To play devils advocate, given that American politicians have essentially called for Assange to be killed surely he counts as a bad guy. Why would they not assume that he would pass it all along to Osama before making is public?
It's a guys name, you seriously think based on a single couriers name they can determine exactly where Osama is?
Or are you thinking they'll magically know in 2008 where Osama is because five years earlier some other guy moved to Abbottabad for a year? Clearly Osama must be in that town in a building that didn't even exist when the detainee in question lived there.
The name is what is important. They were clearly tracking the courier mention (given he was there when they raided), if Osama find out that you know about the guy he has moving in and out of his hiding place he's going assume you are at least close to working it out and so move ASAP and get another courier. He survived for almost 10 years with the world's largest military after him and a $25 million bounty on his head - he had to be paranoid...
Unless they're completely incompetent (and their amazing ability to manage not to blow up bombs makes that not a really safe assumption) they've already assumed that they know everything bin Laden knows. I mean killed and dumped the body in the ocean? That's exactly what they'd say if the captured him and have been torturing him for information non-stop ever since. (I don't think they have, but surely if you were a bad guy you have to assume it's all compromised - you either go to ground or you do whatever you planning for the coming weeks/months right this minute).
They didn't dumb down. The mistake they made was not dumbing it down.
They used the language they use internally without bothering to translate it (aka dumb it down) to something people who don't have the right context would understand. Which I agree is unprofessional and stupid of them, but it is not dumbing down though. And while the general public might misunderstand (which is why it was stupid of them) anyone with an IT background who thinks for 2 seconds knows what they mean.
It isn't vague and imprecise, unless you expect them to actually tell you exactly what the was typed. It's just using too much jargon.
He is way lower than that. Basically every leader of a nation that has gone to war has a higher death toll, from ancient times on. Heck many single indiviuals beat out bin Laden and all his followers combined, Kermit Beahan and Thomas Ferebee both win that contest by at least an order of magnitude but I wouldn't call them evil.
it's a stupid metric.
Someone who murders 2 people is more evil than someone who rapes and tortures (but doesn't kill) 10,000?
Nothing except my name (and date of birth if they have that) is the same as in 2002. Heck I've moved countries and changed citizenship since then...
But a lawsuit is interesting from the perspective of required arbitration being ruled valid recently. If the EULA in question is that old, and you are no longer a subscriber would something like this now be covered by it?
Seriously? You can read that and come away with that interpretation? Rather than say "they were supposed to planning out what to do without actually executing any commands, but someone misunderstood and actually did the actions" that it obviously means.
It seems remarkedly unlikely that there would be an executable named "history -c; passwd -l root; rm -rf/", in fact I suspect that trailing / makes it impossible on unix-like systems.
You managed not to read the bit (that is in the damn summary even) that says: 19 percent of its cyber agents on national security intrusion investigations.
Given the heading says "counterintelligence" it seems pretty clear that the cyberattacks refer to those against the national security on not those against businesses that happen to be in the US.
if it shouldn't be the domain of the FBI that's another issue, though apparently it currently is in their domain.
How about they do what they are already doing and keep more of the money for themselves. if people really won't put up with the errors and start leaving for greener pastures then they can consider spending more money on it.
See first post: "door has been kicked in" - that only happens in a no-knock raid. That's why they are called no-knock raids - instead of kncking you break in with weapons ready so that the bad guys don't have time to do anything and for "shock and awe" to reduce resistance.
Post I first replied to: "the no-knock raid that would inevitably ensue from".
My post: "1 (ok maybe there's been a couple of others) no-knock raids"
By starting with "One, my ass!" that poster is clearly referring to no-knock raids - given the one in question was. Or they are muddying the waters to confuse people of course. Or they're an idiot I guess.
I'm not a student and hence can't be one of them, whether I'm an idiot or not.
I also wasn't ranting about idiot students, I mentioned that going into huge amounts of debt is dumb in passing.
And no, I don't care if I appear to be an idiot because spelling and grammar are far from my strengths and I pay no attention to them on slashdot. In fact I don't care if I am an idiot because I of that.
So provide the links to the news reports. No-knock SWAT raids are pretty news worthy.
There have been quite a number of "oops wrong house" such raids. So having an open wifi is likely less risky than choosing to live in a house instead of in a box cardboard box under a bridge. In terms of avoiding a no-knock raid when you haven't done anything wrong anyway.
If idiot students are willing to put themselves in obscene amounts of debt and the Government is stupid enough to encourage and enable that then obviously you charge a damn fortune.
If the government wants to encourage people to study science or engineering then they can easily offer scholarships and grants and so on for such studies.
if the government wants education to be more affordable then they can use their large negotiating position and instead of subsidising student loans (directly or via laws making that debt more valuable than other forms of debt) they can offer a voluntary funding scheme to universities. Of the form:
To the universtiies:
"We will pay you $X per student per unit enrolled in studying Y. However, you must offer at least Z places to such students, those places must be filled in order of acedemic merit and you may only charge the student at most an extra $A per unit. You are free to offer as many additional places at whatever price you want with whatever acceptance criteria you want." To the students:
"If you are accepted under this scheme at a university then you will accrue a debt of $X to the government. That debt is only repayable when you have a taxable income of over $Y, is indexed to the CPI, and once you have a qualifying income the payment will be in the form of an additional Z% tax on your income until it is repayed."
Essentially the same as a student loan, but the banks are removed from making the loans. And the government has bulk purchasing power for negotiating a reasonable price from the participating universities. And Universities are free to not opt in so it's not a government take over or whatever...
The numbers can be adjusted and the two Xs don't have to be the same. If the government wants to encourage science they could pay the universities more per science place than they charge the students - essentially running a scholarship scheme.
There are millions of open wifi connections, there's been 1 (ok maybe there's been a couple of others) no-knock raids. That hardly seems to make one inevitable.
It's qualified with "Sure in reality they are just making more money from people who bring their own phone".
You can't tell them "I already have a phone, please don't include the handset payment cost in my plan" and have them do so. Because it isn't part of the price. You don't pay extra (in the monthly charge) if you get the phone so there's no "payment" included.
In many markets (and some providers in the US, though not the ones that offer the iPhone) you can get a cheaper plan if you bring your own phone. For them, clearly there is a payment for the handset in the monthly ongoing cost. But for the plans being discussed here there is not. Just like there's no "payment for the CEOs bonus" in the plan, even though it all ends up coming out of them.
Slashdot Mirror
I take it you can't read.
To play devils advocate, given that American politicians have essentially called for Assange to be killed surely he counts as a bad guy. Why would they not assume that he would pass it all along to Osama before making is public?
It's a guys name, you seriously think based on a single couriers name they can determine exactly where Osama is?
Or are you thinking they'll magically know in 2008 where Osama is because five years earlier some other guy moved to Abbottabad for a year? Clearly Osama must be in that town in a building that didn't even exist when the detainee in question lived there.
The name is what is important. They were clearly tracking the courier mention (given he was there when they raided), if Osama find out that you know about the guy he has moving in and out of his hiding place he's going assume you are at least close to working it out and so move ASAP and get another courier. He survived for almost 10 years with the world's largest military after him and a $25 million bounty on his head - he had to be paranoid...
Unless they're completely incompetent (and their amazing ability to manage not to blow up bombs makes that not a really safe assumption) they've already assumed that they know everything bin Laden knows. I mean killed and dumped the body in the ocean? That's exactly what they'd say if the captured him and have been torturing him for information non-stop ever since. (I don't think they have, but surely if you were a bad guy you have to assume it's all compromised - you either go to ground or you do whatever you planning for the coming weeks/months right this minute).
Because South Park has never killed the same character multiple times. Never!
They didn't dumb down. The mistake they made was not dumbing it down.
They used the language they use internally without bothering to translate it (aka dumb it down) to something people who don't have the right context would understand. Which I agree is unprofessional and stupid of them, but it is not dumbing down though. And while the general public might misunderstand (which is why it was stupid of them) anyone with an IT background who thinks for 2 seconds knows what they mean.
It isn't vague and imprecise, unless you expect them to actually tell you exactly what the was typed. It's just using too much jargon.
top 10?
He is way lower than that. Basically every leader of a nation that has gone to war has a higher death toll, from ancient times on. Heck many single indiviuals beat out bin Laden and all his followers combined, Kermit Beahan and Thomas Ferebee both win that contest by at least an order of magnitude but I wouldn't call them evil.
it's a stupid metric.
Someone who murders 2 people is more evil than someone who rapes and tortures (but doesn't kill) 10,000?
So you don't know what the word "sustained" means. Congrats.
Nothing except my name (and date of birth if they have that) is the same as in 2002. Heck I've moved countries and changed citizenship since then...
But a lawsuit is interesting from the perspective of required arbitration being ruled valid recently. If the EULA in question is that old, and you are no longer a subscriber would something like this now be covered by it?
Seriously? You can read that and come away with that interpretation? Rather than say "they were supposed to planning out what to do without actually executing any commands, but someone misunderstood and actually did the actions" that it obviously means.
It seems remarkedly unlikely that there would be an executable named "history -c; passwd -l root; rm -rf /", in fact I suspect that trailing / makes it impossible on unix-like systems.
nohup sh -c "..." &
on the other hand...
You managed not to read the bit (that is in the damn summary even) that says: 19 percent of its cyber agents on national security intrusion investigations.
Given the heading says "counterintelligence" it seems pretty clear that the cyberattacks refer to those against the national security on not those against businesses that happen to be in the US.
if it shouldn't be the domain of the FBI that's another issue, though apparently it currently is in their domain.
So I'm suporting the MPAA by downloading movies from a torrent and watching them?
Why do they seem to not like it then?
That makes no sense, for places under that scheme the most they can charge the student is $A. But they end up getting $X+A for that place.
For places not covered by that scheme $X is meaningless.
How about they do what they are already doing and keep more of the money for themselves. if people really won't put up with the errors and start leaving for greener pastures then they can consider spending more money on it.
See first post: "door has been kicked in" - that only happens in a no-knock raid. That's why they are called no-knock raids - instead of kncking you break in with weapons ready so that the bad guys don't have time to do anything and for "shock and awe" to reduce resistance.
Post I first replied to: "the no-knock raid that would inevitably ensue from".
My post: "1 (ok maybe there's been a couple of others) no-knock raids"
By starting with "One, my ass!" that poster is clearly referring to no-knock raids - given the one in question was. Or they are muddying the waters to confuse people of course. Or they're an idiot I guess.
I'm not a student and hence can't be one of them, whether I'm an idiot or not.
I also wasn't ranting about idiot students, I mentioned that going into huge amounts of debt is dumb in passing.
And no, I don't care if I appear to be an idiot because spelling and grammar are far from my strengths and I pay no attention to them on slashdot. In fact I don't care if I am an idiot because I of that.
So provide the links to the news reports. No-knock SWAT raids are pretty news worthy.
There have been quite a number of "oops wrong house" such raids. So having an open wifi is likely less risky than choosing to live in a house instead of in a box cardboard box under a bridge. In terms of avoiding a no-knock raid when you haven't done anything wrong anyway.
I already do, and have for years.
If idiot students are willing to put themselves in obscene amounts of debt and the Government is stupid enough to encourage and enable that then obviously you charge a damn fortune.
If the government wants to encourage people to study science or engineering then they can easily offer scholarships and grants and so on for such studies.
if the government wants education to be more affordable then they can use their large negotiating position and instead of subsidising student loans (directly or via laws making that debt more valuable than other forms of debt) they can offer a voluntary funding scheme to universities. Of the form:
To the universtiies:
"We will pay you $X per student per unit enrolled in studying Y. However, you must offer at least Z places to such students, those places must be filled in order of acedemic merit and you may only charge the student at most an extra $A per unit. You are free to offer as many additional places at whatever price you want with whatever acceptance criteria you want."
To the students:
"If you are accepted under this scheme at a university then you will accrue a debt of $X to the government. That debt is only repayable when you have a taxable income of over $Y, is indexed to the CPI, and once you have a qualifying income the payment will be in the form of an additional Z% tax on your income until it is repayed."
Essentially the same as a student loan, but the banks are removed from making the loans. And the government has bulk purchasing power for negotiating a reasonable price from the participating universities. And Universities are free to not opt in so it's not a government take over or whatever...
The numbers can be adjusted and the two Xs don't have to be the same. If the government wants to encourage science they could pay the universities more per science place than they charge the students - essentially running a scholarship scheme.
if everybody left their wifi open then they wouldn't make that assumption.
There are millions of open wifi connections, there's been 1 (ok maybe there's been a couple of others) no-knock raids. That hardly seems to make one inevitable.
It's qualified with "Sure in reality they are just making more money from people who bring their own phone".
You can't tell them "I already have a phone, please don't include the handset payment cost in my plan" and have them do so. Because it isn't part of the price. You don't pay extra (in the monthly charge) if you get the phone so there's no "payment" included.
In many markets (and some providers in the US, though not the ones that offer the iPhone) you can get a cheaper plan if you bring your own phone. For them, clearly there is a payment for the handset in the monthly ongoing cost. But for the plans being discussed here there is not. Just like there's no "payment for the CEOs bonus" in the plan, even though it all ends up coming out of them.
Which is exactly what I said, thanks for repeating it.
Which I said in the next sentence.