Don't forget the Bundesnachrichtendienst. Or the DGSE the DCRI, the CESIS, and 10 or more others.
The truth is, there will be no difference, EU data can't be protected from EU intelligence services, and their partnerships and agreements with each other and with the NSA.
In fact, having to convince a US judge to issue a warrant for a EU government to Google, Facebook, Amazon, or any of the other big players was probably a significant expense and impediment to EU police.
Tell you what, The EU can host all US data, and the US can host all EU data. Requiring some local US sheriff to reach all the way to Brussels in order to sniff US email might be reduce abuse significantly. And Vise-Versa.
don't they realize the nsa and cia have european-based operations, too?
Actually they do, the story specifically states:
But the proposed rules remain riddled with loopholes for intelligence services to exploit, MEPs admit.
The EU has no powers over national or European security, for example, nor its own proper intelligence or security services, which are jealously guarded national prerogatives. National security can be and is invoked to ignore and bypass EU rules.
"This regulation does not regulate the work of intelligence services," said Albrecht. "Of course, national security is a huge loophole and we need to close it. But we can't close it with this regulation."
So nothing will be solved here, the data will simply flow in the reverse direction and national security agencies of the EU will be filtering EU users data and sending it on to the NSA, and the NSA will do the same for data from the rest of the world.
New Boss, same as the Old Boss.
All the Big players will build (or already have) data centers in the EU, and all that they really lose is redundancy in their data backup. But there will be no less spying, it will actually increase the number of national agencies rooting through your data.
This effort is all for show, as well as smaller players using the whole NSA flap to leverage their position. But even this won't work for them because the EU customers want to have their Facebook and Google and their Twitter just as much and anyone else. So the same big players will establish or beef up their data-centers, and succumb to will of the various member states.
But hey, lets bitch-slap those goddamed Americans quick and get the infrastructure and employment back in our countries and under our control before anyone figures this out.
Most big ones do, because they have been in business for far longer than the internet was up and running. Those who don't use VPN routers so that they can have all their plants on the same IP subnet.
So the story is designed to enrage slash dot nerds, but it never actually says they penetrated systems in the wild, simply that the software was vulnerable.
Maybe if your were a little closer to the actual work than "knowing a guy that used to" you would realize that most of these places installed off the shelf VPN routers (about $69 bucks each) years ago, and aren't exposing their SCADA controllers to world plus dog.
It is not like this is a new issue. Fire all IT managers who were responsible for not doing penetration testing, including the ones at Homeland Security.
If you do NOT hold managers responsible then they are just lifers waiting for their pension!!
Before you loop that noose over the tree branch, perhaps you should check if this report actually reflects the real world.
TFA simply says the tested software from vendors, not real world installations. This software is in actual use, but that doesn't necessarily mean its running naked on the internet. Most often this is run on private circuits, as most of these installations predate the availability of internet. Even when on the internet, most of these installations use VPN between plants and control centers.
Even those foolish enough to put SCADA directly on the net have already been notified by their trade associations (if not the DHS) to start using off the shelf VPN routers immediately, and that happened months ago.
Contrary to the rantings of Slashdot Experts, these places aren't run by total idiots. Nor do they have the luxury of replacing every SCADA controller in their plants. But they do know enough to use common off the shelf technology to provide reasonable level of security, and probably accomplished this a long time ago simply to make management of their network easier.
Sure, you can scan the net and find some SCADA controllers small water pumps in East Podunk Oklahoma. But they don't control big city plants.
That sounds reasonable. So how far apart did they build them?
As north america was being settled, horses were in wide use, by every household. Walking was less of an influence.
The average distances between towns averaged 18 miles, the distance you would want to travel on horseback per day. Someone did some research on the distances horses could cover in a day, given the conditions of un-improved trails and found that pretty much agreed with historical records of the location of Roadhouses, which tended to spring up near where common camp sites were, and towns sprung up around the Roadhouses.
This distance, variable by type of terrain, held true as settlement progressed all the way across the continent, EXCEPT for those towns that sprung up along rail lines through mostly un-populated territory. Those tended to spring up near spaced to where steam engines needed to replenish their water and fuel.
So even in Washington, Oregon, and California, towns tended to be on average 18 miles apart. Roadhouses would spring up at that distance, supplies would be transported that far, and stores would appear.
Simply saying don't track me, while as the same time handing over enough identifying information to do precisely that is a silly expectation.
At best you might suppress some innocuous tracking by people who were already probably on the up and up, but big merchants and big ad agencies are going to track everything they can find out about you from your browser and your location. Even if they have only a tiny ad on a site that you visit, you can rest assured that since that site wasn't the site you contacted, its not necessarily going to even see, or pay attention to do-not-track.
You have to evaluate the transit time required via any given mode of transportation, compared to the time it takes to incapacitate a person after initial infection.
That limits the distance a lone carrier could spread the disease. People going to the next village to trade, or (once the danger becomes apparent) to request help or warn them would be the likely rural vectors, and that sounds like the two km / day limit. People could obviously walk farther in a day, but didn't need to. The next village or settlement was the extent of their every-day wandering). That assumes foot traffic as the default mode of transportation.
However when horses became affordable for everyday travelers, as well as wagon freight transport, and carriage travel became common between villages, you would expect that distance could be pushed out to 18 to 25 miles per day. Either on horseback or by carriage or wagon, it was typical to cover about that distance in a day.
This would be the first time non-human disease carriers (rats) would become a significant vector, as wagon cargo could deliver rats, dead or alive, over distances of 100 miles or more in 7 or 8 days.
So I don't believe you have to postulate the existence of rail travel to see much wider spread over the gestation period. All you need to is assume some goods might be transported (in bulk big enough to accidentally include rats) over several days of journey. Rats in cargo, even if dead, would typically arrive at their destination regardless of how long the trip took. and 7 or 800 miles would not be unreasonable in harvest times.
There is lots google can do within its own sphere, (google Shopper, Google Wallet) without trying to drag more money out of the OS itself.
Samsung is known to be working on its own version of an operating system that does not rely on Android, and with Ubuntu and Firefox and the bones of Blackberry being ready to step into the fight it would be stupid to piss off manufacturers.
Yeah, I've done my share of sift work in the past. Oddly I would seek to trade guys to work their graveyard shift, so that I could stay on that shift. I found no shortage of takers. Plant was cooler at night, and house was quieter to sleep with the rest of the family at work or school.
Why should WHEN you sleep matter. Night or day, as long as you get the needed sleep.
Some people may simply have a more efficient "cleaning" system, and need less sleep.
But I have other concerns with this finding, because it suggests this fluid replacement only occurs when the brain is not awake, yet we know that there is vast amounts of neural activity when the brain is asleep and dreaming.
Contract work both ways. I have no trouble with the concept of paying them for their forced vacation, as long as they work the next 17 Saturdays to make up their missed hours.
Only if they work by the hour, floor sweepers, and window washers. Sucks to be them, but then they were employed right through the last major economic downturn when everyone else was suffering. Its their turn.
If they have contracts that specify actual deliverables, they will still get paid when they ultimately deliver, and a 17 day deadline extension.
How is it difficult to believe this number? Considering that we have to pay 800,000 people for time they didn't (couldn't) work, yet we lost 17 days of productivity from each one of them, that comes to $1764 in lost productivity per employee, not counting all kinds of other non-personnel costs. I find that number entirely reasonable, if not a bit low.
So using your own example, we will only lose this 24 Billion if we pay the Federal employees who were not working. We've not lost that money yet, and the wise thing to do is not pay them back wages until or unless they put in 17 additional days of work on weekends to catch up.
That seems fair enough. Problem solved.
But to buy into that bargain you actually have to believe the government produces something. They don't. They just redistribute wealth.
If 95% of your government wasn't working for you for 17 days, Americans should be able to deduct 95% of 17/365ths off their taxes.
GDP is Gross Domestic Product, but the Government doesn't produce anything, it simply redistributes wealth. NOT robbing peter and NOT paying Paul is just as much of a zero sum game and robbing and paying.
Government spending on other than the essentials is largely a window breaking enterprise. The less they break, the less we have to pay to fix.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't forget the Bundesnachrichtendienst. Or the DGSE the DCRI, the CESIS, and 10 or more others.
The truth is, there will be no difference, EU data can't be protected from EU intelligence services, and
their partnerships and agreements with each other and with the NSA.
In fact, having to convince a US judge to issue a warrant for a EU government to Google, Facebook, Amazon, or any of the other
big players was probably a significant expense and impediment to EU police.
Tell you what, The EU can host all US data, and the US can host all EU data.
Requiring some local US sheriff to reach all the way to Brussels in order to sniff US email might be reduce abuse significantly. And Vise-Versa.
Wow. A post straight out of 1988.
don't they realize the nsa and cia have european-based operations, too?
Actually they do, the story specifically states:
But the proposed rules remain riddled with loopholes for intelligence services to exploit, MEPs admit.
The EU has no powers over national or European security, for example, nor its own proper intelligence or security services, which are jealously guarded national prerogatives. National security can be and is invoked to ignore and bypass EU rules.
"This regulation does not regulate the work of intelligence services," said Albrecht. "Of course, national security is a huge loophole and we need to close it. But we can't close it with this regulation."
So nothing will be solved here, the data will simply flow in the reverse direction and national security agencies of the EU will be filtering EU users data and sending it on to the NSA, and the NSA will do the same for data from the rest of the world.
New Boss, same as the Old Boss.
All the Big players will build (or already have) data centers in the EU, and all that they really lose is redundancy in their data backup. But there will be no less spying, it will actually increase the number of national agencies rooting through your data.
This effort is all for show, as well as smaller players using the whole NSA flap to leverage their position. But even this won't work for them because the EU customers want to have their Facebook and Google and their Twitter just as much and anyone else. So the same big players will establish or beef up their data-centers, and succumb to will of the various member states.
But hey, lets bitch-slap those goddamed Americans quick and get the infrastructure and employment back in our countries and under our control before anyone figures this out.
Who will step up and be the European Snowden?
Most big ones do, because they have been in business for far longer than the internet was up and running.
Those who don't use VPN routers so that they can have all their plants on the same IP subnet.
So the story is designed to enrage slash dot nerds, but it never actually says they penetrated systems in the
wild, simply that the software was vulnerable.
How do you know it hasn't been done?
Maybe if your were a little closer to the actual work than "knowing a guy that used to" you would realize that most of these places installed off the shelf VPN routers (about $69 bucks each) years ago, and aren't exposing their SCADA controllers to world plus dog.
It is not like this is a new issue. Fire all IT managers who were responsible for not doing penetration testing, including the ones at Homeland Security.
If you do NOT hold managers responsible then they are just lifers waiting for their pension!!
Before you loop that noose over the tree branch, perhaps you should check if this report actually reflects the real world.
TFA simply says the tested software from vendors, not real world installations. This software is in actual use, but that doesn't necessarily mean its running naked on the internet. Most often this is run on private circuits, as most of these installations predate the availability of internet. Even when on the internet, most of these installations use VPN between plants and control centers.
Even those foolish enough to put SCADA directly on the net have already been notified by their trade associations (if not the DHS) to start using off the shelf VPN routers immediately, and that happened months ago.
Contrary to the rantings of Slashdot Experts, these places aren't run by total idiots. Nor do they have the luxury of replacing every SCADA controller in their plants. But they do know enough to use common off the shelf technology to provide reasonable level of security, and probably accomplished this a long time ago simply to make management of their network easier.
Sure, you can scan the net and find some SCADA controllers small water pumps in East Podunk Oklahoma. But they don't control big city plants.
That sounds reasonable. So how far apart did they build them?
As north america was being settled, horses were in wide use, by every household. Walking was less of an influence.
The average distances between towns averaged 18 miles, the distance you would want to travel on horseback per day. Someone did some research on the distances horses could cover in a day, given the conditions of un-improved trails and found that pretty much agreed with historical records of the location of Roadhouses, which tended to spring up near where common camp sites were, and towns sprung up around the Roadhouses.
This distance, variable by type of terrain, held true as settlement progressed all the way across the continent, EXCEPT for those towns that sprung up along rail lines through mostly un-populated territory. Those tended to spring up near spaced to where steam engines needed to replenish their water and fuel.
So even in Washington, Oregon, and California, towns tended to be on average 18 miles apart. Roadhouses would spring up at that distance, supplies would be transported that far, and stores would appear.
Simply saying don't track me, while as the same time handing over enough identifying information to do precisely that is a silly expectation.
At best you might suppress some innocuous tracking by people who were already probably on the up and up, but big merchants
and big ad agencies are going to track everything they can find out about you from your browser and your location. Even if they have only a tiny ad on a site that you visit, you can rest assured that since that site wasn't the site you contacted, its not necessarily going to even see, or pay attention to do-not-track.
Ships can deliver rats a long distance. As can wagon loads of produce.
You have to evaluate the transit time required via any given mode of transportation, compared to the time it takes to incapacitate a person after initial infection.
That limits the distance a lone carrier could spread the disease. People going to the next village to trade, or (once the danger becomes apparent) to request help or warn them would be the likely rural vectors, and that sounds like the two km / day limit. People could obviously walk farther in a day, but didn't need to. The next village or settlement was the extent of their every-day wandering).
That assumes foot traffic as the default mode of transportation.
However when horses became affordable for everyday travelers, as well as wagon freight transport, and carriage travel became common between villages, you would expect that distance could be pushed out to 18 to 25 miles per day. Either on horseback or by carriage or wagon, it was typical to cover about that distance in a day.
This would be the first time non-human disease carriers (rats) would become a significant vector, as wagon cargo could deliver rats, dead or alive, over distances of 100 miles or more in 7 or 8 days.
So I don't believe you have to postulate the existence of rail travel to see much wider spread over the gestation period. All you need to is assume some goods might be transported (in bulk big enough to accidentally include rats) over several days of journey. Rats in cargo, even if dead, would typically arrive at their destination regardless of how long the trip took. and 7 or 800 miles would not be unreasonable in harvest times.
Lost.
How was all this money lost?
The people who didn't go still have that money. How was it lost?
There is lots google can do within its own sphere, (google Shopper, Google Wallet) without trying to drag more money out of the OS itself.
Samsung is known to be working on its own version of an operating system that does not rely on Android, and
with Ubuntu and Firefox and the bones of Blackberry being ready to step into the fight it would be stupid to piss off
manufacturers.
Except that actually works. Your foot can radiate enough excess heat to keep you from being too hot.
Yeah, I've done my share of sift work in the past.
Oddly I would seek to trade guys to work their graveyard shift, so that I could stay on that shift. I found no shortage of takers.
Plant was cooler at night, and house was quieter to sleep with the rest of the family at work or school.
Loan?
They weren't working. Where is this Loan you speak of?
But what they did say was:
"less than one percent of asteroids the size of the Chelyabinsk meteor (17-20 meters in diameter) have been detected."
Which wasn't that long and not all that awkward.
It is however, something of an un-provable statement.
Ah, the old I'm Irreplaceable syndrome.
There are ten guys in line for your job, and all of them will start at a lower salary.
Why should WHEN you sleep matter. Night or day, as long as you get the needed sleep.
Some people may simply have a more efficient "cleaning" system, and need less sleep.
But I have other concerns with this finding, because it suggests this fluid replacement only
occurs when the brain is not awake, yet we know that there is vast amounts of neural activity
when the brain is asleep and dreaming.
You are right. Social Services is a negative sum game.
In which case I expect 17 days of saturday work.
Contract work both ways.
I have no trouble with the concept of paying them for their forced vacation, as long as they work the next 17 Saturdays to make up their missed hours.
Only if they work by the hour, floor sweepers, and window washers. Sucks to be them, but then they were employed right through
the last major economic downturn when everyone else was suffering. Its their turn.
If they have contracts that specify actual deliverables, they will still get paid when they ultimately deliver, and a 17 day deadline extension.
Federal employees were not allowed to just get another job elsewhere in the meantime. many had to continue working, unpaid.
All those who had to continue working were getting paid. So your point is bogus.
Contrary to what you are lead to believe by the press, the government was not actually out of spending money.
Read and learn: http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/economy/news/2011/03/21/9347/were-not-broke/
How is it difficult to believe this number? Considering that we have to pay 800,000 people for time they didn't (couldn't) work, yet we lost 17 days of productivity from each one of them, that comes to $1764 in lost productivity per employee, not counting all kinds of other non-personnel costs. I find that number entirely reasonable, if not a bit low.
So using your own example, we will only lose this 24 Billion if we pay the Federal employees who were not working.
We've not lost that money yet, and the wise thing to do is not pay them back wages until or unless they put in
17 additional days of work on weekends to catch up.
That seems fair enough. Problem solved.
But to buy into that bargain you actually have to believe the government produces something.
They don't. They just redistribute wealth.
If 95% of your government wasn't working for you for 17 days, Americans should be
able to deduct 95% of 17/365ths off their taxes.
The whole concept is ludicrous as you point out.
GDP is Gross Domestic Product, but the Government doesn't produce anything, it simply redistributes wealth.
NOT robbing peter and NOT paying Paul is just as much of a zero sum game and robbing and paying.
Government spending on other than the essentials is largely a window breaking enterprise.
The less they break, the less we have to pay to fix.