in a case like this will agree with user erroneous IMHO.
its sort of like the Drake case. the government is full of shit, but its really heavy sounding shit that makes you think Adekeye did something horrible.
then when you dig into the details, you find out, well, the government was just full of shit. and all of that heavy sounding tone was just some DOJ moron grandstanding and doing bullshit PR work to try to influence media coverage of the case.
there are a large number of counts against him that are CFAA, or the military equivalent (my favorite: "using a computer for other than its intended purpose")
imho, the CFAA charges against manning are not the tip of the iceberg - they are the iceberg.
Aiding the Enemy is the shiny barber pole sticking in the top of the iceberg, that everybody notices. Those other charges are there for bullshit reasons, one of which is apparently to set a precedent where nobody is allowed to blog about taking a shit without being put in prison for 10 years.
because people do this all the time, (sharing passwords) at every company in america.
and 99.99999% of them dont get any jail time, and the federales dont care. they have better things to do, like going after Mara Salvatrucha and mexican drug lords.
it just is a bizarre coincidence when the one guy they do choose to go after just so happens to have been a small business man in competition with a behemoth that some would argue is guilty of violating the anti monopoly laws.
on the other hand i do agree with the rest of your post, the writing of the summary could be improved a great deal.
this is the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, which basically makes it a Federal Crime to 'do anything we dont like, with a computer'.
it is overly broad and probably unconstitutional.
that is, if someone would challenge it's constitutionality in court.
if you dont know about the Thomas Drake case, google it
same for the specific counts against Manning (i.e. the 'collateral murder' video, well, they are trying to get him on the exact same paragraph here, 18 usc 1030 a 2)
hayden was in charge of NSA during the Trailblazer IT fiasco, which caused Congress to severly restrict NSAs spending ability. Trailblazers end products were, well, basically they mostly dont exist. it was abandoned.
but SAIC and others made a lot of money off of it.
now who will make money off of an IT blackwater? SAIC, probably. or at least, SAIC alumni.
the mass surveillance and privacy violations occured all through the 1930s and were perpetrated by the Nazis as a prelude to political assassinations, repression, prison camps, etc. the SS had informers all over the place. people's personal information was recorded on a mass scale partly thanks to IBM Germany.
and no, you cant say 'ibm was separated from ibm germany in the war'. the nazis came to power in 1933. the war started in 1939. IBM was intimately involved in germany and did not get disentangled until well after 1939 - even then they still kept communications open through 'back channels' using their european headquarters.
the story summary is just, flat out wrong. the german privacy laws go back far before the 'stasi'
and in fact the Stasi inherited a lot of its philosophy and its personnel from the nazis.
the government was able to convince the judge to use an obscure 1959 NSA law to redact UNCLASSIFIED information from the defense exhibits, so that they would not be publically shown at trial.
there is a lot more to the Drake case regarding evidence, the CIPA, and the Silent Witness Rule.
the project he 'blew the whistle' on was Trailblazer, which spent a billion dollars and produced uhm, just about zero actual product.
and if you count up the thousands of Thomas Drakes in the government, well, if they had all been listened to for the past 10+ years, we could have saved a trillion dollars.
the charge against him was 5 counts of 'retaining information related to the national defense', Espionage Act 18 USC 793(e)
thats because there is no crime called 'leaking', never has been and probably never will be. it doesnt even have a set definition.
and its not illegal to give out classified material , only certain types of classified material in certain situations to certain people.
and Thomas Drake didnt give out any classified material - the judge even said basically this (the emails the DOJ said had classified material, well, they didnt).
Drake was actually an expert in handling classified material, he was an intelligence analyst for many years in the military and NSA. He specifically avoided giving out any classified info to the reporter.
thats one of the scariest things about the case. they decided a bunch of stuff they seized from him was 'classified', after they sezied it. and then they also even argued that material marked UNCLASSIFIED in big bold letters was really classified.
yes 'accused' is perhaps correct, in a technical sense, since the government's indictment said he did it. but when it came to actual criminal charges, there werent any, because there arent any laws about "leaking classified material".
because the biggest leakers? Congress and the President, going back all the way to Eisenhower, at least, and then even back farther, you can even find some of the founding fathers 'leaking' sensitive info. and none of them got 35 years in prison for it. (which is what the government wanted to do to Drake)
Slashdot Mirror
'hey dude could you watch my house and my dog?'
'sure dude. gimme the key'
'ok bro'
two weeks pass...
'dude you took a shit in my toilet!'
'uhmm yeah? so what?'
'so! you violated the toilet fraud and abuse act! im gonna sue you! im gonna sue you in england!'
in a case like this will agree with user erroneous IMHO.
its sort of like the Drake case. the government is full of shit, but its really heavy sounding shit that makes you think Adekeye did something horrible.
then when you dig into the details, you find out, well, the government was just full of shit. and all of that heavy sounding tone was just some DOJ moron grandstanding and doing bullshit PR work to try to influence media coverage of the case.
there are a large number of counts against him that are CFAA, or the military equivalent (my favorite: "using a computer for other than its intended purpose")
imho, the CFAA charges against manning are not the tip of the iceberg - they are the iceberg.
Aiding the Enemy is the shiny barber pole sticking in the top of the iceberg, that everybody notices. Those other charges are there for bullshit reasons, one of which is apparently to set a precedent where nobody is allowed to blog about taking a shit without being put in prison for 10 years.
because people do this all the time, (sharing passwords) at every company in america.
and 99.99999% of them dont get any jail time, and the federales dont care. they have better things to do, like going after Mara Salvatrucha and mexican drug lords.
it just is a bizarre coincidence when the one guy they do choose to go after just so happens to have been a small business man in competition with a behemoth that some would argue is guilty of violating the anti monopoly laws.
on the other hand i do agree with the rest of your post, the writing of the summary could be improved a great deal.
behold the stupidity that is the federal computer law
this is the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, which basically makes it a Federal Crime to 'do anything we dont like, with a computer'.
it is overly broad and probably unconstitutional.
that is, if someone would challenge it's constitutionality in court.
if you dont know about the Thomas Drake case, google it
same for the specific counts against Manning (i.e. the 'collateral murder' video, well, they are trying to get him on the exact same paragraph here, 18 usc 1030 a 2)
"unions never left"
"no, we dont need unions back" ...
uhmmmmm ok ...
and neither are Moody's or Fitch.
If you read the books about the Synethic CDO industry, you will realize that S&P and Moody's are elaborate frauds.
it doesnt matter if they cured cancer tomorrow. if it cost more than a few thousand dollars, most of the people on this planet could never afford it.
without health insurance, all of these wonderful medical breakthroughs dont mean anything.
autodesk is about as anti-open anything as you can get. they are 100% against any kind of open standard for anything.
combine that with the power of patent lawsuits, and you can pretty much kiss free 3d-printing goodbye in the United States.
their plan is to make you pay for every single last triangle in your STL file, claiming they somehow invented triangles.
mass murderers, rapist, torturers, and regional warlords.
you know. the good guys.
hayden was in charge of NSA during the Trailblazer IT fiasco, which caused Congress to severly restrict NSAs spending ability.
Trailblazers end products were, well, basically they mostly dont exist. it was abandoned.
but SAIC and others made a lot of money off of it.
now who will make money off of an IT blackwater? SAIC, probably. or at least, SAIC alumni.
seriously, what does network management have to do with GUI?
considering that germany has one of the strongest economies in europe, it probably isnt doing much to hurt it.
the mass surveillance and privacy violations occured all through the 1930s and were perpetrated by the Nazis as a prelude to political assassinations, repression, prison camps, etc. the SS had informers all over the place. people's personal information was recorded on a mass scale partly thanks to IBM Germany.
and no, you cant say 'ibm was separated from ibm germany in the war'. the nazis came to power in 1933. the war started in 1939. IBM was intimately involved in germany and did not get disentangled until well after 1939 - even then they still kept communications open through 'back channels' using their european headquarters.
the story summary is just, flat out wrong. the german privacy laws go back far before the 'stasi'
and in fact the Stasi inherited a lot of its philosophy and its personnel from the nazis.
maybe its changed alot.
bad start cookie
waiting for them to compile seems a lot like waiting for a lineprinter
how about thomas drake, did you talk to him?
the government was able to convince the judge to use an obscure 1959 NSA law to redact UNCLASSIFIED information from the defense exhibits, so that they would not be publically shown at trial.
there is a lot more to the Drake case regarding evidence, the CIPA, and the Silent Witness Rule.
forgot to mention that!!!! oops
the project he 'blew the whistle' on was Trailblazer, which spent a billion dollars and produced uhm, just about zero actual product.
and if you count up the thousands of Thomas Drakes in the government, well, if they had all been listened to for the past 10+ years, we could have saved a trillion dollars.
the charge against him was 5 counts of 'retaining information related to the national defense', Espionage Act 18 USC 793(e)
thats because there is no crime called 'leaking', never has been and probably never will be. it doesnt even have a set definition.
and its not illegal to give out classified material , only certain types of classified material in certain situations to certain people.
and Thomas Drake didnt give out any classified material - the judge even said basically this (the emails the DOJ said had classified material, well, they didnt).
Drake was actually an expert in handling classified material, he was an intelligence analyst for many years in the military and NSA. He specifically avoided giving out any classified info to the reporter.
thats one of the scariest things about the case. they decided a bunch of stuff they seized from him was 'classified', after they sezied it. and then they also even argued that material marked UNCLASSIFIED in big bold letters was really classified.
yes 'accused' is perhaps correct, in a technical sense, since the government's indictment said he did it. but when it came to actual criminal charges, there werent any, because there arent any laws about "leaking classified material".
because the biggest leakers? Congress and the President, going back all the way to Eisenhower, at least, and then even back farther, you can even find some of the founding fathers 'leaking' sensitive info. and none of them got 35 years in prison for it. (which is what the government wanted to do to Drake)
... and petrification
is completely and utterly vague, and has become like 'fascist' or 'capitalist' or 'communist', a word without any actual, real meaning.