What exactly has Schneier done that needs a retraction? He's written an unsubstantiated op-ed piece: just like the thousand other unsubstantiated op-ed pieces on a thousand other news sites. It might be lazy journalism but it isn't a crime...
I don't see where Schneier claimed this backdoor allowed the evil geniuses to sign into the violated Gmail accounts. The backdoor merely gave them "access" to the accounts. Which is precisely what the Computer World item says.
This was a talk at a Linux event, not testimony in a court room. You expect the guy to produce tape recordings and affidavits during a speech? You and that ClosedSource fella seem to suffer from the same affliction...
And actually there are company names, dates and documents cited. Well, one of each anyway. Company name: Microsoft. Date: 2008. Document: the OOXML standard specification.
"Conspiracy theories are pretty popular among Microsoft-haters" because Microsoft are always getting involved in conspiracies. "There's no smoke without fire" (Dry ice) etc.
Good analogy, especially when taken further. When one of those Islamic nations does give women equality and freedom, at least relative to their neighbors. They get invaded by a bigger more powerful country, their infrastructure destroyed and the government replaced.
I don't think Saddam was overthrone because of his enlightened approach to equal opportunities. But I'm no expert...
Yeah right. And I suppose microscopic computers made of swarms of nanomachines won't catch on either. Who'd want to watch a video on a screen that small, eh?
So you want to take up where Google left off and help restrict what online content Chinese citizens can access? But that's okay, you think Chinese citizens have no business looking at your site. Their government may well agree with you.
Another one who seems to think he can win a nuclear war with China. Look: You nuke China all to hell + China nukes you all to hell = HELL. No one wins. Not even America behind its "modern ICBM defences"...
Anyway, I can't actually remember China say they're going to "unilaterally take on the world". For now they seem content just to take on the world's manufacturing.
The fact that they wouldn't stand a chance against the US in all-out conflict is the only reason Taiwan wasn't invaded decades ago.
China wouldn't stand a chance against the US in all-out conflict. And the US wouldn't stand a chance against China in all-out conflict. No one walks away from all-out conflict between major nuclear powers. And they know it.
To put it in perspective, and maybe make yourself feel a bit better, you can crack open the news archives and history books for a look back at American espionage, dirty tricks, corporate/3-letter government agency joint ventures and international "development" over the these many years. We generally give as good as we get.
So China hasn't done anything that America hasn't done. Except this time they got caught with their hand in the cookie jar. That's the real crime.
Never mind "would" - could the UN condemn China? As a permanent member of the Security Council China has veto powers. So they'll just veto any move to censure them.
Slashdot Mirror
What exactly has Schneier done that needs a retraction? He's written an unsubstantiated op-ed piece: just like the thousand other unsubstantiated op-ed pieces on a thousand other news sites. It might be lazy journalism but it isn't a crime...
Why on earth do you think you should be told the answer to that? Unless you work for Google or the cops I dare say it's none of your business.
I don't see where Schneier claimed this backdoor allowed the evil geniuses to sign into the violated Gmail accounts. The backdoor merely gave them "access" to the accounts. Which is precisely what the Computer World item says.
If papers and news sites carried only substantiated stories they'd be pretty boring. And small.
Follow the Linux philosophy: Openness, including commercial.
And whose "Linux philosophy" is that?
This was a talk at a Linux event, not testimony in a court room. You expect the guy to produce tape recordings and affidavits during a speech? You and that ClosedSource fella seem to suffer from the same affliction... And actually there are company names, dates and documents cited. Well, one of each anyway. Company name: Microsoft. Date: 2008. Document: the OOXML standard specification. "Conspiracy theories are pretty popular among Microsoft-haters" because Microsoft are always getting involved in conspiracies. "There's no smoke without fire" (Dry ice) etc.
Good analogy, especially when taken further. When one of those Islamic nations does give women equality and freedom, at least relative to their neighbors. They get invaded by a bigger more powerful country, their infrastructure destroyed and the government replaced.
I don't think Saddam was overthrone because of his enlightened approach to equal opportunities. But I'm no expert...
Well they are wrong. Screen surface size matters.
Yeah right. And I suppose microscopic computers made of swarms of nanomachines won't catch on either. Who'd want to watch a video on a screen that small, eh?
The German people are lucky to have the CCC. And to have a press that are happy to spread the word about the CCC's discoveries.
Twitter?
So you want to take up where Google left off and help restrict what online content Chinese citizens can access? But that's okay, you think Chinese citizens have no business looking at your site. Their government may well agree with you.
Tell me where to read this news for Pete's sake. I look at my usual online news source:
Google has thrown down the gauntlet to China by saying it is no longer willing to censor search results on its Chinese service.
I look to the horse's mouth and find results that say:
"Google to end censorship in China over cyber attacks"
"Google to stop censoring in China, may pull out"
"Google to stop censoring in China after cyber attacks"
"Google will stop censorship and might close China operations"
and more of the same...
Another one who seems to think he can win a nuclear war with China. Look: You nuke China all to hell + China nukes you all to hell = HELL. No one wins. Not even America behind its "modern ICBM defences"...
Anyway, I can't actually remember China say they're going to "unilaterally take on the world". For now they seem content just to take on the world's manufacturing.
The fact that they wouldn't stand a chance against the US in all-out conflict is the only reason Taiwan wasn't invaded decades ago.
China wouldn't stand a chance against the US in all-out conflict. And the US wouldn't stand a chance against China in all-out conflict. No one walks away from all-out conflict between major nuclear powers. And they know it.
Being the starter of WWIII is being good?
Yeah right. "Google are pulling out! Launch the missiles!"
But they have ALREADY stopped censoring
Source? All I've seen is that Google have said they will stop censoring search results. No "already".
Because the oppressed Chinese people have a right to know where to find furry hentai.
She wouldn't care, she uses Yahoo.com.
And Google would have given up those passwords with a big smile and a "Have a nice day."
To put it in perspective, and maybe make yourself feel a bit better, you can crack open the news archives and history books for a look back at American espionage, dirty tricks, corporate/3-letter government agency joint ventures and international "development" over the these many years. We generally give as good as we get.
So China hasn't done anything that America hasn't done. Except this time they got caught with their hand in the cookie jar. That's the real crime.
Yes, the Leader of the Free World must make us feel warm and fuzzy. George W Bush was never found wanting in that regard.
Never mind "would" - could the UN condemn China? As a permanent member of the Security Council China has veto powers. So they'll just veto any move to censure them.
I've never breached a canon. But I violated a prelate once.
And don't forget the tentacle porn.
Spider-Man 2099 ain't Spider-Man.