All that plus a little time in PMITA Federal Prison would be nice. I mean they've built and profited from the largest prison industry in the world. They should experience it because it's theirs.
Anagama wanted to use jargon to sound "in the know"
No, I wanted to make sure I fit the headline in the space allotted so I abbreviated without even thinking about it. I abbreviate WA DC like that all the time when commenting on stuff here and elsewhere and nobody has ever expressed confusion. Seemed totally natural to me. Next time I'll be sure to write "Mordor Post" or something to avoid confusion.
I only vote third party anymore. If there is no third party candidate, I vote for my cat.
In 2008 I voted 3d party based on my skepticism of Obama, but I was still hopeful he would reverse the abuses of the GWB administration, and I voted for Democrats running in other races.
Obama's extension and expansion of the GWB abuses, which began within months of his election, coupled with the absolute silence from Democrats about this crap, soured me beyond any possibility of returning to the fold. The Democrats could run Gandalf, and I'd be suspicious. At this point, anyone running under a GOP or New GOP (AKA, DNC) label will not get my vote under any circumstance, because even if the candidate is an angel, his or her party is corrupt beyond redemption and that person will not even get on the ticket without compromising his or her morals.
So I vote for my cat and any third parties. I don't even care what third parties. I'm jewish and I'd vote for a nazi candidate before I'd vote for a Dem. or Repub.
That is from Amy Goodman's interview with him before he died. Interestingly, he talks about the prosecutions under the espionage act of labor organizers (Phillips was a Wobbly) around WWI toward the end of that segment. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palmer_Raids
J. Edgar Hoover was involved in those.
Anyway, this tangent on "WA Wash Washington" seems to have made a 180 back on topic, at least for me.
Right. Like the government has prosecuted people who claim the moon landing was false or that the face on mars was built just so it could protect its good name from conspiracy nuts.
All the government does to those people, is laugh along with everyone else.
The fact that it is prosecuting Snowden, rather letting have a silly foil hat rant, shows it isn't a foil hat rant.
"Wash." used to be the postal code for WA before we went to two letter abbreviations. I'm surprised though that people are having such a hard time reading this (well, I can understand non US based people not getting it, but anyone in America who doesn't must lead an incredibly hard life, being so literal and all).
Or maybe it is just that I live Washington State, and it rankles me whenever I hear people say "Washington" when they mean "Washington DC".
I live in the real Washington, the one with trees and mountains sticking out of it. That city in the east though? We call that Mordor out here. (*)
I can say with absolute certainty, that the NSA workers were never collecting information while sitting ON millions of Americans. Number one, they sit on chairs, not people. Number two, some of them may be chubby but nobody is fat enough to sit ON even 1000 Americans at once, let alone millions.
We've SUSPECTED spying. It was even reasonable to suspect that, though you could still be called a foil hatter.
Now we KNOW.
It is like the difference between an untested hypothesis you strongly suspect is true, and experimental results that confirm the hypothesis. The confirmation allows a next step to taken on a fully informed basis rather than belief.
So you are totally wrong -- this is NOT nothing. This is confirmation and if we don't do something about it now, it will be seen as a free pass to do this and more. That's why you should care -- apathy now absolutely ensures a deteriorating future.
That's very interesting. A friend of mine was talking about doing a similar thing recently so I'm going to let him know about this.
One of the problems with encryption, is that even if the content is secret, who it was sent to and who sent it isn't necessarily so. That makes me think that perhaps one the scourges of the internet, spam, could be turned into a secure means of communication, because if a message is delivered to 50m people, figuring out who it was intended for is pretty hard. Couple that with an encryption system that instead of using random letters and characters to represent the plain text content, it would use common words to randomly represent each letter, making the text readable but gibberish so it wasn't obviously encrypted data at a glance. Throw in an advert for Viagra and the text would look like an attempt to evade spam filters.
Anyway, I'd love to see someone work on that end of secure communications, in particular, obscuring sender and receiver information. One hard part would be figuring out how to get the emails to spammers in a way that is not traceable, but once spammed, the message would be pretty anonymous both in content and at least for recipient. The spammer would probably get grilled if found out, so that IS a weak link.
It would be pretty easy to create PowerPoint with the requisite markings, logos, etc, on it and then peddle it to various newspapers.
That would explain why Biden called Correa for a personal chat, the White House is orchestrating a smear campaign directed not at the content, but at Snowden and Greenwald, and it's pursing Snowden to the ends of the earth to bring him back for "trial" (he has been indicted you know). That all points to the obvious conclusion that Snowden photoshopped some slides? Are you daft?
Lame self reply, but look at the "Content Type" box of slide 3 -- what does "OSN" mean in that context? Online Service Network? eg: "H: OSN Messaging (photos, wallposts, activity, etc)"
This implies to me that the provider of the info is not the ISP, though the ISP does stand in the middle so it would be technically capable of intercepting and passing this on.
The FBI equipment is for CALEA and is on site in ISP's, not content providers such as google and yahoo.
The third slide has this annotation:
The PRISM case notation format reflects the availability, confirmed by The Post's reporting, of real-time surveillance as well as stored content.... Depending on the provider [referencing the infamous 9], the NSA may receive live notifications when a target logs on or sends an e-mail, or may monitor a voice, text or voice chat as it happens (noted on the first slide as "Surveillance").
So who should I believe -- the government's own claims or that of an AC?
Count me in the latter group (except I kinda like going to the dentist) -- you're typically way better off getting a newish used car off Craigslist where someone else has paid the "I drove it off the lot instantaneous depreciation" cost. All you pay for is the car that way.
The flip side of this is that a person could be very convincingly set up with a fake plate, a "borrowed" cell phone, and a few forged texts. At that point, your life hangs in the balance of that casino we game we call a jury trial.
No boundaries. Let's say the NSA is prohibited from spying on Americans and the GCHQ is prohibited from spying on Brits (I know, unrealistic assumption but play along). The NSA grabs all the info from the Brits' communications, the GCHQ does the same for Americans' communications. Then, they just trade data. Voila! NSA isn't spying on Americans, and GCHQ isn't spying on Brits, and all those people saying "but of course the NSA spies on foreigners, no story here, move along".... well, I don't know what happens to them. Maybe the advance up the rungs of Federal jobs, get elected, oppress their neighbors. One would hope they would succumb to any of the real dangers people face (bathtubs, cars, horses, etc)... but the reality is, they'll probably do really well at the expense of freedom.
Except the NSA keeps all the encrypted stuff, and then will keep it for 5 years after it is decrypted. What is more correct is to say that the encrypted stuff is temporarily safe until a flaw in the encryption scheme is discovered, or computing power is sufficient to make brute force attacks trivial.
This however exposes the lie inherent to the claim that it is to protect us from terrorism. 15 or 20 year old decrypted data will have no relevance to a terrorist attack happening tomorrow. It's only use may be as background material in a post-attack and post-aprehension trial (as if a fair trial would be allowed).
You could probably stop a lot of terrorist plots, or at least illegal acts, if you had sound and video monitoring in all bathrooms public and private. That doesn't make it worth it.
You could probably stop a handful of terrorist attacks by monitoring absolutely everything, though this seems a bit far fetched. Half the world would have to be monitors, but leaving that aside, you could probably solve a lot more of terrorist plots using real police work rather than storing all communications ever made. The only thing this pile of data is really good for, is finding dirt on people in order to destroy opposition. The fact that maybe it accidentally comes across a terror plot, that's just good for marketing.
Not taking sides on whether the GP is being hurtful, or the submitter really is in that much pain, but I feel there is a certain point where scientifically we should be able to say "no, you're just being a hypochondriac".
That a very unscientific use of hypochondriac and it drips with contempt, which is a form of prejudice, which is a form of irrationality.
People's ability to sense traverses a wide range, and people at the extreme edge of that range are in no way hypochondriacs, rather their discomfort can be very real. And understanding that difference is not only considerate, it can be profitable. Example: ring tones most old people can't hear due to loss of high frequency hearing capability.
I'm getting older, 45, and I can hear those tones. In fact I've always been highly sensitive to high frequencies, and one of the things I always hated about CRTs was the whine they make. It gave me headaches so when LCDs came along, I got one early on -- I think I paid $600 for it, but it was such a sweet relief, that it worth it to me. Now, I'm lucky in that I don't notice any flickering, and I'm relieved of the suffering CRTs caused me, but it sounds like other people have the opposite problem. Someone who decides to not be contemptuous, is going to make some decent money, maybe a lot of money, selling them solutions for what is a very real problem for them.
Apparently, Crawford was an industrial engineer for GE and a KKK member -- which just makes it all that much weirder that they'd try to sell it to Jewish organizations.
Nice spin there about the FISA court reviewing itself for compliance with the Constitution. You know he is talking about higher court review. Very sly of you.
Fox: I never harm chickens in the henhouse. Hen: Let's ask Farmer John for an independent review or your activities. Fox: No need to go to John, I reviewed my actions, and I never harmed chickens in the henhouse... *burp, spits out chicken down*
Slashdot Mirror
All that plus a little time in PMITA Federal Prison would be nice. I mean they've built and profited from the largest prison industry in the world. They should experience it because it's theirs.
No, I wanted to make sure I fit the headline in the space allotted so I abbreviated without even thinking about it. I abbreviate WA DC like that all the time when commenting on stuff here and elsewhere and nobody has ever expressed confusion. Seemed totally natural to me. Next time I'll be sure to write "Mordor Post" or something to avoid confusion.
I only vote third party anymore. If there is no third party candidate, I vote for my cat.
In 2008 I voted 3d party based on my skepticism of Obama, but I was still hopeful he would reverse the abuses of the GWB administration, and I voted for Democrats running in other races.
Obama's extension and expansion of the GWB abuses, which began within months of his election, coupled with the absolute silence from Democrats about this crap, soured me beyond any possibility of returning to the fold. The Democrats could run Gandalf, and I'd be suspicious. At this point, anyone running under a GOP or New GOP (AKA, DNC) label will not get my vote under any circumstance, because even if the candidate is an angel, his or her party is corrupt beyond redemption and that person will not even get on the ticket without compromising his or her morals.
So I vote for my cat and any third parties. I don't even care what third parties. I'm jewish and I'd vote for a nazi candidate before I'd vote for a Dem. or Repub.
Usually I hate Slashdot tangents, especially pedantic ones, but this one got me looking at some Utah Phillips stuff on Youtube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0f-mlwaGcE
That is from Amy Goodman's interview with him before he died. Interestingly, he talks about the prosecutions under the espionage act of labor organizers (Phillips was a Wobbly) around WWI toward the end of that segment. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palmer_Raids
J. Edgar Hoover was involved in those.
Anyway, this tangent on "WA Wash Washington" seems to have made a 180 back on topic, at least for me.
Right. Like the government has prosecuted people who claim the moon landing was false or that the face on mars was built just so it could protect its good name from conspiracy nuts.
All the government does to those people, is laugh along with everyone else.
The fact that it is prosecuting Snowden, rather letting have a silly foil hat rant, shows it isn't a foil hat rant.
"Wash." used to be the postal code for WA before we went to two letter abbreviations. I'm surprised though that people are having such a hard time reading this (well, I can understand non US based people not getting it, but anyone in America who doesn't must lead an incredibly hard life, being so literal and all).
Or maybe it is just that I live Washington State, and it rankles me whenever I hear people say "Washington" when they mean "Washington DC".
I live in the real Washington, the one with trees and mountains sticking out of it. That city in the east though? We call that Mordor out here. (*)
(*) Paraphrased from a Utah Phillips show.
I can say with absolute certainty, that the NSA workers were never collecting information while sitting ON millions of Americans. Number one, they sit on chairs, not people. Number two, some of them may be chubby but nobody is fat enough to sit ON even 1000 Americans at once, let alone millions.
"OSN is probably online social network."
That sounds more plausible than my guess.
You're totally wrong.
We've SUSPECTED spying. It was even reasonable to suspect that, though you could still be called a foil hatter.
Now we KNOW.
It is like the difference between an untested hypothesis you strongly suspect is true, and experimental results that confirm the hypothesis. The confirmation allows a next step to taken on a fully informed basis rather than belief.
So you are totally wrong -- this is NOT nothing. This is confirmation and if we don't do something about it now, it will be seen as a free pass to do this and more. That's why you should care -- apathy now absolutely ensures a deteriorating future.
That's very interesting. A friend of mine was talking about doing a similar thing recently so I'm going to let him know about this.
One of the problems with encryption, is that even if the content is secret, who it was sent to and who sent it isn't necessarily so. That makes me think that perhaps one the scourges of the internet, spam, could be turned into a secure means of communication, because if a message is delivered to 50m people, figuring out who it was intended for is pretty hard. Couple that with an encryption system that instead of using random letters and characters to represent the plain text content, it would use common words to randomly represent each letter, making the text readable but gibberish so it wasn't obviously encrypted data at a glance. Throw in an advert for Viagra and the text would look like an attempt to evade spam filters.
Anyway, I'd love to see someone work on that end of secure communications, in particular, obscuring sender and receiver information. One hard part would be figuring out how to get the emails to spammers in a way that is not traceable, but once spammed, the message would be pretty anonymous both in content and at least for recipient. The spammer would probably get grilled if found out, so that IS a weak link.
That would explain why Biden called Correa for a personal chat, the White House is orchestrating a smear campaign directed not at the content, but at Snowden and Greenwald, and it's pursing Snowden to the ends of the earth to bring him back for "trial" (he has been indicted you know). That all points to the obvious conclusion that Snowden photoshopped some slides? Are you daft?
NSA sockpuppets, fascist retards, and media shills unfairly modded parent down. Please correct.
Lame self reply, but look at the "Content Type" box of slide 3 -- what does "OSN" mean in that context? Online Service Network? eg: "H: OSN Messaging (photos, wallposts, activity, etc)"
This implies to me that the provider of the info is not the ISP, though the ISP does stand in the middle so it would be technically capable of intercepting and passing this on.
The third slide has this annotation:
So who should I believe -- the government's own claims or that of an AC?
Count me in the latter group (except I kinda like going to the dentist) -- you're typically way better off getting a newish used car off Craigslist where someone else has paid the "I drove it off the lot instantaneous depreciation" cost. All you pay for is the car that way.
The flip side of this is that a person could be very convincingly set up with a fake plate, a "borrowed" cell phone, and a few forged texts. At that point, your life hangs in the balance of that casino we game we call a jury trial.
No boundaries. Let's say the NSA is prohibited from spying on Americans and the GCHQ is prohibited from spying on Brits (I know, unrealistic assumption but play along). The NSA grabs all the info from the Brits' communications, the GCHQ does the same for Americans' communications. Then, they just trade data. Voila! NSA isn't spying on Americans, and GCHQ isn't spying on Brits, and all those people saying "but of course the NSA spies on foreigners, no story here, move along" .... well, I don't know what happens to them. Maybe the advance up the rungs of Federal jobs, get elected, oppress their neighbors. One would hope they would succumb to any of the real dangers people face (bathtubs, cars, horses, etc) ... but the reality is, they'll probably do really well at the expense of freedom.
Except the NSA keeps all the encrypted stuff, and then will keep it for 5 years after it is decrypted. What is more correct is to say that the encrypted stuff is temporarily safe until a flaw in the encryption scheme is discovered, or computing power is sufficient to make brute force attacks trivial.
This however exposes the lie inherent to the claim that it is to protect us from terrorism. 15 or 20 year old decrypted data will have no relevance to a terrorist attack happening tomorrow. It's only use may be as background material in a post-attack and post-aprehension trial (as if a fair trial would be allowed).
You could probably stop a lot of terrorist plots, or at least illegal acts, if you had sound and video monitoring in all bathrooms public and private. That doesn't make it worth it.
You could probably stop a handful of terrorist attacks by monitoring absolutely everything, though this seems a bit far fetched. Half the world would have to be monitors, but leaving that aside, you could probably solve a lot more of terrorist plots using real police work rather than storing all communications ever made. The only thing this pile of data is really good for, is finding dirt on people in order to destroy opposition. The fact that maybe it accidentally comes across a terror plot, that's just good for marketing.
Well, it's a judgment call. It might also be called 1985.
replying so I have easy access to your citations.
That a very unscientific use of hypochondriac and it drips with contempt, which is a form of prejudice, which is a form of irrationality.
People's ability to sense traverses a wide range, and people at the extreme edge of that range are in no way hypochondriacs, rather their discomfort can be very real. And understanding that difference is not only considerate, it can be profitable. Example: ring tones most old people can't hear due to loss of high frequency hearing capability.
I'm getting older, 45, and I can hear those tones. In fact I've always been highly sensitive to high frequencies, and one of the things I always hated about CRTs was the whine they make. It gave me headaches so when LCDs came along, I got one early on -- I think I paid $600 for it, but it was such a sweet relief, that it worth it to me. Now, I'm lucky in that I don't notice any flickering, and I'm relieved of the suffering CRTs caused me, but it sounds like other people have the opposite problem. Someone who decides to not be contemptuous, is going to make some decent money, maybe a lot of money, selling them solutions for what is a very real problem for them.
Holy shit -- that's actually worth watching. Very clever, very amusing.
Apparently, Crawford was an industrial engineer for GE and a KKK member -- which just makes it all that much weirder that they'd try to sell it to Jewish organizations.
http://news.yahoo.com/york-men-accused-plotting-build-radiation-weapon-204445880.html
Nice spin there about the FISA court reviewing itself for compliance with the Constitution. You know he is talking about higher court review. Very sly of you.
Fox: I never harm chickens in the henhouse. ... *burp, spits out chicken down*
Hen: Let's ask Farmer John for an independent review or your activities.
Fox: No need to go to John, I reviewed my actions, and I never harmed chickens in the henhouse