I'm not sure you understand the complex nature of these attacks. These are not simply fire and forget executable files, like you see in your email constantly from script kiddies. There are few, if any, executable files involved initially. They are more after usernames, passwords, and network information. From their, they can launch more sophisticated attacks trying to gain access to network components, etc... and do more targeted phishing and attempt to send files.
When files are sent, these again are not the same as what you see in your email "Watch 2 hawt babes in action here". Names come specific to projects and programs, and are not simply asp hacks or pr0n.pdf.exe files.
As mentioned above, good security can mitigate those types of attacks. It takes much more than a few programs on the Windows PC's to accomplish.
I agree with what you say, but will also add that the rules are different with the MPAA/RIAA that have massive amounts of influence. This just means that smaller video shops will be told to piss off when they ask for information, the big guys will still get theirs.
Sorry, you are going to have to search for it since I'm lazy at the moment (actually to swamped with other things). This was a big internal discussion at my last work place, and a person was able to track down many of the funding sources. Greenpeace was one, and of course Oil and Coal were big ones.
The controversy I'm talking about is not quite the same as it seems you are thinking. Example: If I make a shitload of money polluting and you say it's bad, having a controversy allows me to keep polluting and continue to make assloads of money. This is a very common business tactic.
I never said NASA was bad, why would you infer that? Is NASA the only source of scientific data being used currently? I think that you will find that Politicians stay pretty far from NASA's data when proposing policies, laws, and discussion of GW. MSM uses the same data you find Politicians have.
This article does exactly what you say, however it's presentation by other media has been: "See, no global warming. We use to much water!". Sanity is not a requirement to work in the media. On occasion, I listen to a few minutes of Rush Limbaugh on the way to work. In the last week, I have heard at least 2 segments claiming that Global Warming is a farce because plants need CO2, so CO2 can't be rising to cause global warming.
And yes, I probably read way to much in to the comments of the post I replied to.
There are at least 2 distinct lobby groups. Polluters, and GW. The GW group also breaks down in to two more groups. The natural and man made.
Each has their own funding and support, and each publishes reports based on biases that tend to show that the opinion they receive funding from is correct.
I think you are making a mistake in thinking that Money can only come from one source. You also make a second mistake, in that the creation of controversy has no financial gain.
Since we have such a closed government now, and many other countries are following the same exact tight lipped policies let me ask a few questions.
Syria, how many foreigners are involved? We simply don't know, and obviously we won't know. I think we both know that the US, China, and Russia are all involved right? Just how much and who becomes the question. Is Russia simply supplying arms? Or are they also manning gunships in "Police" action? (Just like the US does mind you)
How many Iranians are involved in the constant fights still going on in Iraq and Afghanistan? Pakistanis? Again, we don't know.
These are small conflicts at this point, the US made sure that the actual war was over very quickly. If this was a longer war, would more troops from more countries be involved? Historically the answer is a resounding "FUCK YEAH!"
The more open the conflict, the more apt there will be for people to send in soldiers. It's a simple game in politics that is universally played. Everyone want's their interests interjected on the other side. If that was not true, why would we have wars in the first place?
Which of course becomes a contributing factor, but it's painfully obvious that it's not the only reason for the rise. Ice loss in the Arctic and Antarctic have much more bearing than ground water as the article tried to state. Those do not include Glacial loss, permafrost loss, etc...
If anything, I think the Global Warming issues point at an immediate problem we have with the Scientific community (by no way is that statement intended to blame the Scientists directly). Instead of doing "Science" they are working on theories that an agenda wants them to work on. Real science took a back seat long ago.
You are making a massive leap in logic. If we opened a war with North Korea for example, I think you would find that even if it did not do so openly, China would be sending in lots of troops. The regime is not the only difference between now and the Vietnam/NK war times. There is also no open war in the area, which makes probably more difference than who is currently in power.
Wow, do people ever think any more? Okay, we pumped ground water out. Did it stop raining? Did the processes for saturation suddenly stop working? Did all of the ground water magically vanish that we were pumping out, rivers all dried up, and shit we all live in a desert now?
As of about five years ago, you should immediately have known that "Science" no longer means Science. What you read is from an agenda, and not Scientists.
Honestly, I feel really bad for Scientists that want to do real science. The only way they can seem to make money is to spew garbage that fills someone's agenda, they can't do real science (or at least they can't write papers based on it).
That is correct. 5 years ago I worked at a Defense contractor and we had a carefully crafted spear phishing attack. The hackers learned that Company "doe" did the support for IT for most of their IT. The group created a "doesupport.com" domain, and stole company logos from "doe.com". A fake site was crafted, and honestly looked pretty legit. They even had someone that knew English do the wording. The problem was, with all that work they had a username and password dialogue box on the site, and our users were warned about this type of attack every day. We had 1 user out of about 6800 log in to the site, and more than 2800 tickets from users reporting the suspected site.
The site was in the US, but traced it's roots to China. Interesting how fast this gets found out when Government is involved.
Obviously "doe" is a fictional name to protect both the contractor and support people.
Gnome is horrid, and everyone knows it. It was better than CDE, which is why you saw some name brand Unix pushing V2 as well as Linux and easier to support with the Java base. It was never geared to average users, just as CDE would never have appealed to the average users.
When I see adoption, again I'll use KDE since I have given numerous POC presentations for the solution, I see the same issue. Ignorance by those that are making the decisions. The only thing they see in trade rags is MS products, and that is all they can figure out how to use. As soon as you give them KDE, that they can figure out easily and actually become productive in rather quickly, Linux gains traction. This impacts server and desktop solutions. Again, I'm not thinking about "MY" adoption, I'm thinking about what organizations will approve as a whole. Startups, yeah they don't give a rats behind what you run. Established places always have a standards guide that has to be followed, or modifications need to be made to the standards. Sadly, even with the long time Linux has been around and proving itself there is a lot of brass that has no clue.
And yeah, the MS issue is present but Google, Libre, OO all make this obtainable.. assuming you can sell the brass on a solution.
You point at a different problem, which is that we have all of these special cases for double jeopardy, which by the way is unconstitutional. If you fixed that problem you would fix much of the problem in our legal system. Not all mind you, but it would be a big dent. We spend a lot of resources pursuing frivolous cases where criminal trials had no conviction.
And look, lets be honest. The system is broken pretty badly, which is why we have several high profile cases where obviously guilty people were not found guilty. We don't fix a broken system by adding more broken processes, such as a separation of civil and criminal trials for the same exact crime.
The one functional part of our economy is that consumers have choices still. Don't buy, businesses either change or vanish. SGI is an example of a computer company that failed to change. IBM is a company that has stayed adaptive to consumers. There have been lots of shitbag companies that went out of business because consumers refused to buy from them, I just gave a massively scaled example. How you think that democracy, which is a form of government and not a type of economy, fits in is rather dumbfounding.
Suggestion(and probably misplace in a reply to you): Add a new number for obvious shit like the post you replied to so that it becomes invisible to everyone . This meets the/. original requirement of keeping everything in place, without some POS spammer getting the satisfaction of creating a visible post. I suggest "-666" as a rating since these people must be the debil!
Wait wait wait a minute there. What you point at is what should be the right method. A Police officer should get a warrant, and should get a subpoena. This is what is required under the law for everything else. Why because it's computers would it be subject to a different set of laws?
What is missed in the conversation so far, is that laws are always written with an acceptable amount of risk. They must be in order to have a functional society. Look, nobody wants a murder roaming the streets, but do you have 24/7 surveillance on every citizen in your country just to prevent a murder? No!
What do you do? We have societal normals that we teach to people: Murder is wrong. Murder is against the Law. That small amount of education I can assure you prevents a metric assload of muders.
Beyond that, you use logic and reason. If you have a murder, you start to investigate. Often, this requires warrants and subpoenas to find evidence and make convictions. This is what we do all the damn time, and it works very well.
Your "Because it's on a computer" is pure idiocy! Do you think that we have never cracked a case where someone tried to hide evidence, or anonymously kill someone?
Before you go to your apples and oranges routine, I intentionally gave an extreme example since you are suggesting it's okay to use extreme methods of preventing a potential crime. In essence, prevention is what the law is about. A side effect of the law is correction when someone breaks the law!
I very much like the point that writing a function or program called "AIRPLANE" does not make you Wilbur Wright! I spit some coffee out laughing at that one...
No need to burn them down, just boycott them. Tell your friends to boycott them, and ask them to ask their friends to boycott. Look, I'm not a fan of big-ole corporations either. But we have a very good method for check and balance built in to our economy, yet people generally refuse to use it. At least until it becomes Obamegg and you are force to buy gear there, you can always take your business elsewhere.
So you know, I have had a personal boycott MS and have for years. I'm vocal with my boycott, and can guarantee you I have harmed their business with my boycott. (I can't control tools I'm force to work with all the time, but I do try to boycott there also).
Seriously, I have no issues with law enforcement investigating the creeps on line. But doesn't the UK already have a warrant process that accomplishes this without the obviously open exposure to all of society for spying?
Thanks for the clarification, your point makes much more sense. Also helps to know that English is not your native language, you had me fooled so your skills with English are very good.
Flattery aside, I think what you point it fits exactly the definition of a conspiracy. I agree that the act of pushing toward a World Government is more open now. However we lack the agenda that want's this to happen, the agenda is a secret. Note item 2 and item 3 in the definition, but all points are relevant.
1. An agreement to perform together an illegal, wrongful, or subversive act.
2. A group of conspirators.
3. Law An agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime or accomplish a legal purpose through illegal action.
4. A joining or acting together, as if by sinister design: a conspiracy of wind and tide that devastated coastal areas.
While perhaps a bit funny, your statements lack any credibility. We are spending billions on scanners, and more on people that grope everyone boarding a plane. The US Military has had air detection for a long long time. Expense relates to adoption, so costs for the air sensors would quickly be reduced if adopted. They are not more expensive to build, and operation requires much less training and head count. In other words, you have been duped in to thinking that financially the only option is a massive head count, massive amounts of machinery, and massive amounts of intrusion in to your privacy.
Food will not deter trained dogs, it's been proven over and over and over. You think this has not been tried by smugglers in Mexico over and over and over? In order for that logic to be true, you need to provide cases where dogs have been trained and maintained properly. IE starving a dog would have a different result, and I'm sure you can find cases of mishandling having an impact. K9 forces are generally treated exceptionally well, and handlers and dogs have strong bonds.
The success of Linux as a whole has much to do with the usability among all users, not just those that put themselves on a pedestal. Try not to ignore what happened to name brand Unix because of that same mentality.
Maybe the logic makes little sense to you, but imagine how much easier adoption of Linux would be if people could actually advocate Linux that were not technically savvy. Linux is much more than just a server OS, yet we don't see desktop adoption. This is not because Linux lacks desktop functionality mind you, quite the contrary. This is because a bunch of techies, that could do most of their work on an old teletype are pissing and moaning.
You know, I really really hate straw man arguments. Especially when you are brainwashed in to thinking that's the only answer.
Did you know, that we have chemical detection units that could be installed in airports that detect chemicals in the air without intrusion. We also have numerous types of animals trained to do the same. Did you know that using either of those two methods would have caught the underwear bomber before they boarded a plane. No current methods including the naked scanner will pick up a surgically implanted bomb, so don't bother. Did you know that the naked scanner would have done little good in finding the allegedly used plastic box cutters in the 9/11 hijackings?
Did you know that using dogs, or the airborne detection would save loads of money? But you, you only see the option of the TSA. Yes, groping grandma is the only option right?
I won't even go further for an AC. Just do some research, people much smarter than you have already pointed to answers.
I read a great article on something much bigger than what they currently do, and it's all perfectly legal according to the article. The NSA super compute center being built currently, scheduled to be on line 2013 has links already in place by agreements with the only provider for major telecom hubs in the US which is AT&T. According to the article the NSA will be snooping, storing, and even trying to crack the encryption for all internet traffic both foreign and domestic, and all without a warrant.
Simply put, if it's not legal now it will be next year with the activation of this new center.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not sure you understand the complex nature of these attacks. These are not simply fire and forget executable files, like you see in your email constantly from script kiddies. There are few, if any, executable files involved initially. They are more after usernames, passwords, and network information. From their, they can launch more sophisticated attacks trying to gain access to network components, etc... and do more targeted phishing and attempt to send files.
When files are sent, these again are not the same as what you see in your email "Watch 2 hawt babes in action here". Names come specific to projects and programs, and are not simply asp hacks or pr0n.pdf.exe files.
As mentioned above, good security can mitigate those types of attacks. It takes much more than a few programs on the Windows PC's to accomplish.
Maybe their heads will all explode from cognitive dissonance!
I agree with what you say, but will also add that the rules are different with the MPAA/RIAA that have massive amounts of influence. This just means that smaller video shops will be told to piss off when they ask for information, the big guys will still get theirs.
Sorry, you are going to have to search for it since I'm lazy at the moment (actually to swamped with other things). This was a big internal discussion at my last work place, and a person was able to track down many of the funding sources. Greenpeace was one, and of course Oil and Coal were big ones.
The controversy I'm talking about is not quite the same as it seems you are thinking. Example: If I make a shitload of money polluting and you say it's bad, having a controversy allows me to keep polluting and continue to make assloads of money. This is a very common business tactic.
I never said NASA was bad, why would you infer that? Is NASA the only source of scientific data being used currently? I think that you will find that Politicians stay pretty far from NASA's data when proposing policies, laws, and discussion of GW. MSM uses the same data you find Politicians have.
This article does exactly what you say, however it's presentation by other media has been: "See, no global warming. We use to much water!". Sanity is not a requirement to work in the media. On occasion, I listen to a few minutes of Rush Limbaugh on the way to work. In the last week, I have heard at least 2 segments claiming that Global Warming is a farce because plants need CO2, so CO2 can't be rising to cause global warming.
And yes, I probably read way to much in to the comments of the post I replied to.
There are at least 2 distinct lobby groups. Polluters, and GW. The GW group also breaks down in to two more groups. The natural and man made.
Each has their own funding and support, and each publishes reports based on biases that tend to show that the opinion they receive funding from is correct.
I think you are making a mistake in thinking that Money can only come from one source. You also make a second mistake, in that the creation of controversy has no financial gain.
Since we have such a closed government now, and many other countries are following the same exact tight lipped policies let me ask a few questions.
Syria, how many foreigners are involved? We simply don't know, and obviously we won't know. I think we both know that the US, China, and Russia are all involved right? Just how much and who becomes the question. Is Russia simply supplying arms? Or are they also manning gunships in "Police" action? (Just like the US does mind you)
How many Iranians are involved in the constant fights still going on in Iraq and Afghanistan? Pakistanis? Again, we don't know.
These are small conflicts at this point, the US made sure that the actual war was over very quickly. If this was a longer war, would more troops from more countries be involved? Historically the answer is a resounding "FUCK YEAH!"
The more open the conflict, the more apt there will be for people to send in soldiers. It's a simple game in politics that is universally played. Everyone want's their interests interjected on the other side. If that was not true, why would we have wars in the first place?
Which of course becomes a contributing factor, but it's painfully obvious that it's not the only reason for the rise. Ice loss in the Arctic and Antarctic have much more bearing than ground water as the article tried to state. Those do not include Glacial loss, permafrost loss, etc...
If anything, I think the Global Warming issues point at an immediate problem we have with the Scientific community (by no way is that statement intended to blame the Scientists directly). Instead of doing "Science" they are working on theories that an agenda wants them to work on. Real science took a back seat long ago.
You are making a massive leap in logic. If we opened a war with North Korea for example, I think you would find that even if it did not do so openly, China would be sending in lots of troops. The regime is not the only difference between now and the Vietnam/NK war times. There is also no open war in the area, which makes probably more difference than who is currently in power.
Wow, do people ever think any more? Okay, we pumped ground water out. Did it stop raining? Did the processes for saturation suddenly stop working? Did all of the ground water magically vanish that we were pumping out, rivers all dried up, and shit we all live in a desert now?
As of about five years ago, you should immediately have known that "Science" no longer means Science. What you read is from an agenda, and not Scientists.
Honestly, I feel really bad for Scientists that want to do real science. The only way they can seem to make money is to spew garbage that fills someone's agenda, they can't do real science (or at least they can't write papers based on it).
That is correct. 5 years ago I worked at a Defense contractor and we had a carefully crafted spear phishing attack. The hackers learned that Company "doe" did the support for IT for most of their IT. The group created a "doesupport.com" domain, and stole company logos from "doe.com". A fake site was crafted, and honestly looked pretty legit. They even had someone that knew English do the wording. The problem was, with all that work they had a username and password dialogue box on the site, and our users were warned about this type of attack every day. We had 1 user out of about 6800 log in to the site, and more than 2800 tickets from users reporting the suspected site.
The site was in the US, but traced it's roots to China. Interesting how fast this gets found out when Government is involved.
Obviously "doe" is a fictional name to protect both the contractor and support people.
You forgot to mention Vietnam in that. Estimates put the Chinese casualties at far greater numbers than North Vietnamese troops.
Gnome is horrid, and everyone knows it. It was better than CDE, which is why you saw some name brand Unix pushing V2 as well as Linux and easier to support with the Java base. It was never geared to average users, just as CDE would never have appealed to the average users.
When I see adoption, again I'll use KDE since I have given numerous POC presentations for the solution, I see the same issue. Ignorance by those that are making the decisions. The only thing they see in trade rags is MS products, and that is all they can figure out how to use. As soon as you give them KDE, that they can figure out easily and actually become productive in rather quickly, Linux gains traction. This impacts server and desktop solutions. Again, I'm not thinking about "MY" adoption, I'm thinking about what organizations will approve as a whole. Startups, yeah they don't give a rats behind what you run. Established places always have a standards guide that has to be followed, or modifications need to be made to the standards. Sadly, even with the long time Linux has been around and proving itself there is a lot of brass that has no clue.
And yeah, the MS issue is present but Google, Libre, OO all make this obtainable.. assuming you can sell the brass on a solution.
You point at a different problem, which is that we have all of these special cases for double jeopardy, which by the way is unconstitutional. If you fixed that problem you would fix much of the problem in our legal system. Not all mind you, but it would be a big dent. We spend a lot of resources pursuing frivolous cases where criminal trials had no conviction.
And look, lets be honest. The system is broken pretty badly, which is why we have several high profile cases where obviously guilty people were not found guilty. We don't fix a broken system by adding more broken processes, such as a separation of civil and criminal trials for the same exact crime.
The one functional part of our economy is that consumers have choices still. Don't buy, businesses either change or vanish. SGI is an example of a computer company that failed to change. IBM is a company that has stayed adaptive to consumers. There have been lots of shitbag companies that went out of business because consumers refused to buy from them, I just gave a massively scaled example. How you think that democracy, which is a form of government and not a type of economy, fits in is rather dumbfounding.
Suggestion(and probably misplace in a reply to you): Add a new number for obvious shit like the post you replied to so that it becomes invisible to everyone . This meets the /. original requirement of keeping everything in place, without some POS spammer getting the satisfaction of creating a visible post. I suggest "-666" as a rating since these people must be the debil!
Wait wait wait a minute there. What you point at is what should be the right method. A Police officer should get a warrant, and should get a subpoena. This is what is required under the law for everything else. Why because it's computers would it be subject to a different set of laws?
What is missed in the conversation so far, is that laws are always written with an acceptable amount of risk. They must be in order to have a functional society. Look, nobody wants a murder roaming the streets, but do you have 24/7 surveillance on every citizen in your country just to prevent a murder? No!
What do you do? We have societal normals that we teach to people: Murder is wrong. Murder is against the Law. That small amount of education I can assure you prevents a metric assload of muders.
Beyond that, you use logic and reason. If you have a murder, you start to investigate. Often, this requires warrants and subpoenas to find evidence and make convictions. This is what we do all the damn time, and it works very well.
Your "Because it's on a computer" is pure idiocy! Do you think that we have never cracked a case where someone tried to hide evidence, or anonymously kill someone?
Before you go to your apples and oranges routine, I intentionally gave an extreme example since you are suggesting it's okay to use extreme methods of preventing a potential crime. In essence, prevention is what the law is about. A side effect of the law is correction when someone breaks the law!
I very much like the point that writing a function or program called "AIRPLANE" does not make you Wilbur Wright! I spit some coffee out laughing at that one...
No need to burn them down, just boycott them. Tell your friends to boycott them, and ask them to ask their friends to boycott. Look, I'm not a fan of big-ole corporations either. But we have a very good method for check and balance built in to our economy, yet people generally refuse to use it. At least until it becomes Obamegg and you are force to buy gear there, you can always take your business elsewhere.
So you know, I have had a personal boycott MS and have for years. I'm vocal with my boycott, and can guarantee you I have harmed their business with my boycott. (I can't control tools I'm force to work with all the time, but I do try to boycott there also).
Seriously, I have no issues with law enforcement investigating the creeps on line. But doesn't the UK already have a warrant process that accomplishes this without the obviously open exposure to all of society for spying?
Thanks for the clarification, your point makes much more sense. Also helps to know that English is not your native language, you had me fooled so your skills with English are very good.
Flattery aside, I think what you point it fits exactly the definition of a conspiracy. I agree that the act of pushing toward a World Government is more open now. However we lack the agenda that want's this to happen, the agenda is a secret. Note item 2 and item 3 in the definition, but all points are relevant.
1. An agreement to perform together an illegal, wrongful, or subversive act. 2. A group of conspirators. 3. Law An agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime or accomplish a legal purpose through illegal action. 4. A joining or acting together, as if by sinister design: a conspiracy of wind and tide that devastated coastal areas.
While perhaps a bit funny, your statements lack any credibility. We are spending billions on scanners, and more on people that grope everyone boarding a plane. The US Military has had air detection for a long long time. Expense relates to adoption, so costs for the air sensors would quickly be reduced if adopted. They are not more expensive to build, and operation requires much less training and head count. In other words, you have been duped in to thinking that financially the only option is a massive head count, massive amounts of machinery, and massive amounts of intrusion in to your privacy.
Food will not deter trained dogs, it's been proven over and over and over. You think this has not been tried by smugglers in Mexico over and over and over? In order for that logic to be true, you need to provide cases where dogs have been trained and maintained properly. IE starving a dog would have a different result, and I'm sure you can find cases of mishandling having an impact. K9 forces are generally treated exceptionally well, and handlers and dogs have strong bonds.
The success of Linux as a whole has much to do with the usability among all users, not just those that put themselves on a pedestal. Try not to ignore what happened to name brand Unix because of that same mentality.
Maybe the logic makes little sense to you, but imagine how much easier adoption of Linux would be if people could actually advocate Linux that were not technically savvy. Linux is much more than just a server OS, yet we don't see desktop adoption. This is not because Linux lacks desktop functionality mind you, quite the contrary. This is because a bunch of techies, that could do most of their work on an old teletype are pissing and moaning.
You know, I really really hate straw man arguments. Especially when you are brainwashed in to thinking that's the only answer.
Did you know, that we have chemical detection units that could be installed in airports that detect chemicals in the air without intrusion. We also have numerous types of animals trained to do the same. Did you know that using either of those two methods would have caught the underwear bomber before they boarded a plane. No current methods including the naked scanner will pick up a surgically implanted bomb, so don't bother. Did you know that the naked scanner would have done little good in finding the allegedly used plastic box cutters in the 9/11 hijackings?
Did you know that using dogs, or the airborne detection would save loads of money? But you, you only see the option of the TSA. Yes, groping grandma is the only option right?
I won't even go further for an AC. Just do some research, people much smarter than you have already pointed to answers.
I read a great article on something much bigger than what they currently do, and it's all perfectly legal according to the article. The NSA super compute center being built currently, scheduled to be on line 2013 has links already in place by agreements with the only provider for major telecom hubs in the US which is AT&T. According to the article the NSA will be snooping, storing, and even trying to crack the encryption for all internet traffic both foreign and domestic, and all without a warrant.
Simply put, if it's not legal now it will be next year with the activation of this new center.