"1 year for guessing a publicly available password reset question/answer on a published email address and then publishing the password and doing no real damage except to expose a politicians improper use of private email channels for to violate public transparency laws."
Oh please.
No, it's 1 year for breaking into the potential vice president's account then trying to get rid of the evidence that he'd done so. Don't try and dress it up as a Noble crusader who loved his country being harshly imprisoned for something that anyone could've done by accident!
He was so noble he posted the information on 4chan! Clearly the most trusted, respected news outlet in the land! Improper use of email? Among the hundreds of emails there were one or two from work contacts talking about private matters. Technically improper usage but it would be unbelievably petty to go after a politician for other people's incredibly minor breach of protocol, it would cost hundreds of thousands of dollars and at worst, she'd get a low key warning. All the evidence pointed to he not using her private email for public office matters in any deliberate manner.
It would take any half decent locksmith less time to pick the lock of your front door (assuming you use one of the most common locks) than to break into someone's email. This information is publically available on the internet. I guess if anyone breaks into your house, we shouldn't arrest them because of how easy it was for them. Heck they may even discover some illegal software or porn of questionable taste! They would be doing the world a favour by breaking into your house and revealing your porn tastes for everyone to see! Oh noble burglar, how misaligned by society you are!
Lots of people save email attachments to their user space. Not much good in wiping email data if they've saved the spreadsheet with their confidential client data onto their phone's general storage
You cannot abuse a dominant market position in one area to dominate another area. Manipulating their search results to put competitors at a disadvantage in areas other than search is something that companies can't compete with.
These charitable trusts and funds would be just as hurt from investors panicking because what are actually pretty good figures for a company are buried by "FLAGSHIP PRODUCT MAKES MASSIVE LOSS. IS GLOBOCOM DOOMED?" headlines.
Malware developers are getting increasingly clever in how the social engineering techniques they use to get people to install their crap. Even people who are fairly competent can be tricked. Browser makers need to realise that there's far more they could do to prevent these kinds of social engineering tricks:
1: Make it clear what a confirm() (or the equivalent in other languages) box is trying to do. Is it trying to prevent you from leaving a page? Will it redirect you? Is clicking OK the safest thing to do? Clicking cancel? No? close window? They implemented something like this for a window.unload triggered confirm and but it doesn't inform the user that what they need to click to leave the page safely.
2: Don't make update notifications spoofable! Look at things like Sitekey for examples. inform the users that update windows will always contain a phrase/image that can't be obtained by malware authors on uncompromised machines so users will know something is fake.
3: Implement a halt all button. A single button that will disable all javascript (even if there's an alert box displaying) and forcefully halt and close every active plugin. All too often something will be caught by an antivirus but the script behind it keeps running and compromises the system anyway.
They're going to get dozens of reports from the university, they're going to have to sort out the WoW updates from the stuff that was genuinely pirated then they'll have to find the companies involved, contact their legal department and ask if they want to press charges. Why should they go to all that hassle for something that'll have no negative effect on their district and only serve to push up the crime statistics and take officers off the streets?
If the university cared about catching file sharers, they'd report the students activities to the companies whose work is being infringed. Of course they can't be arsed to actually put in the work and not risk their students facing a police interview for something that could be perfectly legal.
If you're going for asinine nitpicking, then yes, it is clearly more damaging to use targeted hacking than not. Just like a court would recognise it's worse to fire a gun at someone's head than to fire a gun straight up in the air and for it to hit someone 1km away.
For one the chances of getting someone more high profile than a vice president is probably millions to one.
For another, if you don't know whose emails you've hacked, you're not going to convince anyone it's worth their
Nobody cares about your emails. Hundreds of thousands of people care about Palins. Getting your emails broken won't get them plastered on a few thousand blogs.
Sentencing is based on the damage done, hacking into the email account of the (potential) vice president is clearly more damaging than hacking into a random person's.
The crime was political in nature. She wouldn't have had her account broken into and the details made public if she wasn't such a high profile political figure.
You are severely misguided if you think sentencing shouldn't be influenced by who the victim is.
I would expect someone who shot a random 5 year old to get a worse sentence than someone who shot a random 30 year old because the former crime is far worse, despite the only difference being the victim.
If a random person's emails were hacked and posted online, they get what... 5 people reading them? No one cares about a stranger's email (especially if no CC info was in them) . Palin's a public figure, 10,000s will have gone through the emails. Not to mention she was a potential vice president, even personal information that had nothing to do with her job could have national security implications (or endanger family and friends).
Yes crimes are sentenced based on the victims, that's because, the nature of who the victim is can mean the crime is more damaging to them compared to most people.
It's one of the strengths of Slashdot's moderation in that it encourages people to mod up more than mod down. Yes you occasionally get "-1 disagree" but most people would rather promote comments they like than bury ones that go against their point of view. It's not perfect and some most unpopular views, even when well argued get modded down.
Compare that to Reddit and Digg which give you unlimited scope to mod people down and you end up with a mob mentality and a horribly narrow range of extreme viewpoints. If you aren't an extreme cop hater, pro-cannabis pro RON PAUL(!!!) and don't thinks the Daily Show is the most accurate and informative news source on the planet, expect extreme downvoting. Gotta love a site where you can click on the username of someone you're having an argument with and downvote every comment they've made in the last few weeks.
It's like the classic newspaper hit pieces of the type "Obama smiles whilst people lose their jobs!". Obama did indeed smile and whilst he did that some people probably lose their jobs at the same time but that doesn't mean the events are connected or that the headline isn't insanely unfair and stupid.
Every case is difference, different crimes have different levels of culpability even if the outcome is worse (otherwise you'd hand out life sentences to every driver who killed someone because they killed someone who ran out in front of them when they were doing 31mph in a 30mph zone). Judges have a huge in depth knowledge of the law, the effect on society sentences have and they know far more about the case than any casual reader ever would.
Basing sentences on the 'outrage factor' results in horribly unjust sentencing.
Cutting a phone line doesn't involve hijacking thousands of systems without permission. You probably would get off easier but not by much. Intimidation + trespassing + criminal damage could easily give you a couple of years. Heck they could even add in a terrorism charge.
1: The person(s) whose site was taken down. This can have a massive financial implication from both the lost patronage and the costs to get the servers up and running.
2: The people's whose systems were hijacked. This could be hundreds to hundreds of thousands of systems, all being used without permission and for a criminal act. Their service suffers, their ISP suffers too.
3: Society as a whole. Performing criminal acts of people purely because of their political views is incredibly harmful to a free society.
Just because it's done a lot by script kiddies and is fairly common it doesn't mean this is a minor crime.
127 plus 80 who were given suspended sentences! I'm sure you don't need a citation because electoral fraud is so common place and all criminals are asked their political alligiences meaning that these stats are so easy to come across! How many left wingers have gone to jail for voter caging? Or voter intimidation? Talk about a double standard!
So let me make this clear, you're not only outraged at this because you share the perpetrator's political views? You would be equally as outraged if the person jailed was a die hard republican? You would never exhibit such double standards as you would accuse other people of right?
Badly coded WebGL will cause graphics chipsets to suck up more power than Flash will. Animation with no frame limiters, spheres with insane numbers of polygons.
It's hard to detect when Javascript is stalling the browser and/or maxing out CPU, if it could be easily implemented, all the major browsers would already do it. The current 'this script is screwing with your PC' halts are unreliable at best, only catching a small percentage of javascript based lock ups. One of the most common lockups for me is when javascript gets stuck in a loop adding HTML elements to a page, especially given that Firefox is one of the worst browsers (in my experience) when it comes to handling insanely large HTML pages.
Look at the incredibly crude HTML5 games that are sucking up 50%+ of a CPU core. You really think things will be better if advertisers switch over from flash?
I also use a DS as an alarm. It's surprisingly good as an alarm even if you have to set it every day. The auto-snooze is handy, too many alarms either don't shut up or shut up permenently, both of which don't suit my habbit of lying in bed for 10-15 minutes after waking.
Pure gelatine may (or may not) have the exact same capacitence... But what about the sugar, flavourings etc?
Then there's the fact that if you pressed your finger into a gummi bear, it's not going to create a lasting or deep impression. Perhaps if you really squashed the gummi bear it would create a detailed, lasting impression but then you're going to be left with a fragile, thin piece sheet of gelatine that would fall apart if you pressed it on the scanner.
Yes you could create a mould of the finger and fill it with pure gelatin but a 11year old would struggle to create a detailed enough mould without being helped and it's simply too much hassle for a kid to attempt. It would be easier to clone a magnetic strip, tell someone a passcode, get someone to forge a signiature or simply to say "here" when their name is called out.
Nice of you to result to personal insults without even supplying so much as a single citation.
Whether or not the MS implementation was slow or fast at the time is utterly irrelevant. The article is comparing benchmarks for a 4 year old network to a brand new one which almost certainly has new hardware.
It's the equivalent of saying "Microsoft make the best consoles because the Xbox 360 outperforms the PS2!".
It may be that a Linux network is able to conduct trades faster than a windows one. I'd be willing to be though that most of this dramatic speed increase is down to new hardware. The windows network the LSE was on was what... 4+ years old?
It's not terribly hard given the article is about just that. I'd imagine it wouldn't be terribly hard to fill a 1000 capacity venue if they put on a concert like this around one of the major cons.
Hatsune Miku can do English songs fairly well if the people using her are smart enough, some of them are fairly listenable. As she only sings Japanese syllables she's always going to have a bit of a Japanese accent. Here's a sample of some of the better done ones, some:
Slashdot Mirror
"1 year for guessing a publicly available password reset question/answer on a published email address and then publishing the password and doing no real damage except to expose a politicians improper use of private email channels for to violate public transparency laws."
Oh please.
No, it's 1 year for breaking into the potential vice president's account then trying to get rid of the evidence that he'd done so. Don't try and dress it up as a Noble crusader who loved his country being harshly imprisoned for something that anyone could've done by accident!
He was so noble he posted the information on 4chan! Clearly the most trusted, respected news outlet in the land! Improper use of email? Among the hundreds of emails there were one or two from work contacts talking about private matters. Technically improper usage but it would be unbelievably petty to go after a politician for other people's incredibly minor breach of protocol, it would cost hundreds of thousands of dollars and at worst, she'd get a low key warning. All the evidence pointed to he not using her private email for public office matters in any deliberate manner.
It would take any half decent locksmith less time to pick the lock of your front door (assuming you use one of the most common locks) than to break into someone's email. This information is publically available on the internet. I guess if anyone breaks into your house, we shouldn't arrest them because of how easy it was for them. Heck they may even discover some illegal software or porn of questionable taste! They would be doing the world a favour by breaking into your house and revealing your porn tastes for everyone to see! Oh noble burglar, how misaligned by society you are!
Lots of people save email attachments to their user space. Not much good in wiping email data if they've saved the spreadsheet with their confidential client data onto their phone's general storage
You cannot abuse a dominant market position in one area to dominate another area. Manipulating their search results to put competitors at a disadvantage in areas other than search is something that companies can't compete with.
These charitable trusts and funds would be just as hurt from investors panicking because what are actually pretty good figures for a company are buried by "FLAGSHIP PRODUCT MAKES MASSIVE LOSS. IS GLOBOCOM DOOMED?" headlines.
Malware developers are getting increasingly clever in how the social engineering techniques they use to get people to install their crap. Even people who are fairly competent can be tricked. Browser makers need to realise that there's far more they could do to prevent these kinds of social engineering tricks: 1: Make it clear what a confirm() (or the equivalent in other languages) box is trying to do. Is it trying to prevent you from leaving a page? Will it redirect you? Is clicking OK the safest thing to do? Clicking cancel? No? close window? They implemented something like this for a window.unload triggered confirm and but it doesn't inform the user that what they need to click to leave the page safely.
2: Don't make update notifications spoofable! Look at things like Sitekey for examples. inform the users that update windows will always contain a phrase/image that can't be obtained by malware authors on uncompromised machines so users will know something is fake.
3: Implement a halt all button. A single button that will disable all javascript (even if there's an alert box displaying) and forcefully halt and close every active plugin. All too often something will be caught by an antivirus but the script behind it keeps running and compromises the system anyway.
They're going to get dozens of reports from the university, they're going to have to sort out the WoW updates from the stuff that was genuinely pirated then they'll have to find the companies involved, contact their legal department and ask if they want to press charges. Why should they go to all that hassle for something that'll have no negative effect on their district and only serve to push up the crime statistics and take officers off the streets?
If the university cared about catching file sharers, they'd report the students activities to the companies whose work is being infringed. Of course they can't be arsed to actually put in the work and not risk their students facing a police interview for something that could be perfectly legal.
time to read it.
If you're going for asinine nitpicking, then yes, it is clearly more damaging to use targeted hacking than not. Just like a court would recognise it's worse to fire a gun at someone's head than to fire a gun straight up in the air and for it to hit someone 1km away.
For one the chances of getting someone more high profile than a vice president is probably millions to one.
For another, if you don't know whose emails you've hacked, you're not going to convince anyone it's worth their
Nobody cares about your emails. Hundreds of thousands of people care about Palins. Getting your emails broken won't get them plastered on a few thousand blogs.
Sentencing is based on the damage done, hacking into the email account of the (potential) vice president is clearly more damaging than hacking into a random person's.
The crime was political in nature. She wouldn't have had her account broken into and the details made public if she wasn't such a high profile political figure.
You are severely misguided if you think sentencing shouldn't be influenced by who the victim is.
I would expect someone who shot a random 5 year old to get a worse sentence than someone who shot a random 30 year old because the former crime is far worse, despite the only difference being the victim.
If a random person's emails were hacked and posted online, they get what... 5 people reading them? No one cares about a stranger's email (especially if no CC info was in them) . Palin's a public figure, 10,000s will have gone through the emails. Not to mention she was a potential vice president, even personal information that had nothing to do with her job could have national security implications (or endanger family and friends).
Yes crimes are sentenced based on the victims, that's because, the nature of who the victim is can mean the crime is more damaging to them compared to most people.
It's one of the strengths of Slashdot's moderation in that it encourages people to mod up more than mod down. Yes you occasionally get "-1 disagree" but most people would rather promote comments they like than bury ones that go against their point of view. It's not perfect and some most unpopular views, even when well argued get modded down.
Compare that to Reddit and Digg which give you unlimited scope to mod people down and you end up with a mob mentality and a horribly narrow range of extreme viewpoints. If you aren't an extreme cop hater, pro-cannabis pro RON PAUL(!!!) and don't thinks the Daily Show is the most accurate and informative news source on the planet, expect extreme downvoting. Gotta love a site where you can click on the username of someone you're having an argument with and downvote every comment they've made in the last few weeks.
Because it's utterly inane?
It's like the classic newspaper hit pieces of the type "Obama smiles whilst people lose their jobs!". Obama did indeed smile and whilst he did that some people probably lose their jobs at the same time but that doesn't mean the events are connected or that the headline isn't insanely unfair and stupid.
Every case is difference, different crimes have different levels of culpability even if the outcome is worse (otherwise you'd hand out life sentences to every driver who killed someone because they killed someone who ran out in front of them when they were doing 31mph in a 30mph zone). Judges have a huge in depth knowledge of the law, the effect on society sentences have and they know far more about the case than any casual reader ever would.
Basing sentences on the 'outrage factor' results in horribly unjust sentencing.
There's a a big difference between a prank and a DDOS attack. Something that a lot of script kiddies need to realise.
They can cost a huge amount of money for the victim and they have a genuine intimidation effect.
Cutting a phone line doesn't involve hijacking thousands of systems without permission. You probably would get off easier but not by much. Intimidation + trespassing + criminal damage could easily give you a couple of years. Heck they could even add in a terrorism charge.
There are three groups of victims:
1: The person(s) whose site was taken down. This can have a massive financial implication from both the lost patronage and the costs to get the servers up and running.
2: The people's whose systems were hijacked. This could be hundreds to hundreds of thousands of systems, all being used without permission and for a criminal act. Their service suffers, their ISP suffers too.
3: Society as a whole. Performing criminal acts of people purely because of their political views is incredibly harmful to a free society.
Just because it's done a lot by script kiddies and is fairly common it doesn't mean this is a minor crime.
127 plus 80 who were given suspended sentences! I'm sure you don't need a citation because electoral fraud is so common place and all criminals are asked their political alligiences meaning that these stats are so easy to come across! How many left wingers have gone to jail for voter caging? Or voter intimidation? Talk about a double standard!
So let me make this clear, you're not only outraged at this because you share the perpetrator's political views? You would be equally as outraged if the person jailed was a die hard republican? You would never exhibit such double standards as you would accuse other people of right?
Badly coded WebGL will cause graphics chipsets to suck up more power than Flash will. Animation with no frame limiters, spheres with insane numbers of polygons.
It's hard to detect when Javascript is stalling the browser and/or maxing out CPU, if it could be easily implemented, all the major browsers would already do it. The current 'this script is screwing with your PC' halts are unreliable at best, only catching a small percentage of javascript based lock ups. One of the most common lockups for me is when javascript gets stuck in a loop adding HTML elements to a page, especially given that Firefox is one of the worst browsers (in my experience) when it comes to handling insanely large HTML pages.
Look at the incredibly crude HTML5 games that are sucking up 50%+ of a CPU core. You really think things will be better if advertisers switch over from flash?
I also use a DS as an alarm. It's surprisingly good as an alarm even if you have to set it every day. The auto-snooze is handy, too many alarms either don't shut up or shut up permenently, both of which don't suit my habbit of lying in bed for 10-15 minutes after waking.
Pure gelatine may (or may not) have the exact same capacitence... But what about the sugar, flavourings etc?
Then there's the fact that if you pressed your finger into a gummi bear, it's not going to create a lasting or deep impression. Perhaps if you really squashed the gummi bear it would create a detailed, lasting impression but then you're going to be left with a fragile, thin piece sheet of gelatine that would fall apart if you pressed it on the scanner.
Yes you could create a mould of the finger and fill it with pure gelatin but a 11year old would struggle to create a detailed enough mould without being helped and it's simply too much hassle for a kid to attempt. It would be easier to clone a magnetic strip, tell someone a passcode, get someone to forge a signiature or simply to say "here" when their name is called out.
Nice of you to result to personal insults without even supplying so much as a single citation.
Whether or not the MS implementation was slow or fast at the time is utterly irrelevant. The article is comparing benchmarks for a 4 year old network to a brand new one which almost certainly has new hardware.
It's the equivalent of saying "Microsoft make the best consoles because the Xbox 360 outperforms the PS2!".
It may be that a Linux network is able to conduct trades faster than a windows one. I'd be willing to be though that most of this dramatic speed increase is down to new hardware. The windows network the LSE was on was what... 4+ years old?
It's not terribly hard given the article is about just that. I'd imagine it wouldn't be terribly hard to fill a 1000 capacity venue if they put on a concert like this around one of the major cons.
Hatsune Miku can do English songs fairly well if the people using her are smart enough, some of them are fairly listenable. As she only sings Japanese syllables she's always going to have a bit of a Japanese accent. Here's a sample of some of the better done ones, some:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HATpOha7DFg - Heaven is a place on Earth
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TaSZ0siQjXA - Never ending story (duet with an english vocaloid)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6m2NzdN7o0 - I'm Gonna Be (500 Miles)