" policy than lack of activity. One of the incredibly stupid things about having backdoors is that they actually HELP miscreants, not hinder.

    Example: Anyone who has rented in an apartment building probably knows that the landlord has a master key "in case of emergencies". What they don't know is that any tenant can determine that master key combination by disassembling the lock using their own tenant key. In effect, having a master key might be convenient for the landlord living in blissful ignorance, but in terms of security it grants undetectable access to the worst element of any apartment building, not keeps them out.

    Most people have no problem with three letter agencies doing their legal duties. But back doors, just like master keys, actually ASSIST the very people they think they're working against. It's the result of a fundamentally misguided and misinformed leadership with no idea of the consequences.

  19. No, just no. by RivenAleem · · Score: 1

    Anything that the Russians can get their hands on by simply working with regular US companies, is not going to give them sudden military advantages. Any military-relevant research happening in the US is happening in secret.

    The kind of companies that the Russians are getting involved in are the type that will publicly announce any major breakthroughs or inventions on the web, because they are interested in domestic and foreign investment.

    This is just another FUD statement to try reinforce hate directed at the Russians in order to generate acceptance when the next budget rolls around and we ask why Three Letter Agencies are still being given so much money for spying on citizens of the US.

    1. Re:No, just no. by geekoid · · Score: 1

      "...happening in the US is happening in secret."
      often by corporations, who need to be reminded that security is an on going process and not an install and forget item on a spreadsheet.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:No, just no. by RivenAleem · · Score: 1

      While I agree that for some corporations, security is handled poorly, (not an expert on this, sorry) I would expect that any corporation that knows it's working on a military contract, is not the target of the FBI general alert of which comprises the subject of the article.

      This alert is a general one to tech companies in the Boston area, and not to defense contractors. As if your average tech company might just happen to be working on something with massive military potential and not know it. This leads me to think that the only point of this is to spread fear of anything Russian just to give the government something to protect the public against.

    3. Re:No, just no. by Sarten-X · · Score: 1

      This alert is a general one to tech companies in the Boston area, and not to defense contractors.

      It's a warning to everybody. The truck driver of the shipping company can know what vendor's parts go into the secret Foo Bar research. One of those vendors may have an overeager sales rep, who's all too happy to boast that their widgets are used on the Foo Bar project. Those widgets are designed by an engineer, who might be easily bribed into tweaking the design to have some subtle change. It's immaterial to the widgets themselves, but when embedded in the final system it might be enough to compromise the Foo Bars when they're used in the field.

      A contrived and convoluted example, but not terribly far-fetched. The supply chain for new technology is often pretty big, and there are many places that are vital enough and vulnerable enough to be worth attacking.

      --
      You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    4. Re:No, just no. by RivenAleem · · Score: 1

      And when your Foo Bars don't work in the field, well everything's ... well, you know...

  20. so encourage domestic investors by Goldsmith · · Score: 2

    Investing in companies is hardly what I would call stealing.

    Foreign companies can come in and poach talent and taxpayer funded research from Universities and the startups that come out of them. There's nothing illegal or even remotely unethical there. This is what we wanted! Russian capitalists investing in US companies, US students and US schools. Even if their goal is to move the company to Russia, that's part of how capitalism and globalization work. If we want to encourage researchers to stay in the US, we should do more to encourage direct domestic investment in startups rather than secondary investments like hedge funds.

    If we want to completely protect our basic R&D, we have to classify it. That would be sure to drive researchers out of the country.

    1. Re:so encourage domestic investors by geekoid · · Score: 1

      VC invest in tech company. Tech company gets tech contract from government. Russia has a direct line to what that is.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:so encourage domestic investors by schneidafunk · · Score: 1

      Exactly! Think how many hard working people come to America from other countries to invest in their own education and then put that talent to work for the U.S. immediately afterwards.

      --
      Some people die at 25 and aren't buried until 75. -Benjamin Franklin
    3. Re:so encourage domestic investors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Problem with Russians buying companies early is that they run the risk of disrupting the straight line to market and product redevelopment process by moving product to a new market. Russia has a history of buying companies and taking them home before it's a completed and launched product. Multiple companies where Russia basically bought it, closed up shop in the US, took it home, tried to implement it in their country first which ultimately needed lots of support(but without the key development team that initially built it in the US and a decent testing team) only to end up basically all the way at the beginning needing to spend 2-3 times as much to bring the product to the same point it was initially at in the US market.

    4. Re:so encourage domestic investors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I worked in the laser field at one of the academic centers in Boston and collaborated with a Russian-managed (US citizens, but nothing buy cyrillic spoken there). The Russians were way ahead of the US people in Laser technology. Getting it to a marketable idea, is a different thing.

    5. Re:so encourage domestic investors by Goldsmith · · Score: 1

      You have to disclose any foreign investors in an application for government funding; usually you have to disclose all VC firms invested in your company. If the government doesn't like your investors, they're allowed to disqualify you from receiving a contract even if the work has no security implications at all.

      If these guys are trying to invest and hide where they're from, that's different, but that's not what the FBI says is happening.

  21. FBI Shark Jump Victory Lap by TheCarp · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They did it!

    Sure, you thought they had precious little to do when they started calling kids running DDOS scripts criminals. You knew it was bad the second and third times they created their own terrorist and handed him weapons from their own stockpile to arrest him with....

    Now.... they are releasing politically motivated propaganda. Moving on up.

    --
    "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
  22. Its all bullshit by cHiphead · · Score: 1

    Everyone was stealing from each other the entire time, now the guys up top have to do their dick waving to match Russian's dick waving with Ukraine. We just felt left out of the dick waving contest so here we go again.

    --

    This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    1. Re:Its all bullshit by geekoid · · Score: 1

      The FBI routinely releases information to business to describe potential vectors for security failures.
      That is all this is.
      This is a good thing, and it's something they should be doing.
      'Hey, here is a possible threat, so keep an eye out'.
      WTF is wrong with that?

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  23. May contain traces of irony by Archtech · · Score: 2

    Many years ago, I recall that the US government refused entry to certain Russian mathematicians coming to attend a major conference in the USA. The reason given was that the commies were obviously trying to steal good ol' American know-how. The funny part was that the Russians in question were actually the world experts at the time (in that particular field), so the only people who lost out were the American mathematicians who had hoped to learn from them.

    It's one thing to have a policy of pretending that all worthwhile innovation originates in the USA. It's quite another thing to start believing that's true. (See, for example, Joy's Law: ""No matter who you are, most of the smartest people work for someone else”).

    --
    I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
    1. Re:May contain traces of irony by geekoid · · Score: 1

      I can't find any reference to that, link?

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    2. Re:May contain traces of irony by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1
      --
      Watch this Heartland Institute video
    3. Re:May contain traces of irony by Archtech · · Score: 1

      Sorry, in those days there were no links. Indeed, there was no Internet. I offered the anecdote purely as something I remember because it made a deep impression on me at the time. (The same mathematician who told me about it had also been refused entry to the USA because he had recently attended a conference in Poland, then a communist state).

      --
      I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
  24. Oblig ... by PPH · · Score: 1
    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  25. Obviously we're trying to punish the Russians by Karmashock · · Score: 2, Interesting

    And the method is sadly pretty silly.

    Putin want's to go back to the cold war... fine. We offered his country a clean slate... Obama even went so far as to offer that reset button thing. And what do we get? This... Well, whatever.

    Back to the cold war it is then.

    And that means going back to squeezing Russia's economy into ruin.

    The ways to do that are obvious... Russia depends heavily on sales of oil and gas. Ruin them. Give their customer's cheap plentiful alternatives.

    And calm down hippies... but fracking is happening... get over it... its going to be a big thing in eastern europe at the very least and they'll ideally be able to supply themselves and sell to the western europeans that still think they can't get off oil... despite utterly failing after spending hundreds of billions trying.

    I said calm down hippies... When we get the tech to actually get off oil... such as getting a battery worth a damn... then fine. Till then... its here to stay.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    1. Re:Obviously we're trying to punish the Russians by TubeSteak · · Score: 1

      Putin want's to go back to the cold war... fine. We offered his country a clean slate... Obama even went so far as to offer that reset button thing. And what do we get? This... Well, whatever.

      The problem is that you're viewing this from an American perspective.
      The EU has been slowly encroaching on Russia's buffer states for years.
      It finally boiled over when Russia's attempt to retain the Ukrainian Government's alignment ended with a Ukrainian revolution.

      The actual participants in this dance are the EU and Russia.
      The USA is a side actor. It's not about US.

      Also... why... all the... ellipses?

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    2. Re:Obviously we're trying to punish the Russians by Karmashock · · Score: 1

      Ukraine has every right to allign itself one way or the other.

      It is not Russia's place to determine these things. It is just this sort of attitude that has caused Russia to squander opportunities.

      Imagine for a moment what Russia would look like if its government were more like the US government?

      Look at those vast resources... look at the trade connections... look at the resident skill population... the universities... the heavy industry...

      Russia has enormous potential IF lead by a rational government.

      What does it have though? They're poor, politically isolated, and generally withering on all fronts.

      They are not a developing nation... they're a deteriorating nation.

      And it is just this sort of behavior from putin that leads to that.

      What Russia should be trying to do is get other countries to trust them so they'll invest. At the same time, don't try to scare Ukraine etc into submission, rather make them comfortable with you.

      Russia could have formed its own version of the EU with former soviet states in it. The requirement would have been ACTUAL rights and ACTUAL due process. Which are not things ACTUALLY present in the current Russian state.

      As to the ellipse... its a thing I do...

      --
      I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
  26. Re:Big deal by Vlad_the_Inhaler · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Snowden supplies some of the answers.
    The GCHQ and NSA's surveillance of Italy specifically included looking for commercial advantages. It looks very much as though the same applies to Germany so it seems obvious what this is a general pattern. My first thought when I saw this article was that the FBI is trying to claim "everybody does it" - hell, they may even be right.
    What annoyed the Germans so much was that it was their supposed friends acting this way.

    --
    Mielipiteet omiani - Opinions personal, facts suspect.
  27. OTAN by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Justification for NATO expansionism, without an Evil Russia, NATO has no purpose.

  28. Capitalism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    How is this stealing? An investment firm BUYS ideas and SELLS them.
    How does it make any different that they are russian?
    If this where JP Morgan buys an idea (or a whole company) and sold it to Lookhead Martin would that be ok?
    Maybe US don't want to compete in the global market on equal terms...

    I'm pretty sure major firms have deals with Russia and that is used in wars.

    Luckly Im neither american or russian.

  29. What's amazing about this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ... is that the American public would still swallow this hook, line and sinker.

  30. Industrial Espionage is everywhere by Virtucon · · Score: 1

    Russians, Chinese it doesn't matter. We have lots of nations in competition in many hi-tech and low-tech fields always looking for an edge. Sometimes it's not state-sponsored either. Back in the 80s, Hitachi was found stealing computer technology trade secrets from IBM in the 80s and settled out of court. While technology today allows for the theft of more secrets and to reverse engineer just about everything out there more quickly, it's more imperative that companies take this kind of threat more seriously. Patents, which force the inventor to disclose how an invention works, are one thing but when whole industries are stolen it not only represents a national defense but a national economic issue as well.

    --
    Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
    1. Re:Industrial Espionage is everywhere by k6mfw · · Score: 1

      Yep, if you are a country or a corporation then you gotta have spies (like all other big organizations need accountants and other staff to do specific jobs). As earlier post, whoop de do. What really gets me though is when we export our engineering and manufacturing offshore. Hey, they don't need spies, we will send stuff to them.

      --
      mfwright@batnet.com
  31. Furthermore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    If the NSA hadn't worked so hard to ensure that there were plenty of backdoors in our security protocols and hardware, it would be much harder for foreign intelligence agencies to exploit those backdoors.

    1. Re:Furthermore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Truth! ^

  32. Poor USA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Poor Americans... Under constant attack by everyone. Red alert! The terror is coming! The terror is coming! Grab your weapons, man the defenses! (all on sale now!)

    In reality, the truth is the rest of of the world doesn't give a damn about you (providing you stop trying to bankrupt yourselves and subsequently collapse the world economy).

    1. Re:Poor USA! by RightSaidFred99 · · Score: 1

      Lol, I see posts like this from people commenting on the latest Kardhazzian article. For some reason it makes people feel good to play the "irrelevant!" or "I don't care about that, pfft" cards.

      You're so, like, above it all maaan. You sure put those silly Americans in their place!

  33. Propaganda by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I see the US propaganda machine is working full tilt to slander Russia now that there is conflict in Ukraine. Does this mean that a slew of movies will be released where the antagonist is Russian?

    Looking forward to the reboot of Rocky and Bullwinkle to brainwash a new generation.

  34. HFC to the rescue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hydrogen Fuel Cells are a very viable storage medium for energy.
    The tech already exists and large energy companies already have fully realized infrastructures planned.
    They just don't plan on switching to them until they have sucked every ounce of carbon from the ground and put it into the atmosphere.

    1. Re:HFC to the rescue by Karmashock · · Score: 1

      Bullshit.

      They tried rolling out hydrogen fuel cell cars and they moronically expensive. We even have some hydrogen gas stations in my area. Guess what I see more of on the road? Teslas. Why? Because batteries as shitty as they are are better then hydrogen fuel cells.

      So no.

      --
      I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
  35. Makes sense to me: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why would they switch now? When your only interest is the bottom line, there is no need to miss revenue now just for the sake of a planet that exists in the future. Besides, these large energy companies can probably sell cars more expensively when they have to be sealed up like space crafts so you don't choke on the city air.

    That's a double bang for their buck; why would they even consider green energy yet?

  36. Re:I've worked with many Americans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and they just can't do a proper police state like the Russians could. They have the working design, templates for torture and everything, non persons, election systems that are for show and don't make a difference, they imprison even more people than the Soviets did, they've got their own security curtain now to keep out possible 'terrorists' and anyone who has ever talked to one, but they still haven't got their population fleeing abroad yet. No real threat, yet, ....

  37. What To Do? by Bob9113 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Russian investment firms may be looking to steal high-tech intelligence from Boston-area companies to give to their country's military.

    Oh, my. That does sound serious. Whatever can we do? Oh, I know, perhaps we should work to harden information security so that companies can maintain the integrity of their research. Futhermore, though I'm sure this goes without saying, we should fire -- and ban from any future participation in any aspect of government, government contracts, lobbying, or information security -- any person who has been involved in the intentional weakening of information security standards.

  38. distraction bullshit .. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    distraction bullshit .. nothing to see here .. moving on ...

  39. criminals everywhere by globaljustin · · Score: 1

    It's not just "plausible", but in fact likely, that the FBI has a lead that there are Russians operating in Boston.

    yes.

    Putin is wearing the Patriots' owner's Super Bowl ring as we speak: http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/...

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
  40. Easy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's easy to do, especially since many U.S. Firms are running Kasperski Anti-Virus (based in Russia). What better way to deliver malware than in a anti-virus program, that is based in Russia. It's a perfect oportunity for Russia to launch a cyber attack against U.S. companies.

  41. Re:Big deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Except the NSA and other US intel agencies aren't looking out for the commercial advantage of US companies in general, but only a few very specific companies AND their investors in all 3 branches of government (who do you think the "customers" referred to in those presentation slides are, anyway?). So they're not just screwing the Germans, but most of the US as well. If a full audit were ever done I bet it would show that a lot of wealth has been generated from that intel on behalf of members of both parties. It's time to cancel the gravy train once and for all. If a project can't be shown to have ever prevented the loss of American lives it should be cancelled. If that means the NSA or any other agency no longer has anything to do, well so be it. I'm sure someone can find something to do with the vacant office space. Maybe Bill Shatner would be willing to buy that damned juvenile captain's chair in the Enteprise bridge... er, NSA operations center.

  42. so today it's not the Chinese, it's the Ruskies. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ok, got it.

  43. they'll stop when the US stops by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1

    Does the US seriously expect to be taken seriously after they've been busted for helping with industrial espionage and then the whole NSA / Snowden ordeal? I'd say everyone has the US to fear, no one else.

  44. The US matters by tinkerton · · Score: 1

    It's reasonable to point out the importance of the EU but the US is a major actor and is I think a larger worry for Russia. It was a core part of the agreement when the USSR was disbanded that NATO would not expand in its former client states. Which NATO promptly disregarded.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F...
    Nato is now working very hard to enroll the rest of the countries,hence the (bullshit)scare stories about russian expansionism. Russia isn't trying to expand , they're trying to save what's left.

    Also the US was -against EU wishes- an active instigator in making the revolution what it was and in getting it accepted afterwards. Not an obvious thing when a democratically elected president is ousted.

    1. Re:The US matters by Karmashock · · Score: 1

      Russia has no right to eastern europe.

      And as to this agreement you say NATO broke... cite it. I have no knowledge of this agreement that NATO members signed to not expand NATO.

      Russia wasn't to reverse the collapse of the USSR. Well, that's f'ed up. The USSR was an evil shithole. And while Russia might not feel as mighty as they once did... So what? That's just ego. Russia has more then enough in their own territory to deal with and they're doing a piss poor job of it. So why should they have more? To what end? If they ruled the world we'd be starving to death.

      Russia even as it is will continue to decline unless it goes through some serious changes. And that will ultimately mean more territorial losses to developing countries at their borders that will likely snip off pieces in a generation or so.

      That is Russia's future unless they reform.

      Putin is doing nothing to help that. He's damning his own country for nothing.

      Forgive the comparison but I see parallels between this and the collapse of the Byzantine empire. Russia is a child of that empire just as the west is a child of the western roman empire. The Byzantines were quite mighty in their time. But through pride they squandered their alliances, cut themselves off from trade, and ultimately were crippled by a Crusade because they wouldn't stop screwing with the Venetians. That crippling led them to be defeated by the Turks... which is why Constantinople is now Istanbul.

      All of that was avoidable. If the Byzantines had made peace with the west and not gone out of their way to be unrelenting assholes then they would have had strong allies. And the Byzantines AND the Crusading kings of the west could have driven the Turks out of their land... and possibly gone farther.

      But alliances were not to be had because the Byzantines were just too proud.

      Likewise, the Russians are destroying themselves by starting fights with the West for NOTHING. There is no point to this hostility. It accomplishes nothing and wastes everything.

      They could ally, get western investment, build rail lines from eastern asia to europe that could haul everything that is currently going by container ship. And that's just the beginning. We could run a tunnel from eastern russia to alaska and from there to Canada.

      There is no limit. But for any of that to happen we'd have to trust the Russians. And NO ONE trusts them because they're given to moronic bouts of hostility.

      Putin is a fool.

      --
      I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    2. Re:The US matters by tinkerton · · Score: 1

      I didn't say there was a signed treaty about NATO expansion. This new article from the Atlantic looks like a fair primer.
      http://www.theatlantic.com/int...

      The thing is, your position is that since Russia is not legitimate they don't have legitimate concerns, therefore, whenever they push back it's for no good reason at all. My position is slightly different. Let's take the ultimate hellhole North Korea: my take is that their aggressive posturing is not only for internal use. It's also based on legitimate concerns about US/South Korean aggressive posturing.
      In the case of Russia, there's quite a difference between 'owning' the ex-soviet states and having legitimate concerns about NATO creeping up to them. The US has an official policy that if anyone tries something like that in South America, they've got war on their hands. So in part the conflict comes down to this: is the US going to recognize that Russia has legitimate security concerns or not? I tend towards recognizing those concerns. It doesn't mean one has to be nice about it though.

    3. Re:The US matters by Karmashock · · Score: 1

      No, captain strawman, I did not say Russia is not legitimate or does not have legitimate concerns.

      What I said is that they have no sovereignty over countries they have no sovereignty over.

      Call me captain obvious.

      And guess which countries Russia doesn't have sovereignty over? All countries that are not Russia.

      Is Ukraine Russia?

      No.

      End of stupid argument.

      --
      I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
  45. google... for example by superwiz · · Score: 1

    I hear the Russians implanted someone as high as the owner of the company. And now you can use it for free anywhere in Russia. Theft. Plain and simple.

    --
    Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
  46. It's really not an attack on Russia itself by superwiz · · Score: 1

    It's a political attack on a selected conservative group. Most former Russians in the US are conservative. This administration has already shown that they have no scruples in attacking their political enemies by using the instruments of state. This is just another example. You can accuse me of paranoia all you want, but Obama's entire election was done through Bayesian inference micro-targeting of special groups. Since Russian Jews are (almost overwhelmingly) Republican and well-educated, they represent a very target-rich environment for any leftist trying to smear the right.

    --
    Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
  47. Accusations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    made by the U.S should always be taken with a handful of salt. Remember, this is the country who for the last 70 years has wielded its military against farmers, civilians, wedding parades, resistance fighters, and so on. Why would you trust their accusations against another world power to be true?

  48. Americans steal US Tech secrets by Neuromatic · · Score: 1

    It's annoying how members of American government, media, and industry organizations frequently take turns unilaterally accusing country X or Y for trying to steal secrets or information for US companies. Of course they're trying! So are we! The U.S. probably tops the list of countries whose citizens or organizations are trying to steal U.S. tech secrets. Exhibit A: Apple vs. Google. I suppose someone will argue that at least we don't have to worry about American companies or governments using those secrets against our own citizens. But. that. would. be. hilarious. And wrong.

  49. High Tech Lottery by Sciath · · Score: 1

    Who needs to "steal" these days? Ignoring the completely superfluous (and ineffectual) industrial/technological export restrictions, "free-market capitalism" is giving everything away. Take China for example. International corporations looking to do business with the Chinese are often required by the communist government to "share" industrial secrets with Chinese companies and/or government. And many corporations are complying because of the profit margins involved. Insidiously, the Chinese, Russians etc. are utilizing that same capitalistic free-market ideology to further their own nationalistic goals at the expense of the American people.

    --
    "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire