>" I play computer games in which people are punched, shot, stabbed, harpooned, bombed, etc."
You play those games in full knowledge that these games are not real, the characters being killed are not real. This cannot be said for this sweetie bot, these people would have thought it was real, because if they thought it was a trap they would not have let their personal identification (ie switched on the web cam so a photo could be taken) be known.
>and if the authorities spend one moment on it, they are deliberately redirecting resources away from catching criminals,
> i.e. choosing to take a path which will increase the number of abused children.
and if the authorities ignore the evidence collected then one of these people might go on to abuse a real person. What you have here is a collection of people who have expressed an interest in abuse, even if it was not a real child.
There is the whole 'conspiracy to commit', often terrorists are charged with that.
There is also probable cause that said man (or woman, lets not be sexist, I am sure there are women pedophiles) has evidence on their computer of wrong doing, a visit from the police to take away computers for inspection might highlight crimes that person can be charged with.
And even then, you have cases where the FBI set up a terrorist sting, even supply the plans and the weapons, the bad guys are rounded up and it goes to court.
Is it ok to look at the speedo whilst drive, or people that do are morons? on my car the rev counter is replaced by the GPS map, which is right next to the speedo (the speedo and rev counter are an lcd display and change depending on function).
When city driving and the GPS says "take the next left", when in reality there are 3 next lefts very close together, the GPS map can show the car position in relation to the left you want to take.
I am sure it not out of googles ability to detect when a glass is being used in a car (by a driver) and to limit its abilities to navigation, etc.
Modern cars have a center mounted screen where people music libraries can be scrolled through, or phone book entry selected if car has a built in phone, is that not distracting?
Even
Given that helmet mounted HUDs are good enough for military pilots, how does having a GPS in your field of vision whilst driving a car, impair you? It sure beats looking down at a fixed display to view the GPS map (often not in the best location).
I think the issue is they (police) do not know what else you are doing, such as playing tetris at a stop light.
This does not fit into Amazons plans to take over the world by selling items at cost (or below cost as is the case with some Music, and I am sure some books).
It goes beyond legal protection...to eliminate the Guardian from the scene, it is a big organisation - hard work, but a guy starting out on his own (or with a small team), he might just find himself floating the wrong way up in the Thames, after all it is spy agencies he is working against and they have many creative ways (poisoned umbrella, radioactive drink just to name a few Russian favs).
The womans car looks very much undamaged, so possibly that police car crashed into something bigger (lorry)?
If this woman had mental issues (Post Natal?), perhaps shooting her was not the best option (especially as there is a baby in the car). Ok the police would not know that, but this whole terrorism thing has everyone on edge, in the old days, that car would have been blocked in by other cars and the woman removed, or even road spikes deployed to get the tyres. If it was mental issues, she picked the wrong target sadly, it is protected by heavy armed people just itching to bag a terrorist.
Well if a well funded org is looking for (D) all it has to do is put up a critical mass of tor relays, then when it has B and C all on its own systems, they can find D, all they need is relays with logging of all data in and out.
(I thought Tor uses 3 relays between source and destination, but the same applies).
The big difference is...if a company is based in the USA the NSA can ask for practically anything, backdoors, etc and that company has to comply or shutdown.
I do not think this is true for a company say for example based in Portugal (or Andora, or some other EU country which is not big on spying), there is perhaps no such legal framework forcing companies to insert backdoors.
It needs more people to be outraged by it, to what lengths are people willing to accept this kind of intrusion? If these spy agencies shipped all domestic post to a 3rd country, where it was opened, photocopied, stored then sent on its way, people would be doing a Bastille style take down, yet somehow because these letters (email) are electronic, and it does not need a huge complex of Stasi officers doing the actual work, then it is OK for most of the people?
Well I say to those people, your liberty is gone, a form of government is in place which is open to internal corruption / blackmail, there is a massive abuse of power going on. Information is power, and the next President, well the NSA, FBI, etc might just have a file on said future president, all his little secrets, so the President is in their pocket so to speak.
Remember, for a true democracy, government needs to be transparent.
For half that you could have had 100 sharks with frickin laser beams attached to their heads, they would have been quicker, not to mention more enjoyable to watch.
Is there a law on the books specifically about interference of the operation of a school? If so, it is such an open ended law, imagine an 8 year old in class being a little disruptive (perhaps chatting to friend), should that child face criminal charges?
Ah the word terrorizing, let me guess, once the other kids found out they were running around screaming in terror? what no? then it is not terrorizing, it might be making a nuisance, but definitely not terrorizing.
The constant involvement of police (or the threat of) in school business, that will lead to:
1) an army of robot citizens, with little or no thought of being free
2) those who are not robots, a strong resentment of law enforcement (people have a judgement of what is fair and what is not).
From the NYT: On Tuesday, N.I.S.T. attributed the allegations to confusion and noted that it was required, by statute, to consult with the N.S.A.
“There has been some confusion about the standards development process and the role of different organizations in it,” the agency’s statement read. “N.I.S.T. has a long history of extensive collaboration with the world’s cryptography experts to support robust encryption. The National Security Agency (N.S.A.) participates in the N.I.S.T. cryptography process because of its recognized expertise. N.I.S.T. is also required by statute to consult with the N.S.A.”
Confusion? What good is an open consultation?, you are just betting your experts (the non-affiliated experts around the world) against the experts at the NSA (or some other secret agency).
Let us not forget by intentionally weakening encryption, the NSA has made everyone who uses computers unsafe from attack.
Time to kick NIST out of the loop. If all indicators are right, that they work to deliberately weaken, and backdoor standards then an alternative is required. And given the secret courts, this cannot be based in the USA.
Slashdot Mirror
>" I play computer games in which people are punched, shot, stabbed, harpooned, bombed, etc."
You play those games in full knowledge that these games are not real, the characters being killed are not real. This cannot be said for this sweetie bot, these people would have thought it was real, because if they thought it was a trap they would not have let their personal identification (ie switched on the web cam so a photo could be taken) be known.
>and if the authorities spend one moment on it, they are deliberately redirecting resources away from catching criminals,
> i.e. choosing to take a path which will increase the number of abused children.
and if the authorities ignore the evidence collected then one of these people might go on to abuse a real person. What you have here is a collection of people who have expressed an interest in abuse, even if it was not a real child.
There is the whole 'conspiracy to commit', often terrorists are charged with that. There is also probable cause that said man (or woman, lets not be sexist, I am sure there are women pedophiles) has evidence on their computer of wrong doing, a visit from the police to take away computers for inspection might highlight crimes that person can be charged with.
And even then, you have cases where the FBI set up a terrorist sting, even supply the plans and the weapons, the bad guys are rounded up and it goes to court.
Is it ok to look at the speedo whilst drive, or people that do are morons? on my car the rev counter is replaced by the GPS map, which is right next to the speedo (the speedo and rev counter are an lcd display and change depending on function).
And GPS can inform of traffic queues, and route around.
When city driving and the GPS says "take the next left", when in reality there are 3 next lefts very close together, the GPS map can show the car position in relation to the left you want to take.
I am sure it not out of googles ability to detect when a glass is being used in a car (by a driver) and to limit its abilities to navigation, etc.
Modern cars have a center mounted screen where people music libraries can be scrolled through, or phone book entry selected if car has a built in phone, is that not distracting? Even
Given that helmet mounted HUDs are good enough for military pilots, how does having a GPS in your field of vision whilst driving a car, impair you? It sure beats looking down at a fixed display to view the GPS map (often not in the best location).
I think the issue is they (police) do not know what else you are doing, such as playing tetris at a stop light.
(whilst wearing my tin hat - na na - cannot get me)
This does not fit into Amazons plans to take over the world by selling items at cost (or below cost as is the case with some Music, and I am sure some books).
In other news, a 80 year old grandmother has been released today when it was found that a supposed rocket launcher was just an umbrella stand.
It is hardly a gun if all it consisted of was a trigger and magazine. A hammer and nail is much more dangerous (assuming you had ammunition).
Perhaps much of what he said is true...the truth should not be insulting. In these politically correct times, he should have changed:
Mrs Clinton 'had few policy goals and no wins' in the Middle East.
to:
Mrs Clinton was policy goal challenged.
It goes beyond legal protection...to eliminate the Guardian from the scene, it is a big organisation - hard work, but a guy starting out on his own (or with a small team), he might just find himself floating the wrong way up in the Thames, after all it is spy agencies he is working against and they have many creative ways (poisoned umbrella, radioactive drink just to name a few Russian favs).
Here is an image of one of the police cars:
http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/70268000/jpg/_70268976_cpshooting1.jpg
The womans car looks very much undamaged, so possibly that police car crashed into something bigger (lorry)?
If this woman had mental issues (Post Natal?), perhaps shooting her was not the best option (especially as there is a baby in the car). Ok the police would not know that, but this whole terrorism thing has everyone on edge, in the old days, that car would have been blocked in by other cars and the woman removed, or even road spikes deployed to get the tyres. If it was mental issues, she picked the wrong target sadly, it is protected by heavy armed people just itching to bag a terrorist.
A connects to B, B to C and C to destination (D).
Well if a well funded org is looking for (D) all it has to do is put up a critical mass of tor relays, then when it has B and C all on its own systems, they can find D, all they need is relays with logging of all data in and out. (I thought Tor uses 3 relays between source and destination, but the same applies).
The big difference is...if a company is based in the USA the NSA can ask for practically anything, backdoors, etc and that company has to comply or shutdown.
I do not think this is true for a company say for example based in Portugal (or Andora, or some other EU country which is not big on spying), there is perhaps no such legal framework forcing companies to insert backdoors.
I can see an animal arms race there.
NIST fooled us once (Dual_EC_DRBG), but to fool us twice, that would be a shame on 'us'. (us = everyone who is not NIST and NSA)
Kick them to the touch I say, time for a replacement.
Also reprocessing:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_Oxide_Reprocessing_Plant
One of the reasons why the Sellafield reprocessing plant was built (not to reprocess, but to get plutonium for bomb making).
It needs more people to be outraged by it, to what lengths are people willing to accept this kind of intrusion? If these spy agencies shipped all domestic post to a 3rd country, where it was opened, photocopied, stored then sent on its way, people would be doing a Bastille style take down, yet somehow because these letters (email) are electronic, and it does not need a huge complex of Stasi officers doing the actual work, then it is OK for most of the people?
Well I say to those people, your liberty is gone, a form of government is in place which is open to internal corruption / blackmail, there is a massive abuse of power going on. Information is power, and the next President, well the NSA, FBI, etc might just have a file on said future president, all his little secrets, so the President is in their pocket so to speak.
Remember, for a true democracy, government needs to be transparent.
For half that you could have had 100 sharks with frickin laser beams attached to their heads, they would have been quicker, not to mention more enjoyable to watch.
Is there a law on the books specifically about interference of the operation of a school? If so, it is such an open ended law, imagine an 8 year old in class being a little disruptive (perhaps chatting to friend), should that child face criminal charges?
Ah the word terrorizing, let me guess, once the other kids found out they were running around screaming in terror? what no? then it is not terrorizing, it might be making a nuisance, but definitely not terrorizing.
The constant involvement of police (or the threat of) in school business, that will lead to:
1) an army of robot citizens, with little or no thought of being free
2) those who are not robots, a strong resentment of law enforcement (people have a judgement of what is fair and what is not).
From the NYT: On Tuesday, N.I.S.T. attributed the allegations to confusion and noted that it was required, by statute, to consult with the N.S.A.
“There has been some confusion about the standards development process and the role of different organizations in it,” the agency’s statement read. “N.I.S.T. has a long history of extensive collaboration with the world’s cryptography experts to support robust encryption. The National Security Agency (N.S.A.) participates in the N.I.S.T. cryptography process because of its recognized expertise. N.I.S.T. is also required by statute to consult with the N.S.A.”
Confusion? What good is an open consultation?, you are just betting your experts (the non-affiliated experts around the world) against the experts at the NSA (or some other secret agency).
Let us not forget by intentionally weakening encryption, the NSA has made everyone who uses computers unsafe from attack.
Time to kick NIST out of the loop. If all indicators are right, that they work to deliberately weaken, and backdoor standards then an alternative is required. And given the secret courts, this cannot be based in the USA.