Slashdot Mirror
US Government Admits It Doesn't Know If Assange Cracked Password For Manning (vice.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Motherboard: The U.S. government does not have any evidence that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange succeeded in cracking a password for whistleblower Chelsea Manning, according to a newly unsealed affidavit written by an FBI agent. Last week, Assange was escorted out of the Ecuadorian embassy in London, and arrested for breaching bail in connection to allegations of sexual misconduct in Sweden. The day of Assange's arrest, the U.S. government unsealed an indictment against Assange with a hacking conspiracy charge. The Department of Justice accused WikiLeaks' founder of agreeing to help Manning crack a password that would have helped the former military analyst get into a classified computer system under a username that did not belong to her, making it harder for investigators to trace the eventual leak.
On Monday, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia unsealed the affidavit, which is dated December 21, 2017. The document contains more details on the interactions between Assange and Manning. And, most significantly, contains the admission that the U.S. government -- as of December of 2017 -- had no idea whether Assange actually cracked the password. Until now, we knew that the U.S. was aware that Assange attempted to crack a password for Manning once, but didn't know if it had more evidence of further attempts or whether it thought Assange was successful. "Investigators have not recovered a response by Manning to Assange's question, and there is no other evidence as to what Assange did, if anything, with respect to the password," FBI agent Megan Brown said in the affidavit. According to lawyers, the simple offer to help can be considered part of a conspiracy to violate the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.
"For purposes of a conspiracy charge, it is not necessary for the action to be successful. All that is needed is an overt action in furtherance of the conspiracy, namely Assange's efforts to crack the password for Manning," Bradley, a lawyer at the Mark Zaid P.C law firm in Washington, DC, told Motherboard via email. "That he failed is irrelevant."
On Monday, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia unsealed the affidavit, which is dated December 21, 2017. The document contains more details on the interactions between Assange and Manning. And, most significantly, contains the admission that the U.S. government -- as of December of 2017 -- had no idea whether Assange actually cracked the password. Until now, we knew that the U.S. was aware that Assange attempted to crack a password for Manning once, but didn't know if it had more evidence of further attempts or whether it thought Assange was successful. "Investigators have not recovered a response by Manning to Assange's question, and there is no other evidence as to what Assange did, if anything, with respect to the password," FBI agent Megan Brown said in the affidavit. According to lawyers, the simple offer to help can be considered part of a conspiracy to violate the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.
"For purposes of a conspiracy charge, it is not necessary for the action to be successful. All that is needed is an overt action in furtherance of the conspiracy, namely Assange's efforts to crack the password for Manning," Bradley, a lawyer at the Mark Zaid P.C law firm in Washington, DC, told Motherboard via email. "That he failed is irrelevant."
You really are fucking stupid aren't you. The Federal government only executes people by lethal injection. That said, the federal government itself has only executed three people since 1963.
I'm not a fan of the Donald by any means, but fucking hell, you're making yourself look as stupid as a Trumper.
They've just had their bits swapped.
Surgery is just one relatively small part of the transition process. It's mostly about living as your gender in day-to-day life. Imagine if you, as a man, decided to dress in women's clothing, shave your legs, put on make-up, get a feminine hair-cut, speak with a feminine voice, and ask that people use female pronouns, for the rest of your life. Imagine you were quite successful and people treated you just like any other woman. How much difference would it make in most of your daily interactions if you hadn't also had the surgeries?
Why don't we have a genderless way to refer to people?
You refuse you to use new pronouns like ze and hir, but ask why we don't have a genderless way to refer to people. Unfortunately we are where we are, gender does matter to most people, English isn't going to change overnight.
Richard Stallman wrote an interesting article about this, where he suggests "person", "per" and "pers". Not sure any of it will catch on, but he is also very clear that if someone asks him to use particular pronouns he will, regardless of what they are.
The only times it matters what someone's gender is: when police are trying to ID someone, when you're trying to fuck someone, or when someone is trying to qualify for gender-specific sports.
None of those examples work I'm afraid. The police don't really care what gender someone is, only what they look like and what their fingerprints and DNA are.
When it comes to procreation it's far more complex than just gender, and many normative male/female couples struggle.
In some sports gender doesn't or shouldn't matter, in others gender is really just a bad way of creating divisions, little different to different weight categories in sports like boxing. In the best sports such things are unnecessary, e.g. there is no weight division in Grand Sumo and 100kg guys can and do beat 200kg guys at the very top level. Maybe it's time to re-think these things.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC