Slashdot Mirror
The Internal Report Proving the FCC Made Up a Cyberattack (gizmodo.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Gizmodo: An investigation carried out by Federal Communication Commission's own inspector general officially refutes controversial claims that a cyberattack was responsible for disrupting the FCC's comment system in May 2017, at the height of the agency's efforts to kill off net neutrality. The investigation also uncovered that FCC officials had provided congressional lawmakers with misleading information regarding conversations between an FCC employee and the Federal Bureau of Investigation's cybercrime task force. A report from the inspector general's office (OIG) released Tuesday afternoon states that the comment system's downtime was likely caused by a combination of "system design issues" and a massive surge in traffic caused when Last Week Tonight host John Oliver directed millions of TV viewers to flood the FCC's website with pro-net neutrality comments.
Investigators were unable to "substantiate the allegations of multiple DDoS attacks" alleged by then-FCC Chief Information Officer David Bray, the report says. "At best, the published reports were the result of a rush to judgment and the failure to conduct analyses needed to identify the true cause of the disruption to system availability." [Here's an excerpt from the report:] "While we identified a small amount of anomalous activity and could not entirely rule out the possibility of individual DoS attempts during the period from May 7 through May 9, 2017, we do not believe this activity resulted in any measurable degradation of system availability given the minuscule scale of the anomalous activity relative to the contemporaneous voluminous viral traffic." Yesterday, before the report was released, FCC chairman Ajit Pai came clean on the fact that the hack of its comment system last year actually took place. Pai blamed the former chief information officer and the Obama administration for providing "inaccurate information about the incident to me, my office, Congress, and the American people."
Investigators were unable to "substantiate the allegations of multiple DDoS attacks" alleged by then-FCC Chief Information Officer David Bray, the report says. "At best, the published reports were the result of a rush to judgment and the failure to conduct analyses needed to identify the true cause of the disruption to system availability." [Here's an excerpt from the report:] "While we identified a small amount of anomalous activity and could not entirely rule out the possibility of individual DoS attempts during the period from May 7 through May 9, 2017, we do not believe this activity resulted in any measurable degradation of system availability given the minuscule scale of the anomalous activity relative to the contemporaneous voluminous viral traffic." Yesterday, before the report was released, FCC chairman Ajit Pai came clean on the fact that the hack of its comment system last year actually took place. Pai blamed the former chief information officer and the Obama administration for providing "inaccurate information about the incident to me, my office, Congress, and the American people."
Perhaps you missed this really HUGE news in bad governance:
https://archpaper.com/2018/08/epa-asbestos-manufacturing/
EPA, the *ENVIRONMENTAL Protection Agency", “no longer consider the effect or presence of substances in the air, ground, or water in its risk assessments.”
Under this rule change, EPA does not consider the *environment* while decided if something is bad for the environment. Hence asbestos, which still kills 40,000 people a year, is now safe and allowed in products, because it's presence in air is no longer considered, so its presence in lungs is no longer considered, so its no longer toxic, according to the EPA.
So now Uralasbest can now export it from Russia to USA (its no longer made in USA). Here's a stock market quote of this company quoted in Moscow:
https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/urag?countrycode=ru
To invest in the Russian stock market, you'll need a Russian trading bank..... Alfabank is one of the biggest of those.
1+1=2, f**ing Russians.
Not another one. No, this didn't happen during the Obama administration's watch. It happened the first week of May, 2017. Someone else tried to use the "Obama's fault" card yesterday when Ajit Pai first admitted that his agency had not been hacked. How many times does this have to be shot down before you guys give up trying to lie about it?
https://www.theguardian.com/te...
Here's the story from last July, so you can track Ajit Pai's weasily and pitiful lie in real time.
https://gizmodo.com/fcc-now-sa...
And here's the Slashdot story from yesterday.
https://it.slashdot.org/story/...
You are welcome on my lawn.
Years ago, sites were Slashdotted, nowadays they get Olivered and Colberted.
I haven't seen that. It looks like they've been trending down.
Looks like they have been pretty damn flat for the past year. https://projects.fivethirtyeig...
To be clear he still has the worst approval rating is dismal, but then that's where it also started.
I mentioned your left - Bernie Sanders.
If you had much of a political left, you would not be famous globally for even your previous president not actually setting up such things as universal health care, welfare state, decent consumer rights, user dapa protection and all the other things that your corporate masters do not think you deserve.
Can I guess that you do not believe that there is any difference between socialists and communists? Many of your fellow citizens certainly seem to think this. Do you think that the Nazis were socialists because their full party title had that word in it? If so, presumably you think that the old East Germany was a democracy because its name said so. The "Union of Soviet Socialist Republics" was as Socialist as the DPRK is democratic or belongs to its people. The USSR may well have been heading towards communism under Lenin. Stalin did not continue that journey and it slid into something that he wanted.
Those people way off to your left may be in the middle. Where does that mean you are?
I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
You are completely missing what I am trying to say. Let us pretend we are attending a conference on qualfonic energy, which is completely made up. Let us suppose that someone has just given an address with a serious criticism of this form of energy. Would you be more likely to trust this criticism if it came from someone who has had nothing good to say about it or from someone who was a major proponent of it? Hopefully you can understand why people might take the comments from the latter person more seriously given no other information.
Neither. They both have motivations to lie. I'd want to fact check the claims of either person because the first one might be inventing a criticism and the second one may be omitting other major problems. You're a fool if you think either of them is more trustworthy than the other. Furthermore, a proponent admitting a minor flaw, is a classic hustle technique to get you to buy into the product that they're pitching.
If this were not the case you would understand why a source pointing out all of the things that Trump has lied about or misrepresented is not sufficient proof of your claim. You need to compare it to other politicians and I am not convinced that Trump is significantly worse. He certainly is not a truthful politician, but few are and we tend to forget the myriad lies and cover-ups of controversies that surround past politicians. I suspect that if we were discussing some subject where you were not in agreement with the conclusion, you would be quick to employ the same arguments I have used here, but you dislike Trump so much that your emotions blind you to reason.
Trump's lies corrode democracy.
There's a long history of presidential untruths. Here's why Donald Trump is 'in a class by himself.
How Does Trump Stack Up Against the Best — and Worst — Presidents?
Trump’s Lies vs. Obama’s
Donald Trump running the most dishonest White House ever, says historian
Comparing Hillary Clinton, Donald Trump on the Truth-O-Meter
Are Clinton and Trump the Biggest Liars Ever to Run for President?
That is not to say you are a bad person, because everyone is that way about something that they take personally. My point is that in this particular area, you are not a good source absent significant and quality evidence.
How much evidence do you need? If you're really interested, there's a lot more stuff on Trump's lack of honesty and his place in the world of American politics in respect to that, but I think it's telling that presidential historians (who ought to know quite a bit about past presidents) have (spoilers) ranked him last place out of all of America's presidents. That's pretty unusual, most politicians get ranked in the middle somewhere during their terms, neither best nor worst.
Fanatically anti-fanatical
In a twisted weird point of view, the EPA is actually right :
accidental small exposure to asbesto aren't dangerous, it's the chronic long-term exposition that is highly carcinogenic.
Asbestos is dangerous even in small quantities, because it can easily be lodged in the epithelial wall. It depends mostly on the type of asbestos; shorter fibers mean less ability for cilia to sweep it out of your lungs. Any persistent lung irritant can cause cancer, asbestos is just spectacular at persisting because the body can't break it down.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"