Yes, most governments would have had a general idea of what the NSA was up to, in much the same way that identity thieves have a general idea that you have a social security number and a bank account number. They can't steal from you unless they get that specific information. Snowden is providing specific information. Let's put it another way: the Germans knew the Allied powers would invade France in the 1940s to free the French people and defeat Nazi Germany. What they didn't know was when, where, and how. If they had known that the invasion would have been a disaster. Snowden is providing the when, where, and how. You're worrying about the wrong things.
To you the term "enemy" is rhetorical, or metaphorical. It is a figure of speech that one casually throws around based on the whims of your politics. The NSA and military deal with enemy on a much more concrete basis: nations aiming nuclear weapons at the US, that probe its defenses with bombers and submarines, that attempt to kill Americans by poison, bomb, machinegun, or beheading. They focus on nations engaging in aggression against American allies. The NSA and military are protecting the US from that sort of enemy. They are clear that the American people aren't their enemy but the ones they are defending. The confusion regarding friend and foe, who the actually enemy is, seems to be a malady common to commenters on Slashdot. It is unfortunate that so many otherwise intelligent people get this wrong, but fringe politics will do that.
I'll overlook the fact that your post strayed from the assertion that I responded to and point out that nearly your entire post is false. It isn't even close.
To begin with, there certainly were safeguards in place. To begin with you had to have a Top Secret security clearance following an investigation to get access to the data. The data was limited to the NSA network where you would have had to work and be granted access to it. Snowden wasn't an analyst that would have had more restrictions, but was working as a system administrator which allowed him greater access and a ready excuse for some of his devious behavior and actions. He was detected copying the large and unusual amounts of data, but repeatedly lied to coworkers and investigators when challenged. That was already on top of the lying he did to get his clearance and job to begin with.
As it was Snowden had a narrow window to complete his actions after he started that job since the NSA was in the process of installing new security software that would have made his breaches obvious. That started before Snowden's theft and leaks, not after.
The administration and political establishment condemn the leaks because they are damaging. Snowden's leaks are going to cost billions of tax dollars to work around, and if you live in the Western world you'll almost certainly be paying your share since the US, UK, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and other nations have been compromised.
So no, you didn't correctly evaluate the available evidence. In fact you have it pretty much backward.
I'll admit I wasn't thinking clearly, I'd forgotten their penchant for extending their existence in the British isles backwards in history..In fact I may have heard that verse howled in Oxford last week, it went something like..
Ug Ug ooh Ug, Ug oooh Ug Ug oooh, Ug Uggy Ug Ug ooh Ug Ug,
Sorry, but you must not have been listening close enough. It was this, not Jerusalem.
Now the question is, how many other NSA contractors / staff / moles / spies have been doing the same thing, without Snowden's intention to disclose their behavior?
As has been previously demonstrated on Slashdot the number will be assumed to be as many as are needed to render Snowden's crimes "meaningless," so "therefore he should be pardoned."
You're 82, Leonard. Holding yourself up as an example of the ravages of smoking after reaching the age of 82 is illogical.
Refusing to acknowledge what science teaches us about disease is illogical and yet you are holding yourself up as an arbiter of logic.
Refusing to accept death at 82 is illogical.
There is no logic to dying before necessary if he can still do productive work or enjoy life.
Go with grace.
What an interesting contract to your words in this post and this post. It is almost as if you don't really mean it. You seem to lack empathy. Isn't there a word for that?
Exactly! Why would Slashdot ever carry a story about Leonard Nimoy? Wasn't he in some westerns, like Gunsmoke and The Virginian? Anything else that we should know about? Did he ever travel? Any famous treks to relate that nerds would care about?
I have to give you credit, you took a bad position and did the best you could with it. Anyone that didn't read the material closely would likely to sucked into the focusing on the wrong points and be taken in by your distortions and misleading presentation. I made it quite clear up front what I was demonstrating: "Democrats have used fake websites, and their functionality depended on the purpose." Do you claim that I didn't show a Democrat using a fake website? No, because I did. You set up the straw man that I was trying to show them using donations, when that wasn't the point.
Your disparagement of the links is dishonest. They are sourced and are well known blogs that reference the original sources. I guess you have to try that since you don't have much else. It is also amusing that you try to disassociate various members of the Democratic party from each other - No! They have nothing to do with each other, at all!
Funny how you don't bring this up:
Harry Reid’s campaign, however, took the code from the prior Angle website and launched a website called “TheRealSharronAngle.com.” The fake website was what, in internet terminology, is called spoofing, where a seemingly real website is created, usually to obtain information under false pretenses (frequently referred to as “phishing”).
Isn't taking the code of another candidate's site just a little unusual?
Instead you just keep tiling at the donation straw man and rely upon unsubstantiated claims about what Reid's fake site did and didn't do.
Your post constitutes negative knowledge. A pity you didn't post using your account, but I can understand why.
1. Massively under-fund education 2. Take advantage of the under-educated masses 3. Profit
The person mentioned in the story above is named, "Dr. Ray Bellamy." Do you really think anyone that uses the honorific "Dr." as in doctor, is suffering from a lack of education? This isn't the result of a conspiracy, or under education, it is simply people not reading or using what brain they have.
Democrats have used fake websites, and their functionality depended on the purpose. Of course they have done more than that too, including running fake candidates.
Harry Reid’s campaign, however, took the code from the prior Angle website and launched a website called “TheRealSharronAngle.com.” The fake website was what, in internet terminology, is called spoofing, where a seemingly real website is created, usually to obtain information under false pretenses (frequently referred to as “phishing”)....
But the reality is that by creating a spoofed website with the contact and volunteer functions operable, the Reid campaign sought to obtain personally identifiable information about Angle supporters. At a minimum, such information about Angle supporters would have been gathered under false pretenses.
The phishing function also would have been disruptive to the Angle campaign because people who thought they had volunteered for the Angle campaign never would have been contacted to help out because they had, in fact, been tricked.
Regardless of whether the Reid campaign’s spoofing and phishing attempt was criminal, it was sleazy.
...except afterwards it was published widely while it was being approved by the states.
Similar to the way that negotiated treaties are when presented to the Senate for confirmation then.
Then there's the Patriot Act that people voted on without even reading...
I'm not a fan of the "pass it before reading" method that has become so popular. On the other hand the Patriot Act has now been available for years and it keeps being reauthorized. People have obviously had a chance to read it before reauthorization.
Is this (below) what you are talking about? It doesn't look like they are looking for private medical records but rather the diagnostic codes that wouldn't be personally identifiable in and of themselves. Either that or they are instructing EPA to code the PHI prior to release, which would render it safe to release. ( See PHI, and De-identification ) The US Congress is the one that makes the rules, and it appears that release of it may be mandated already. The EPA isn't complying. The EPA is doing making its rules both in secret and based on secrets, and I thought we were against that on Slashdot.
3. Request: That underlying data used to promulgate Clean Air Act rules be made public so the public can independently examine cost/benefit and other issues. That the EPA release a full set of data files for the American Cancer Society Study; the Harvard Six Cities Study; HEI/Krewski et al. 2009; Laden et al. 2006; Lepeule 2012; and Jerrett 2009. This request includes the coding of Personal Health Information (PHI).
Background: Since 1997, Congress has requested the underlying data for particulate matter studies (PM2.5) be made available to Congress and the public. Then-EPA Administrator Carol Browner went back and forth with Members regarding Congressional and public access to the underlying data, citing legitimate scientific inquiry qualifications and confidentiality concerns. In response to the continued reticence by EPA to publicly release data, the Shelby amendment, a rider to the FY1999 Omnibus Appropriations Act (P.L. 105-277), mandated that OMB amend Circular A-110 to require federal agencies to ensure that "all data produced under a [federally funded] award be made available to the public through the procedures established under FOIA."
A March 4, 2013, letter to EPA from Ranking Member Vitter and House Science, Space, and Technology Committee Chairman Lamar Smith requested the underlying data from additional long term cohort studies that rely on updates from the Harvard Six Cities Study and the American Cancer Society Study, including: Krewski e. al. (2009); Pope et al. (2002); Pope et al. (2009); Krewski et al. (2000); Laden et. al (2006); and Lepeule et al. (2012). This letter repeated multiple communications from Congress requesting the release of the underlying data which are the basis for nearly all the health and benefit claims from CAA rulemaking in this Administration.
It costs the same to have them there as it does in the Mediterranean just steaming around. It might be cheaper near Sochi since they may not be burning as much fuel. You pay for a navy regardless of what it is doing.
Do you genuinely believe that the US ships that happen to be nearby, and all the Delegation's land security, as well as the assistance provided by the US agencies warning of toothpaste terrorists, are free?
It's prepaid, you pay for those ships, their crews, and supplies, not to mention the agents, regardless of where they are in the world. It might even be saving money to have them in Russia since the price for per diem might even be cheaper there than for travel in the US for the agents, and I don't believe Russia is counted as a war zone for incentive pay.
Note that the US loves supercarriers too and keep building them, even while more rational people know that they'll be sent to the bottom within minutes of an high-intensity, high-tech war breaking out. The Chinese allegedly have ballistic missiles with reentry vehicles which can find and hit moving ships.
They haven't quite gone out of style yet. The Chinese are building aircraft carriers as well, and are on their way to having four of them. The first Chinese aircraft carrier battle group did a demonstration cruise not long ago. The Indians are building up their carrier fleet as well. The British navy is building two new large carriers.
The Chinese allegedly have ballistic missiles with reentry vehicles which can find and hit moving ships.
The US Aegis air defense system typically found on destroyers has a well proven anti-ballistic missile capability.
The start of WWI, with light horsemen charging into, and getting cut up by, machine gun fire. The officers had their ideas -- and that was _it_.
On the Western front in WW 1 cavalry and mounted infantry were stymied. On the Eastern front and Middle East especially they continued to pay an active role that at times was highly successful.
Every defensive system takes time to operate, staring with detection, identification, classification, target selection, weapon / ammunition selection, engagement, assessment, and reengagement (if necessary). Hypersonic weapons really cut down on the amount of time you have to do that as well as make the actual engagement more difficult, and that is just based on speed. If you add any countermeasures, such a stealth technology or jamming it gets even harder. Think of the SR-71. It was never successfully intercepted. Hypersonic weapons are an even more challenging proposition since they are going to be even faster, and likely smaller, with years of advances in materials for radar shielding, and electronics for countermeasures. To successfully engage them your defensive systems have to be quick, accurate, and either have warning or be instant-on. If your defensive systems rely upon large amounts of electricity being instantly available that is going to have some implications. I have little doubt it is possible to engage them, but definitely not easy. You can look at the work being done with armored vehicle active defense systems as an example in a lower speed regime. Bottom line is that if there are a lot of hypersonic weapons in the air at once heading toward you, you're probably in big trouble unless you have deflector shields even if you have phasers.
I thought IBM was able to leverage their detailed knowledge of their semiconductor processes to squeeze every bit of performance they can out of their Power architecture designs, and even tweak the processes to aid them. I doubt they will have enough volume for another company to do much of that unless they are willing to pay.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, most governments would have had a general idea of what the NSA was up to, in much the same way that identity thieves have a general idea that you have a social security number and a bank account number. They can't steal from you unless they get that specific information. Snowden is providing specific information. Let's put it another way: the Germans knew the Allied powers would invade France in the 1940s to free the French people and defeat Nazi Germany. What they didn't know was when, where, and how. If they had known that the invasion would have been a disaster. Snowden is providing the when, where, and how. You're worrying about the wrong things.
To you the term "enemy" is rhetorical, or metaphorical. It is a figure of speech that one casually throws around based on the whims of your politics. The NSA and military deal with enemy on a much more concrete basis: nations aiming nuclear weapons at the US, that probe its defenses with bombers and submarines, that attempt to kill Americans by poison, bomb, machinegun, or beheading. They focus on nations engaging in aggression against American allies. The NSA and military are protecting the US from that sort of enemy. They are clear that the American people aren't their enemy but the ones they are defending. The confusion regarding friend and foe, who the actually enemy is, seems to be a malady common to commenters on Slashdot. It is unfortunate that so many otherwise intelligent people get this wrong, but fringe politics will do that.
I'll overlook the fact that your post strayed from the assertion that I responded to and point out that nearly your entire post is false. It isn't even close.
To begin with, there certainly were safeguards in place. To begin with you had to have a Top Secret security clearance following an investigation to get access to the data. The data was limited to the NSA network where you would have had to work and be granted access to it. Snowden wasn't an analyst that would have had more restrictions, but was working as a system administrator which allowed him greater access and a ready excuse for some of his devious behavior and actions. He was detected copying the large and unusual amounts of data, but repeatedly lied to coworkers and investigators when challenged. That was already on top of the lying he did to get his clearance and job to begin with.
As it was Snowden had a narrow window to complete his actions after he started that job since the NSA was in the process of installing new security software that would have made his breaches obvious. That started before Snowden's theft and leaks, not after.
The administration and political establishment condemn the leaks because they are damaging. Snowden's leaks are going to cost billions of tax dollars to work around, and if you live in the Western world you'll almost certainly be paying your share since the US, UK, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and other nations have been compromised.
So no, you didn't correctly evaluate the available evidence. In fact you have it pretty much backward.
I'll admit I wasn't thinking clearly, I'd forgotten their penchant for extending their existence in the British isles backwards in history..In fact I may have heard that verse howled in Oxford last week, it went something like..
Ug Ug ooh Ug,
Ug oooh Ug Ug oooh,
Ug Uggy Ug Ug ooh Ug Ug,
Sorry, but you must not have been listening close enough. It was this, not Jerusalem.
"Jerusalem" performed by the Cadet Glee Club of West Point
Now the question is, how many other NSA contractors / staff / moles / spies have been doing the same thing, without Snowden's intention to disclose their behavior?
As has been previously demonstrated on Slashdot the number will be assumed to be as many as are needed to render Snowden's crimes "meaningless," so "therefore he should be pardoned."
Extra! Extra! Read all about it! Normandy Invasion D-Day set for next week! Generals are concerned!
... to their real enemy - the general public.
That is such a load of crap.
You're 82, Leonard. Holding yourself up as an example of the ravages of smoking after reaching the age of 82 is illogical.
Refusing to acknowledge what science teaches us about disease is illogical and yet you are holding yourself up as an arbiter of logic.
Refusing to accept death at 82 is illogical.
There is no logic to dying before necessary if he can still do productive work or enjoy life.
Go with grace.
What an interesting contract to your words in this post and this post. It is almost as if you don't really mean it. You seem to lack empathy. Isn't there a word for that?
Better link for The Virginian. The doctor with him looks familiar too, good old DeForest Kelly, another old hand in the Westerns.
Exactly! Why would Slashdot ever carry a story about Leonard Nimoy? Wasn't he in some westerns, like Gunsmoke and The Virginian? Anything else that we should know about? Did he ever travel? Any famous treks to relate that nerds would care about?
I have to give you credit, you took a bad position and did the best you could with it. Anyone that didn't read the material closely would likely to sucked into the focusing on the wrong points and be taken in by your distortions and misleading presentation. I made it quite clear up front what I was demonstrating: "Democrats have used fake websites, and their functionality depended on the purpose." Do you claim that I didn't show a Democrat using a fake website? No, because I did. You set up the straw man that I was trying to show them using donations, when that wasn't the point.
Your disparagement of the links is dishonest. They are sourced and are well known blogs that reference the original sources. I guess you have to try that since you don't have much else. It is also amusing that you try to disassociate various members of the Democratic party from each other - No! They have nothing to do with each other, at all!
Funny how you don't bring this up:
Harry Reid’s campaign, however, took the code from the prior Angle website and launched a website called “TheRealSharronAngle.com.” The fake website was what, in internet terminology, is called spoofing, where a seemingly real website is created, usually to obtain information under false pretenses (frequently referred to as “phishing”).
Isn't taking the code of another candidate's site just a little unusual?
Instead you just keep tiling at the donation straw man and rely upon unsubstantiated claims about what Reid's fake site did and didn't do.
Your post constitutes negative knowledge. A pity you didn't post using your account, but I can understand why.
1. Massively under-fund education
2. Take advantage of the under-educated masses
3. Profit
The person mentioned in the story above is named, "Dr. Ray Bellamy." Do you really think anyone that uses the honorific "Dr." as in doctor, is suffering from a lack of education? This isn't the result of a conspiracy, or under education, it is simply people not reading or using what brain they have.
Democrats have used fake websites, and their functionality depended on the purpose. Of course they have done more than that too, including running fake candidates.
Dems who created fake Tea Party candidates arraigned in Michigan
Reid Campaign Targets Angle Supporters With Phishing Website
Harry Reid’s campaign, however, took the code from the prior Angle website and launched a website called “TheRealSharronAngle.com.” The fake website was what, in internet terminology, is called spoofing, where a seemingly real website is created, usually to obtain information under false pretenses (frequently referred to as “phishing”). ...
But the reality is that by creating a spoofed website with the contact and volunteer functions operable, the Reid campaign sought to obtain personally identifiable information about Angle supporters. At a minimum, such information about Angle supporters would have been gathered under false pretenses.
The phishing function also would have been disruptive to the Angle campaign because people who thought they had volunteered for the Angle campaign never would have been contacted to help out because they had, in fact, been tricked.
Regardless of whether the Reid campaign’s spoofing and phishing attempt was criminal, it was sleazy.
Is Reid Campaign Hiding Its Activities To Evade Campaign Finance Laws?
That would have been a bit of an overreach by the British empire since the Revolutionary War had ended 4 years previously.
...except afterwards it was published widely while it was being approved by the states.
Similar to the way that negotiated treaties are when presented to the Senate for confirmation then.
Then there's the Patriot Act that people voted on without even reading...
I'm not a fan of the "pass it before reading" method that has become so popular. On the other hand the Patriot Act has now been available for years and it keeps being reauthorized. People have obviously had a chance to read it before reauthorization.
Why do you suppose the revision to the Articles of Confederation that became the US Constitution wasn't done like that?
3.The U.S. Constitution was prepared in secret, behind locked doors that were guarded by sentries. -- Fast Facts
Is this (below) what you are talking about? It doesn't look like they are looking for private medical records but rather the diagnostic codes that wouldn't be personally identifiable in and of themselves. Either that or they are instructing EPA to code the PHI prior to release, which would render it safe to release. ( See PHI, and De-identification ) The US Congress is the one that makes the rules, and it appears that release of it may be mandated already. The EPA isn't complying. The EPA is doing making its rules both in secret and based on secrets, and I thought we were against that on Slashdot.
3. Request: That underlying data used to promulgate Clean Air Act rules be made public so the public can independently examine cost/benefit and other issues. That the EPA release a full set of data files for the American Cancer Society Study; the Harvard Six Cities Study; HEI/Krewski et al. 2009; Laden et al. 2006; Lepeule 2012; and Jerrett 2009. This request includes the coding of Personal Health Information (PHI).
Background: Since 1997, Congress has requested the underlying data for particulate matter studies (PM2.5) be made available to Congress and the public. Then-EPA Administrator Carol Browner went back and forth with Members regarding Congressional and public access to the underlying data, citing legitimate scientific inquiry qualifications and confidentiality concerns. In response to the continued reticence by EPA to publicly release data, the Shelby amendment, a rider to the FY1999 Omnibus Appropriations Act (P.L. 105-277), mandated that OMB amend Circular A-110 to require federal agencies to ensure that "all data produced under a [federally funded] award be made available to the public through the procedures established under FOIA."
A March 4, 2013, letter to EPA from Ranking Member Vitter and House Science, Space, and Technology Committee Chairman Lamar Smith requested the underlying data from additional long term cohort studies that rely on updates from the Harvard Six Cities Study and the American Cancer Society Study, including: Krewski e. al. (2009); Pope et al. (2002); Pope et al. (2009); Krewski et al. (2000); Laden et. al (2006); and Lepeule et al. (2012). This letter repeated multiple communications from Congress requesting the release of the underlying data which are the basis for nearly all the health and benefit claims from CAA rulemaking in this Administration.
Status: Wholly unresponsive.
It costs the same to have them there as it does in the Mediterranean just steaming around. It might be cheaper near Sochi since they may not be burning as much fuel. You pay for a navy regardless of what it is doing.
Do you genuinely believe that the US ships that happen to be nearby, and all the Delegation's land security, as well as the assistance provided by the US agencies warning of toothpaste terrorists, are free?
It's prepaid, you pay for those ships, their crews, and supplies, not to mention the agents, regardless of where they are in the world. It might even be saving money to have them in Russia since the price for per diem might even be cheaper there than for travel in the US for the agents, and I don't believe Russia is counted as a war zone for incentive pay.
Note that the US loves supercarriers too and keep building them, even while more rational people know that they'll be sent to the bottom within minutes of an high-intensity, high-tech war breaking out. The Chinese allegedly have ballistic missiles with reentry vehicles which can find and hit moving ships.
They haven't quite gone out of style yet. The Chinese are building aircraft carriers as well, and are on their way to having four of them. The first Chinese aircraft carrier battle group did a demonstration cruise not long ago. The Indians are building up their carrier fleet as well. The British navy is building two new large carriers.
The Chinese allegedly have ballistic missiles with reentry vehicles which can find and hit moving ships.
The US Aegis air defense system typically found on destroyers has a well proven anti-ballistic missile capability.
The start of WWI, with light horsemen charging into, and getting cut up by, machine gun fire. The officers had their ideas -- and that was _it_.
On the Western front in WW 1 cavalry and mounted infantry were stymied. On the Eastern front and Middle East especially they continued to pay an active role that at times was highly successful.
WWI in the Middle East
Every defensive system takes time to operate, staring with detection, identification, classification, target selection, weapon / ammunition selection, engagement, assessment, and reengagement (if necessary). Hypersonic weapons really cut down on the amount of time you have to do that as well as make the actual engagement more difficult, and that is just based on speed. If you add any countermeasures, such a stealth technology or jamming it gets even harder. Think of the SR-71. It was never successfully intercepted. Hypersonic weapons are an even more challenging proposition since they are going to be even faster, and likely smaller, with years of advances in materials for radar shielding, and electronics for countermeasures. To successfully engage them your defensive systems have to be quick, accurate, and either have warning or be instant-on. If your defensive systems rely upon large amounts of electricity being instantly available that is going to have some implications. I have little doubt it is possible to engage them, but definitely not easy. You can look at the work being done with armored vehicle active defense systems as an example in a lower speed regime. Bottom line is that if there are a lot of hypersonic weapons in the air at once heading toward you, you're probably in big trouble unless you have deflector shields even if you have phasers.
They have a large consulting arm - IBM Global Services. (Not sure if that is still the name.)
I thought IBM was able to leverage their detailed knowledge of their semiconductor processes to squeeze every bit of performance they can out of their Power architecture designs, and even tweak the processes to aid them. I doubt they will have enough volume for another company to do much of that unless they are willing to pay.
This is a refreshing change. We no longer have top to bottom posts extolling Edward Snowden's leaks.