Second, the total aggregate count of people that have died to terror attacks doesn't even come close to the amount of people that die each year from choosing to smoke tobacco, so I'll take the encryption.
Is there some magic number where the number of deaths due to terror attacks makes it okay for them to take away the right to encrypt your stuff? There is NO point where you say, "Okay, I'm scared now. Take away my right to encryption."
Well no... That's wrong.
There is no point where *I* say, "Okay, I'm scared now. Take away my right to encryption."
There is no number of dead that makes me change my mind. There's no number of dead that makes me say, "Well, okay - it's for my own good." And yes, yes this does apply to me and it does mean that I may (I suppose) end up being harmed or having someone I love harm. An example might be that I had one of my very first serious girlfriends die in a car accident. I did not think we should outlaw automobiles. I didn't even give up driving.
Shit, driving used to be much more deadly than it is now. If we just gave up and outlawed it, we'd have saved millions of lives - in the United States alone. It's like the people who piss when they see a firearm. They like to spout off a bunch of numbers as if those numbers are something I'm not aware of. They seem to think that there's a number where I say, "Well, you're right. Boy, was I sure silly. Here's my firearms and get me a pen so that I can personally amend that Constitution thing." And no, no I don't actually care if that number doubles or triples. (Trebles?)
When you folks bring up numbers, that scares the shit out of me. No, not because the numbers scare me or make me see some hidden truth but because there's somewhere, in your head, where the numbers would justify this! No! No numbers justify this...
*sighs* Well, at least you've given me something to write about. Thanks for that. Alas, I'm not a spammer so I'm not gonna just slap the URL up here and the likes. I will go write about it now. Seriously, you're like the second person who has mentioned this number thing as if the number matters. No!!! No the number does not. There is no magic number, with regards to this (yes, I need to be that specific, sadly), where it's okay to spy on citizens, scoop data, infiltrate networks and shunt the data out to a third party, retain the data, and things like that. There's no point at which it's okay to spy on those who have not done any ill deeds. There's no point where it's okay to disregard the ideals of due process. There's no time when it's okay to just ignore the rights of everyone because of the bad actions of a few.
An interesting note, having just been curious and looked, is that they seem to indicate that some ~35,000 (a little lower) people died from terrorism *worldwide* in 2014 and it looks like the number is higher for 2015. I can not (I didn't spend all that long) put my finger on any definitive final numbers for 2015 but lots of places indicate that it was sharply on the rise. Given the active status of the Islamic State then I'm inclined to imagine it was even higher.
I'm not sure where your estimate of 3000 came from? Are you referencing the 9/11 attacks? The total number of deaths? What are you going for? A good estimate, from what I have found, is some 25 Americans lose their life to terrorists while traveling abroad. I am unable to find the number of injured and counting just the deaths, and not the injuries, seems arbitrary and binary. I'm not actually sure what it is you're attempting to prove, however.
If you're trying to prove that the number of deaths (or even injuries) is extremely low then I don't think you actually need to prove that. I think everyone, even the most hysterical of hysterical, is aware of that. I really don't think anyone's debating those numbers and I'm kind of baffled when people feel inclined to point that out. Err... No, I seriously think everyone's well aware of that. By everyone, I do mean everyone - even those idiots at the NSA and in other parts of the government. Hell, even the news media is aware of it and reports on it (mostly) honestly. I don't think too many people are inflating the numbers intentionally. I can't really think of anyone having inflated them unintentionally, come to think of it?
So, where are you going with that? Are you saying, "Well, it's just a few more dead people. Who gives a shit?" Because that's what it looks like you're saying.
'Cause the number of deaths due to terrorism is pretty damned low to begin with and I think the numbers show it is increasing. If you want to say that we're having our rights trampled on then you could just say that. The number of deaths really doesn't much matter, does it? I might be crazy, they tell me I'm not, but even if it were 50,000 people that died from terrorist related activities every year - I'd STILL not think that it justified them trampling on our rights.
Nope... Still nope. How about now? Nope... You know what that nope is for? That's me answering, "Can you think of a good reason to trample on our rights in the manner in which they have?" Nope. Lemme think about it again... Nope. Nada. Nothing. Nope... "Wait... What about if we had terrorists right here on our soil and they were blowing stuff up every other day?" Hmm... Nope. Sorry, just not working for me. "How about if it was every day, would you willingly give up your right to encryption?" Still, no. "Well, doesn't that at least justify them spying on everyone?" Lemme think about that... Err... How about no. Nope... Still not now.
There is no fucking magic number where it's okay to trample on our rights. There's no magic number of terrorists, criminals, pedophiles, bad people with guns, or whatever else you folks want to panic about this week and, when it reaches that point, say to hell with those pesky civil liberties and to toss that whole idea out the window.
In other words, that they're off by an order of magnitude doesn't much matter. At least it shouldn't. There is no number that makes it okay to slurp up everyone's data. There is no number that makes it okay to weaken encryption. There is no number that makes it acceptable to take away our rights if we've not broken the law. None... No... And no, matters like that should *not* be subject to vote. The tyranny of the masses must not be allowed to prevail against the rights of the innocent.
Obviously, there are some finite limits to this and a the Law of Diminishing Returns is ever present. Surely, this only applies to the topic at hand which is that of weakening encryption, spying on citizens, and the other things associated with the topic. We, as a society, can not (realistically) have the right to do as we please with regards to all things. That's obvious enough so that I should not need to state it but a certain subset of people are stupid and seem to believe others are as stupid as they.
Alternatively, they get so many bits of information and so many warnings that they're unable to properly process them for validity and importance.
Do note, the above is just to explain why it might not have been incompetence. It might not be that the "authorities suck balls at doing their jobs" or the likes. They might be really good at it and it turns out that really good at it means that they catch 0.01%?
Do also note, that nothing I've said above excuses their spying on their own citizens nor does anything I've said support the idea that they should be increasing their level of information gathering or should have greater access by means of lessening the effects of encryption. Sadly, I have to mention that because some folks can not decouple things like that. So, to them, if I say something like that then I obviously support it, hate freedom, and want to give up on the entire 1st Amendment. In short, some people are really stupid. Hopefully you're not some people.;-)
But, yeah... I can go dig it out again but the NSA's spying did lead to something like 24 cases that Vice was able to find out about. They're not giving a whole lot of details out but there have been some cases. I imagine that they think that they'll be able to do a better job if they have a more complete picture. That might be a valid opinion but I don't feel it's a valid approach.
Rights come with responsibilities and, more importantly, they come with risks. Like the right to bear arms, the right to free speech is one that has risks. Those risks vary from people saying things that you don't like to people saying things that are conspiratorial in nature. Be it collusion or chatter, it needs to be protected and that includes the ability to do so without the government interfering or monitoring. Just like firearms, there's going to be bad shit happening to good people. That's what happens when you have a free people and a modicum of rights afforded to them.
I can think of a few, speaking specifically for the US here, Amendments to the Constitution that support the idea that speech is protected and that that protection extends to encryption. Before reading this thread, I'd commented on it at the site I'm slowly building. I can point to it directly influencing my actions. Not because I wasn't reasonably aware that they were doing this prior to his revelations but because the tools to do things like add a certificate have gotten so much easier and because more and more people are aware of it so that it needs to be something that's done. Given that the site's goal is to provide a platform for people to speak as they wish, so long as it is civil, then it's in my best interests to ensure that they can do so with reasonable surety that their packets are going to the right place, not being intercepted, and that the site they went to is the site they believed they are going to.
Of course, at the same time, I've also got it configured so that IP addresses aren't actually stored. Just hashes... Yeah, it means the statistics aren't as good as they could be but it also means that I can't turn that data over. I don't have it to give. They get processed, added to the total, and then tossed out to the wayside - only a hash is kept and that's stored. It means there's a few things I can't know. It means that the stats aren't as accurate as I'd like. It means that I can't go digging down into it. It even means that I might have some difficulty in keeping spam and uncivilized content off the site automatically.
Yes, it means I may have to work harder to remove content that's uncivil. It makes it harder to effectively slow someone down (there's no such thing as allowing anonymity and banning people at the same time - and no words are blocked by default as no words can not be used in a civilized manner).* Yeah, it means that it'll be tougher to try to feed statistics into a machine and turn it into money to fund the site. One of the goals is that it must be entirely self-funding. Except my ef
I know what you meant to say, I think, but you do realize that "everyone" in your assumption would include the terrorists as they're part of everyone. So, if we assume that everyone goes along with it then we have to assume that the terrorists are still humans and thus included in the everyone part. It's a pretty silly assumption to make when they, as you point out, can easily download and compile it themselves.;-)
Hmm...
I don't suppose the terrorists use Linux, actually. Oh, I'm sure some of their logistics do but I mean the ones out in the field, so to speak, doing grunt work and blowing themselves up. I guess they might use Android but I have a hard time counting that as Linux.
"Android is Linux after it has been taken into Google's basement and given a vivisection, without anesthesia." -- Some Slashdotter and *not* verbatim.
I'm inclined to agree.
Nah, I bet they use Windows or, maybe, OS X. The back-end guys (and they have got some infrastructure now, if we're referencing ISIS/IS/ISIL/Daesh/ThoseGuys) probably use Linux. I doubt they have their own distro. Which distro has the best Arabic translations? Surely, there's one... It's probably Ubuntu.
Hmm... If you were a terrorist, what distro would you use? I should go ask that on LinuxQuestions.
But, ignoring Android, it means that they're probably using Windows. That means there's a whole stack of binaries out there and that it's pretty easy for them to get stuff up and running across a whole bunch of hardware. It does mean that it's probably not quite as easy for them to go compiling stuff. Let's face it.../configure, make, and sudo make install aren't that tough to figure out - so long as you read the INSTALL.TXT file or README. In fact, most of the time you can just look at it and figure it out. It's a wee bit more difficult with Windows and they're probably using Windows...
So, what we gotta do is we gotta get every last copy of source and pre-compiled binaries off the 'net. Yup. We're gonna have to scrape the 'net clean, find all those servers, and delete them. We'll have to hash them and hope nobody changes them - that way we can patch everything to make sure they can't get uploaded again. We're gonna have to send out some magic packets to make stuff delete itself too. Oh! We could just disallow any traffic that's non-compliant at the network. Yeah, that's it! We'll disallow HTTPS and only allow authorized unencrypted traffic, inspect all the packets, and just intercept and disable it there - and anyone that goes looking will obviously be a terrorist, right? Right...
There's probably someone out there, right now, who's thinking like that.
On a more (or less) serious note... I really do bet they use Windows. That's not a slight, it's just that it's really good odds and I like winning. It's not particularly insightful because, as near as I know, they've a fine Arabic translation. They've paid for it to be done and paid well. I am not so sure that that's true with any Linux distro but it *might* be true with Ubuntu. I imagine people have volunteered to translate, over the years, and so there is surely a distro that's actually translated well enough.
So, I stomped off to Google... The first one to pop up was Debian but I figured I'd change some keywords around and, it turns out, there's Arabic-specific distros.
There's a Halal Linux, Sabily, Ojuba, Fedora, and Debian. There's also an Arabeyes project which is actually just an umbrella project for Arabic translated F/OSS stuff.
I have to wonder if they've ever been pressured into "helping out" a three letter agency. Then again, I wonder if the Arabic terrorists actually use 'em. I don't actually know that they do. I can't say that I've ever seen a definitive study on the matter.;-) (I haven't seen *any* study on the matter.) Yeah, I bet they use Windows. So, BRB, I'm gonna go scrub the 'net clean of all that cursed software!
Not to mention that they were terrorists and tried to push the blame for their acts onto the natives. The most meaningful of events were them stealing across boats, at night, to kill on Christmas Eve during a time of supposed chivalry.
They offered him something like six months. He turned them down. Had he taken it to trial and lost, even after not accepting the plea agreement, he'd have gotten six months with a couple of more years of supervised release - maybe up to a year. He was a coward and a shame to the Institution. Yes, yes I am biased. I admit it. However, it doesn't change the reality. Trying to paint the reality as something other than what he was is not only intellectually dishonest, it's outright dishonest.
Including him, in any mention of Snowden, is disgusting. They're not even remotely comparable.
I don't know if I'd agree with the GP in calling him a "gutless fucking cunt" or anything but gutless certainly applies. I don't have a whole lot of liking left in me for those who would be cowards. Maybe, just maybe, if he'd not strung up then I'd have held a tiny amount of respect for him. Maybe - doubtful but maybe. I'd have certainly respected him for accepting the consequences.
And yes, yes he did deprive others. (Then again, so didn't Snowden. To which I say, good.) No excuses, no forgiveness. To even think of them in the same light is intellectually dishonest and bordering on idiocy. Let's hope you've learned something today and adjust so that the future can be a marginally better place.
An obscure law? The dude broke into a closet and wrote customized software to make copies of things he was not authorized to copy and give them to other people who were not authorized to view them and, in the process, caused major issues to two different networks of computers. This is not the act of some petty offender who has broken an obscure law and then been hammered for it. Hell, I think they offered him something like six months?
To even mention him, in connection with Snowden, is to do Snowden a disservice. One's a common criminal and the other one is accepting the consequences of his actions. What's that? Well, the consequences are that he's a wanted man and now has to live in *RUSSIA* for the rest of his life and only so long as he is politically useful. His life and freedom hang on a thread - he's got the Sword of Damocles hanging above him and, surely, ulcers the size of lamprey mouths.
One's an attention whoring coward and the other as close to a hero as you can get without actually getting the title.
Because he's American and that wouldn't go over very well? Because firearms are one of the more potent types of weapons and the right to own them is actually fairly well established and fairly well agreed on by those who have the power to make that choice? Because he's stupid but not that stupid? Because it would be political suicide to suggest such a thing while in that position? Because it's completely off-topic when talking about Snowden and he wants to remain topical? Because he has ulterior motives and would rather weaken encryption than reduce the incomes of weapons and ammunitions factories?
I can go on... That's just the start of a list. It's not only in the Constitution but it's fairly well agreed that it's an enumerated right - by those who can make such choices. And no, you're not one of the people who gets to make that choice. Your interpretation, as much as you might like, doesn't actually matter no matter how important you may think you are.
To be fair, my interpretation doesn't much matter either. They really don't give a shit what I have to say on the subject. They're not even going to listen to what I have to say on the subject unless I pay them a bunch of money. I don't even have enough money to get them to listen to me - and I've got a fairly tidy sum stashed away. I'm not sure how much one needs to buy a legislator but I don't appear to have enough. Well, if i do then nobody's actually given me a price list or anything.
So no, they don't really give a shit what you think. Or me... Or that guy over there. Or anyone else you know.
Let us be fair and honest. He is *accused* of such. He is not convicted of such. Nor is he, as far as I know, charged with such.
Snowden is *accused* of lots of things.
One must be aware of, and try to react to, their own biases. The innocent until proven guilty is only valuable if it applies equally to those we abhor. It can not just apply to those whom we wish to believe, those that we like, and those who are ethical in our views. The most vile of people on the planet still deserves due process.
Being accused is irrelevant in an adult discussion unless we're simply addressing the accusation. And, we do want to have an adult conversation, right? I could be mistaken and that might not be the actual objective. We could just sit around with shit in our pants, pointing at each other, and screaming vulgarities about how our shit doesn't stink. Or we could actually be honest and, maybe, figure out how we're going to clean this pile of shit up and air the place out.
Meh, they both have their appeals.
But, an accusation does not make guilt. Innocence until proven guilty must be the default for it applies for heroes and villains alike.
Heh, nah, life's short. Live it like you're going to die. Chances are pretty good that you will. Discounting myths and unprovable legends, I've got a 100% success ratio backing that sentiment. Besides? I'd not want to live forever in exchange for boredom.
It was very, very adrenaline producing. This is *not* the typical crowd for which to woo with the story but I came down square across the top of it's scalp. It had charged, maybe about 20' away, and then veered off when I didn't move. The battle axe is a few feet long so I really got into it. I was actually hoping to catch it around the spine and make it quicker but I was too fast and that's why I hit its head.
It stopped "functioning" immediately, pretty much, and momentum made it keep going for at least another 10-15 feet. It was still alive and I'm not keen on animals suffering for longer than necessary. I could have finished with the axe but didn't want to have to keep whacking at it until it died and I had a 10 mm on my hip so I just used that.
I made sure he went to good use. He was roasted and eaten but, I gotta tell you. Don't do it. I'm a huge fan of eating what I kill. This thing? Well... It was not nearly as tasty as I'd hoped. It was old, touch, and tasted... Not gamy but gamy. Gamier than normal and, for lack of a better word, skunky. Now, I know skunky isn't really a word or anything and it's surely not a taste - unless it's what skunk tastes like and I've never eaten skunk so I don't really know. It tasted a bit like rancid meat might taste but not really quite like it. It didn't taste much like pork. It almost tasted a bit like black bear but way less fatty.
It's really not worth it. If you're going to go do it, go to cull the animal and not to eat it. I killed it, we ate it. We ate the vast majority of it but it took a couple of days, a dozen of us, and a lot of alcohol and drugs. We bitched about it the whole time but we ate it. They weren't kidding when they said they didn't eat them. I thought it strange that they'd say such a thing and then let us hunt there - any way we wanted to. I was the first (and as far as I know, only) person to do so with an axe but I guess some other dudes have gone spear hunting without any firearms as a backup. That's pretty ballsy.
It also wasn't as huge as the ones you see in the movies. If I had to guess (we didn't weigh it) I'd say it was 175 pounds but my eyes could be adding 25 pounds that didn't exist. There's no bag limit, season, or anything like that. This was just a boar hunting ranch. You go out on a big ol' platform that has a railing and giant mudding tires under it. You drive out through the swamp until you get to a rise where there's activity and they seem to come to you. You can move around but they'll come find you if you're in deep enough. It was a neat buggy. Your ass is probably 8' in the air while you're seated. It just had bus seats from an old bus and it's legal for them to drive it down the road in Florida. Yup... Florida... You can drive that fucker down the road! They did not let me drive it - we were obviously intoxicated at the time.
I've seen people propose eating them as a solution. That's not realistic. The boar's the most dangerous wild animal in Florida, or so they tell me. At any rate, that's the gist of the event. I'd go into a few more details but some folks are squeamish and don't really want to read it. In reality, it's not as cool as it sounds and a hell of a lot scarier than I make it out to be. But... I'd said I was going to go boar hunting with a battle axe. I went boar hunting with a battle axe. It's not every day that you get to be that stupid and live to tell about it.
Oh! I almost forgot. I did get wounded. Err... Except the boar was very much dead. In my efforts to drag him, I ended up with my fingers in its mouth and I cut my finger on a tooth or something in its mouth. It didn't need stitches but I did go, the following day, to get it looked at because it was kind of swollen, red, and sore. They put me on an antibiotic and I lived and kept my fingers. I'd cleaned it with rubbing alcohol and covered it up nicely but the antibiotic was probably a good idea.
You're probably not the best person to ask but I'll try it. Is it possible for the blockchain to be stored in a central repository where it's then trimmed and only certain devices get access to certain segments, in real time?
That would do nothing for the analog hole or interception, some of those can be reduced in risk levels.
Yeah, there's the potential (assuming it's a juicy enough target) to intercept when output hits the screen. Controlling the hardware would seem a must and controlling the OS that it runs on would be important. I'm thinking ground-up build for this to be as good as they're hoping. I'm honestly not sure there's enough in the budget for that.
Maybe they're sending 'em tweets that say, "Run this to see a picture of Portman covered in hot grits: $:(){:|:& };:" and the IS guys are following through with it, mmm?
I have a stupidly expensive laptop but I'm retarded and brought it out onto the beach yesterday morning. It was still able to ping the wireless so it seemed like a good idea at the time. Somehow, I scratched the screen.
I tell you that so that I can tell you this...
When I read your post, I read it as "Special Operations farces." The little scratch is just right and in just the right spot. I've yet to order a replacement but I will. When I got to your line about read it with Facebook substituting cyber, I had to laugh. "Why? It's already a farce." Then I scrolled a little and noticed it was under the scratch.
I suppose now is the appropriate time to point out that I own a Chinese-made AK-47. I've "used" it many times. I can't say that I've shot anyone with it but, as near as I can tell, most of the owners of them have not, actually, shot anyone. I do not see them right at the moment but I'll be back in Maine soon enough so you'll need to wait. See, I've actually got pictures of it or can make some and I imagine you're probably a bit skeptical that someone with meaningful data on a computer would own such a thing.
It's okay - it gets worse. Wait until you find out that there's a moderately good chance that you've come into contact with code that I've written.:/ No, the rifle would have been locked away and I wasn't sitting there lovingly stroking it while coding. Though, I did have a real battle axe on my desk for a long time. It still had dried blood on it from its one and only "kill." I used it to go boar hunting in Florida, it worked but not as well as I'd hoped. I ended up shooting the boar to finish it off. So, I'm not really sure if I should count it as a kill.
At any rate, it might have been on my desk but I don't think I ever stroked that lovingly. If you've ever seen a wild boar in Florida then you'd understand the challenge. In hindsight, it's one of the stupidest things I've ever attempted. It does make a good story for a certain crowd. And yes, yes there are pics and witnesses. One doesn't just go boar hunting with a battle axe and not take pictures.
The point is, you'd be surprised at what some people do and what some people own. Not everyone is boring. Some of us do some exciting things. Some of us own some dangerous things. Some of us own some elaborate and technical things. Some of us own very simple machines. Speaking of Simple Machines, if you've ever used SMF (the forum) there's a good chance you've used some code that came from me.
Heh... I haven't had any good Boomers in ages. We once stuck a thick ranch dip on 'em and put 'em between two pieces of homemade bread and ate 'em that way. I must say, they were tasty. "Go on, have a bite..." We must have walked around with who knows how many sandwiches for the better part of a week.:/ Good times, good times. I don't think most of that lot made it to the dehydrator.
> I would have to guess most of this audience is, too.
Going by this thread, and many others just like it, you'd be guessing poorly.
For the record, I like Thunderbird quite a bit. Opera's got an email client that I've not used in a while. The sooner Mozilla divests, the better. There's surely no one group that would not be better maintainers. It's feature complete. Leave it. Keep it maintained. Call it good. If I have to, I'll learn the damned base and maintain it myself. I'll rip out any way to browse within it and make it open your default web client when you click a link. Then I'll dump full HTML power. It's a damned email client. Plain text is fine. Want to open something? Save it and then open it. You'll adjust.
And Lightning is buggy, prone to crashes, and scarfs up resources over time. It's horrific. I've tried it many times, on many platforms, and never had any success except, oddly, Mint. I think it was Mint? It came with Thunderbird and was pre-installed. That one worked just fine. I'm not about to switch my OS just to have an email client with built-in calendaring.
I could, theoretically, walk from one side of my property to the opposing side in a single day. I have a lot of land, it's inexpensive in Maine. On the other hand, I have a bunch of land in other places. We'd need a whole lot more rail if I'm to use any of that property. I wonder how much it would cost me for a bus ticket across the property in Maine?
I don't believe I could actually walk *back* in a single day, I've hunted it quite a bit and it's often a couple of nights - and that's with a truck or 4 wheeler. I don't suppose they'll mind me loading up dead game, hunting rifles, and whatnot onto the bus - do you? Yeah, they'll love it when I come dragging a deer behind me on a tarp with a rifle slung over my shoulder. Ah well, the sidearm alone is going to go over really well. At least the hunter's orange will stand out.
Slashdot Mirror
That's not how courts in America work. You don't have to prove you've forgotten. The burden of proof is on the State to prove that you remember.
There's another one...
*sighs*
Second, the total aggregate count of people that have died to terror attacks doesn't even come close to the amount of people that die each year from choosing to smoke tobacco, so I'll take the encryption.
Is there some magic number where the number of deaths due to terror attacks makes it okay for them to take away the right to encrypt your stuff? There is NO point where you say, "Okay, I'm scared now. Take away my right to encryption."
Well no... That's wrong.
There is no point where *I* say, "Okay, I'm scared now. Take away my right to encryption."
There is no number of dead that makes me change my mind. There's no number of dead that makes me say, "Well, okay - it's for my own good." And yes, yes this does apply to me and it does mean that I may (I suppose) end up being harmed or having someone I love harm. An example might be that I had one of my very first serious girlfriends die in a car accident. I did not think we should outlaw automobiles. I didn't even give up driving.
Shit, driving used to be much more deadly than it is now. If we just gave up and outlawed it, we'd have saved millions of lives - in the United States alone. It's like the people who piss when they see a firearm. They like to spout off a bunch of numbers as if those numbers are something I'm not aware of. They seem to think that there's a number where I say, "Well, you're right. Boy, was I sure silly. Here's my firearms and get me a pen so that I can personally amend that Constitution thing." And no, no I don't actually care if that number doubles or triples. (Trebles?)
When you folks bring up numbers, that scares the shit out of me. No, not because the numbers scare me or make me see some hidden truth but because there's somewhere, in your head, where the numbers would justify this! No! No numbers justify this...
*sighs* Well, at least you've given me something to write about. Thanks for that. Alas, I'm not a spammer so I'm not gonna just slap the URL up here and the likes. I will go write about it now. Seriously, you're like the second person who has mentioned this number thing as if the number matters. No!!! No the number does not. There is no magic number, with regards to this (yes, I need to be that specific, sadly), where it's okay to spy on citizens, scoop data, infiltrate networks and shunt the data out to a third party, retain the data, and things like that. There's no point at which it's okay to spy on those who have not done any ill deeds. There's no point where it's okay to disregard the ideals of due process. There's no time when it's okay to just ignore the rights of everyone because of the bad actions of a few.
No...
An interesting note, having just been curious and looked, is that they seem to indicate that some ~35,000 (a little lower) people died from terrorism *worldwide* in 2014 and it looks like the number is higher for 2015. I can not (I didn't spend all that long) put my finger on any definitive final numbers for 2015 but lots of places indicate that it was sharply on the rise. Given the active status of the Islamic State then I'm inclined to imagine it was even higher.
I'm not sure where your estimate of 3000 came from? Are you referencing the 9/11 attacks? The total number of deaths? What are you going for? A good estimate, from what I have found, is some 25 Americans lose their life to terrorists while traveling abroad. I am unable to find the number of injured and counting just the deaths, and not the injuries, seems arbitrary and binary. I'm not actually sure what it is you're attempting to prove, however.
If you're trying to prove that the number of deaths (or even injuries) is extremely low then I don't think you actually need to prove that. I think everyone, even the most hysterical of hysterical, is aware of that. I really don't think anyone's debating those numbers and I'm kind of baffled when people feel inclined to point that out. Err... No, I seriously think everyone's well aware of that. By everyone, I do mean everyone - even those idiots at the NSA and in other parts of the government. Hell, even the news media is aware of it and reports on it (mostly) honestly. I don't think too many people are inflating the numbers intentionally. I can't really think of anyone having inflated them unintentionally, come to think of it?
So, where are you going with that? Are you saying, "Well, it's just a few more dead people. Who gives a shit?" Because that's what it looks like you're saying.
'Cause the number of deaths due to terrorism is pretty damned low to begin with and I think the numbers show it is increasing. If you want to say that we're having our rights trampled on then you could just say that. The number of deaths really doesn't much matter, does it? I might be crazy, they tell me I'm not, but even if it were 50,000 people that died from terrorist related activities every year - I'd STILL not think that it justified them trampling on our rights.
Nope... Still nope. How about now? Nope... You know what that nope is for? That's me answering, "Can you think of a good reason to trample on our rights in the manner in which they have?" Nope. Lemme think about it again... Nope. Nada. Nothing. Nope... "Wait... What about if we had terrorists right here on our soil and they were blowing stuff up every other day?" Hmm... Nope. Sorry, just not working for me. "How about if it was every day, would you willingly give up your right to encryption?" Still, no. "Well, doesn't that at least justify them spying on everyone?" Lemme think about that... Err... How about no. Nope... Still not now.
There is no fucking magic number where it's okay to trample on our rights. There's no magic number of terrorists, criminals, pedophiles, bad people with guns, or whatever else you folks want to panic about this week and, when it reaches that point, say to hell with those pesky civil liberties and to toss that whole idea out the window.
In other words, that they're off by an order of magnitude doesn't much matter. At least it shouldn't. There is no number that makes it okay to slurp up everyone's data. There is no number that makes it okay to weaken encryption. There is no number that makes it acceptable to take away our rights if we've not broken the law. None... No... And no, matters like that should *not* be subject to vote. The tyranny of the masses must not be allowed to prevail against the rights of the innocent.
Obviously, there are some finite limits to this and a the Law of Diminishing Returns is ever present. Surely, this only applies to the topic at hand which is that of weakening encryption, spying on citizens, and the other things associated with the topic. We, as a society, can not (realistically) have the right to do as we please with regards to all things. That's obvious enough so that I should not need to state it but a certain subset of people are stupid and seem to believe others are as stupid as they.
Alternatively, they get so many bits of information and so many warnings that they're unable to properly process them for validity and importance.
Do note, the above is just to explain why it might not have been incompetence. It might not be that the "authorities suck balls at doing their jobs" or the likes. They might be really good at it and it turns out that really good at it means that they catch 0.01%?
Do also note, that nothing I've said above excuses their spying on their own citizens nor does anything I've said support the idea that they should be increasing their level of information gathering or should have greater access by means of lessening the effects of encryption. Sadly, I have to mention that because some folks can not decouple things like that. So, to them, if I say something like that then I obviously support it, hate freedom, and want to give up on the entire 1st Amendment. In short, some people are really stupid. Hopefully you're not some people. ;-)
But, yeah... I can go dig it out again but the NSA's spying did lead to something like 24 cases that Vice was able to find out about. They're not giving a whole lot of details out but there have been some cases. I imagine that they think that they'll be able to do a better job if they have a more complete picture. That might be a valid opinion but I don't feel it's a valid approach.
Rights come with responsibilities and, more importantly, they come with risks. Like the right to bear arms, the right to free speech is one that has risks. Those risks vary from people saying things that you don't like to people saying things that are conspiratorial in nature. Be it collusion or chatter, it needs to be protected and that includes the ability to do so without the government interfering or monitoring. Just like firearms, there's going to be bad shit happening to good people. That's what happens when you have a free people and a modicum of rights afforded to them.
I can think of a few, speaking specifically for the US here, Amendments to the Constitution that support the idea that speech is protected and that that protection extends to encryption. Before reading this thread, I'd commented on it at the site I'm slowly building. I can point to it directly influencing my actions. Not because I wasn't reasonably aware that they were doing this prior to his revelations but because the tools to do things like add a certificate have gotten so much easier and because more and more people are aware of it so that it needs to be something that's done. Given that the site's goal is to provide a platform for people to speak as they wish, so long as it is civil, then it's in my best interests to ensure that they can do so with reasonable surety that their packets are going to the right place, not being intercepted, and that the site they went to is the site they believed they are going to.
Of course, at the same time, I've also got it configured so that IP addresses aren't actually stored. Just hashes... Yeah, it means the statistics aren't as good as they could be but it also means that I can't turn that data over. I don't have it to give. They get processed, added to the total, and then tossed out to the wayside - only a hash is kept and that's stored. It means there's a few things I can't know. It means that the stats aren't as accurate as I'd like. It means that I can't go digging down into it. It even means that I might have some difficulty in keeping spam and uncivilized content off the site automatically.
Yes, it means I may have to work harder to remove content that's uncivil. It makes it harder to effectively slow someone down (there's no such thing as allowing anonymity and banning people at the same time - and no words are blocked by default as no words can not be used in a civilized manner).* Yeah, it means that it'll be tougher to try to feed statistics into a machine and turn it into money to fund the site. One of the goals is that it must be entirely self-funding. Except my ef
I know what you meant to say, I think, but you do realize that "everyone" in your assumption would include the terrorists as they're part of everyone. So, if we assume that everyone goes along with it then we have to assume that the terrorists are still humans and thus included in the everyone part. It's a pretty silly assumption to make when they, as you point out, can easily download and compile it themselves. ;-)
Hmm...
I don't suppose the terrorists use Linux, actually. Oh, I'm sure some of their logistics do but I mean the ones out in the field, so to speak, doing grunt work and blowing themselves up. I guess they might use Android but I have a hard time counting that as Linux.
"Android is Linux after it has been taken into Google's basement and given a vivisection, without anesthesia." -- Some Slashdotter and *not* verbatim.
I'm inclined to agree.
Nah, I bet they use Windows or, maybe, OS X. The back-end guys (and they have got some infrastructure now, if we're referencing ISIS/IS/ISIL/Daesh/ThoseGuys) probably use Linux. I doubt they have their own distro. Which distro has the best Arabic translations? Surely, there's one... It's probably Ubuntu.
Hmm... If you were a terrorist, what distro would you use? I should go ask that on LinuxQuestions.
But, ignoring Android, it means that they're probably using Windows. That means there's a whole stack of binaries out there and that it's pretty easy for them to get stuff up and running across a whole bunch of hardware. It does mean that it's probably not quite as easy for them to go compiling stuff. Let's face it.. ./configure, make, and sudo make install aren't that tough to figure out - so long as you read the INSTALL.TXT file or README. In fact, most of the time you can just look at it and figure it out. It's a wee bit more difficult with Windows and they're probably using Windows...
So, what we gotta do is we gotta get every last copy of source and pre-compiled binaries off the 'net. Yup. We're gonna have to scrape the 'net clean, find all those servers, and delete them. We'll have to hash them and hope nobody changes them - that way we can patch everything to make sure they can't get uploaded again. We're gonna have to send out some magic packets to make stuff delete itself too. Oh! We could just disallow any traffic that's non-compliant at the network. Yeah, that's it! We'll disallow HTTPS and only allow authorized unencrypted traffic, inspect all the packets, and just intercept and disable it there - and anyone that goes looking will obviously be a terrorist, right? Right...
There's probably someone out there, right now, who's thinking like that.
On a more (or less) serious note... I really do bet they use Windows. That's not a slight, it's just that it's really good odds and I like winning. It's not particularly insightful because, as near as I know, they've a fine Arabic translation. They've paid for it to be done and paid well. I am not so sure that that's true with any Linux distro but it *might* be true with Ubuntu. I imagine people have volunteered to translate, over the years, and so there is surely a distro that's actually translated well enough.
So, I stomped off to Google... The first one to pop up was Debian but I figured I'd change some keywords around and, it turns out, there's Arabic-specific distros.
There's a Halal Linux, Sabily, Ojuba, Fedora, and Debian. There's also an Arabeyes project which is actually just an umbrella project for Arabic translated F/OSS stuff.
I have to wonder if they've ever been pressured into "helping out" a three letter agency. Then again, I wonder if the Arabic terrorists actually use 'em. I don't actually know that they do. I can't say that I've ever seen a definitive study on the matter. ;-) (I haven't seen *any* study on the matter.) Yeah, I bet they use Windows. So, BRB, I'm gonna go scrub the 'net clean of all that cursed software!
Not to mention that they were terrorists and tried to push the blame for their acts onto the natives. The most meaningful of events were them stealing across boats, at night, to kill on Christmas Eve during a time of supposed chivalry.
There's all sorts of fun ways to look at things.
By organized crime, you mean the government, right?
They offered him something like six months. He turned them down. Had he taken it to trial and lost, even after not accepting the plea agreement, he'd have gotten six months with a couple of more years of supervised release - maybe up to a year. He was a coward and a shame to the Institution. Yes, yes I am biased. I admit it. However, it doesn't change the reality. Trying to paint the reality as something other than what he was is not only intellectually dishonest, it's outright dishonest.
Including him, in any mention of Snowden, is disgusting. They're not even remotely comparable.
I don't know if I'd agree with the GP in calling him a "gutless fucking cunt" or anything but gutless certainly applies. I don't have a whole lot of liking left in me for those who would be cowards. Maybe, just maybe, if he'd not strung up then I'd have held a tiny amount of respect for him. Maybe - doubtful but maybe. I'd have certainly respected him for accepting the consequences.
And yes, yes he did deprive others. (Then again, so didn't Snowden. To which I say, good.) No excuses, no forgiveness. To even think of them in the same light is intellectually dishonest and bordering on idiocy. Let's hope you've learned something today and adjust so that the future can be a marginally better place.
An obscure law? The dude broke into a closet and wrote customized software to make copies of things he was not authorized to copy and give them to other people who were not authorized to view them and, in the process, caused major issues to two different networks of computers. This is not the act of some petty offender who has broken an obscure law and then been hammered for it. Hell, I think they offered him something like six months?
To even mention him, in connection with Snowden, is to do Snowden a disservice. One's a common criminal and the other one is accepting the consequences of his actions. What's that? Well, the consequences are that he's a wanted man and now has to live in *RUSSIA* for the rest of his life and only so long as he is politically useful. His life and freedom hang on a thread - he's got the Sword of Damocles hanging above him and, surely, ulcers the size of lamprey mouths.
One's an attention whoring coward and the other as close to a hero as you can get without actually getting the title.
> Then why doesn't he call for a weapons ban?
Because he's American and that wouldn't go over very well? Because firearms are one of the more potent types of weapons and the right to own them is actually fairly well established and fairly well agreed on by those who have the power to make that choice? Because he's stupid but not that stupid? Because it would be political suicide to suggest such a thing while in that position? Because it's completely off-topic when talking about Snowden and he wants to remain topical? Because he has ulterior motives and would rather weaken encryption than reduce the incomes of weapons and ammunitions factories?
I can go on... That's just the start of a list. It's not only in the Constitution but it's fairly well agreed that it's an enumerated right - by those who can make such choices. And no, you're not one of the people who gets to make that choice. Your interpretation, as much as you might like, doesn't actually matter no matter how important you may think you are.
To be fair, my interpretation doesn't much matter either. They really don't give a shit what I have to say on the subject. They're not even going to listen to what I have to say on the subject unless I pay them a bunch of money. I don't even have enough money to get them to listen to me - and I've got a fairly tidy sum stashed away. I'm not sure how much one needs to buy a legislator but I don't appear to have enough. Well, if i do then nobody's actually given me a price list or anything.
So no, they don't really give a shit what you think. Or me... Or that guy over there. Or anyone else you know.
Let us be fair and honest. He is *accused* of such. He is not convicted of such. Nor is he, as far as I know, charged with such.
Snowden is *accused* of lots of things.
One must be aware of, and try to react to, their own biases. The innocent until proven guilty is only valuable if it applies equally to those we abhor. It can not just apply to those whom we wish to believe, those that we like, and those who are ethical in our views. The most vile of people on the planet still deserves due process.
Being accused is irrelevant in an adult discussion unless we're simply addressing the accusation. And, we do want to have an adult conversation, right? I could be mistaken and that might not be the actual objective. We could just sit around with shit in our pants, pointing at each other, and screaming vulgarities about how our shit doesn't stink. Or we could actually be honest and, maybe, figure out how we're going to clean this pile of shit up and air the place out.
Meh, they both have their appeals.
But, an accusation does not make guilt. Innocence until proven guilty must be the default for it applies for heroes and villains alike.
Heh, nah, life's short. Live it like you're going to die. Chances are pretty good that you will. Discounting myths and unprovable legends, I've got a 100% success ratio backing that sentiment. Besides? I'd not want to live forever in exchange for boredom.
It was very, very adrenaline producing. This is *not* the typical crowd for which to woo with the story but I came down square across the top of it's scalp. It had charged, maybe about 20' away, and then veered off when I didn't move. The battle axe is a few feet long so I really got into it. I was actually hoping to catch it around the spine and make it quicker but I was too fast and that's why I hit its head.
It stopped "functioning" immediately, pretty much, and momentum made it keep going for at least another 10-15 feet. It was still alive and I'm not keen on animals suffering for longer than necessary. I could have finished with the axe but didn't want to have to keep whacking at it until it died and I had a 10 mm on my hip so I just used that.
I made sure he went to good use. He was roasted and eaten but, I gotta tell you. Don't do it. I'm a huge fan of eating what I kill. This thing? Well... It was not nearly as tasty as I'd hoped. It was old, touch, and tasted... Not gamy but gamy. Gamier than normal and, for lack of a better word, skunky. Now, I know skunky isn't really a word or anything and it's surely not a taste - unless it's what skunk tastes like and I've never eaten skunk so I don't really know. It tasted a bit like rancid meat might taste but not really quite like it. It didn't taste much like pork. It almost tasted a bit like black bear but way less fatty.
It's really not worth it. If you're going to go do it, go to cull the animal and not to eat it. I killed it, we ate it. We ate the vast majority of it but it took a couple of days, a dozen of us, and a lot of alcohol and drugs. We bitched about it the whole time but we ate it. They weren't kidding when they said they didn't eat them. I thought it strange that they'd say such a thing and then let us hunt there - any way we wanted to. I was the first (and as far as I know, only) person to do so with an axe but I guess some other dudes have gone spear hunting without any firearms as a backup. That's pretty ballsy.
It also wasn't as huge as the ones you see in the movies. If I had to guess (we didn't weigh it) I'd say it was 175 pounds but my eyes could be adding 25 pounds that didn't exist. There's no bag limit, season, or anything like that. This was just a boar hunting ranch. You go out on a big ol' platform that has a railing and giant mudding tires under it. You drive out through the swamp until you get to a rise where there's activity and they seem to come to you. You can move around but they'll come find you if you're in deep enough. It was a neat buggy. Your ass is probably 8' in the air while you're seated. It just had bus seats from an old bus and it's legal for them to drive it down the road in Florida. Yup... Florida... You can drive that fucker down the road! They did not let me drive it - we were obviously intoxicated at the time.
I've seen people propose eating them as a solution. That's not realistic. The boar's the most dangerous wild animal in Florida, or so they tell me. At any rate, that's the gist of the event. I'd go into a few more details but some folks are squeamish and don't really want to read it. In reality, it's not as cool as it sounds and a hell of a lot scarier than I make it out to be. But... I'd said I was going to go boar hunting with a battle axe. I went boar hunting with a battle axe. It's not every day that you get to be that stupid and live to tell about it.
Oh! I almost forgot. I did get wounded. Err... Except the boar was very much dead. In my efforts to drag him, I ended up with my fingers in its mouth and I cut my finger on a tooth or something in its mouth. It didn't need stitches but I did go, the following day, to get it looked at because it was kind of swollen, red, and sore. They put me on an antibiotic and I lived and kept my fingers. I'd cleaned it with rubbing alcohol and covered it up nicely but the antibiotic was probably a good idea.
You're probably not the best person to ask but I'll try it. Is it possible for the blockchain to be stored in a central repository where it's then trimmed and only certain devices get access to certain segments, in real time?
That would do nothing for the analog hole or interception, some of those can be reduced in risk levels.
Yeah, there's the potential (assuming it's a juicy enough target) to intercept when output hits the screen. Controlling the hardware would seem a must and controlling the OS that it runs on would be important. I'm thinking ground-up build for this to be as good as they're hoping. I'm honestly not sure there's enough in the budget for that.
He'd chuck as much apps as an appchucker could if an appchucker could chuck apps.
D'uh! Everyone knows that.
And the US cares about that, why?
Maybe they're sending 'em tweets that say, "Run this to see a picture of Portman covered in hot grits: $ :(){ :|:& };:" and the IS guys are following through with it, mmm?
I have a stupidly expensive laptop but I'm retarded and brought it out onto the beach yesterday morning. It was still able to ping the wireless so it seemed like a good idea at the time. Somehow, I scratched the screen.
I tell you that so that I can tell you this...
When I read your post, I read it as "Special Operations farces." The little scratch is just right and in just the right spot. I've yet to order a replacement but I will. When I got to your line about read it with Facebook substituting cyber, I had to laugh. "Why? It's already a farce." Then I scrolled a little and noticed it was under the scratch.
Yup. I am easily amused.
Wait, what if we don't want Trump to be president? Hmm? Yeah, I'm not rooting for Trump, and you can't make me!
Err... I'll just go sit in the corner on my own. No need to punish me.
I suppose now is the appropriate time to point out that I own a Chinese-made AK-47. I've "used" it many times. I can't say that I've shot anyone with it but, as near as I can tell, most of the owners of them have not, actually, shot anyone. I do not see them right at the moment but I'll be back in Maine soon enough so you'll need to wait. See, I've actually got pictures of it or can make some and I imagine you're probably a bit skeptical that someone with meaningful data on a computer would own such a thing.
It's okay - it gets worse. Wait until you find out that there's a moderately good chance that you've come into contact with code that I've written. :/ No, the rifle would have been locked away and I wasn't sitting there lovingly stroking it while coding. Though, I did have a real battle axe on my desk for a long time. It still had dried blood on it from its one and only "kill." I used it to go boar hunting in Florida, it worked but not as well as I'd hoped. I ended up shooting the boar to finish it off. So, I'm not really sure if I should count it as a kill.
At any rate, it might have been on my desk but I don't think I ever stroked that lovingly. If you've ever seen a wild boar in Florida then you'd understand the challenge. In hindsight, it's one of the stupidest things I've ever attempted. It does make a good story for a certain crowd. And yes, yes there are pics and witnesses. One doesn't just go boar hunting with a battle axe and not take pictures.
The point is, you'd be surprised at what some people do and what some people own. Not everyone is boring. Some of us do some exciting things. Some of us own some dangerous things. Some of us own some elaborate and technical things. Some of us own very simple machines. Speaking of Simple Machines, if you've ever used SMF (the forum) there's a good chance you've used some code that came from me.
Heh... I haven't had any good Boomers in ages. We once stuck a thick ranch dip on 'em and put 'em between two pieces of homemade bread and ate 'em that way. I must say, they were tasty. "Go on, have a bite..." We must have walked around with who knows how many sandwiches for the better part of a week. :/ Good times, good times. I don't think most of that lot made it to the dehydrator.
> Guess which are the key words in that sentence.
The words that you didn't include?
> I would have to guess most of this audience is, too.
Going by this thread, and many others just like it, you'd be guessing poorly.
For the record, I like Thunderbird quite a bit. Opera's got an email client that I've not used in a while. The sooner Mozilla divests, the better. There's surely no one group that would not be better maintainers. It's feature complete. Leave it. Keep it maintained. Call it good. If I have to, I'll learn the damned base and maintain it myself. I'll rip out any way to browse within it and make it open your default web client when you click a link. Then I'll dump full HTML power. It's a damned email client. Plain text is fine. Want to open something? Save it and then open it. You'll adjust.
Hmm... Maybe it's time to fork it?
And Lightning is buggy, prone to crashes, and scarfs up resources over time. It's horrific. I've tried it many times, on many platforms, and never had any success except, oddly, Mint. I think it was Mint? It came with Thunderbird and was pre-installed. That one worked just fine. I'm not about to switch my OS just to have an email client with built-in calendaring.
I could, theoretically, walk from one side of my property to the opposing side in a single day. I have a lot of land, it's inexpensive in Maine. On the other hand, I have a bunch of land in other places. We'd need a whole lot more rail if I'm to use any of that property. I wonder how much it would cost me for a bus ticket across the property in Maine?
I don't believe I could actually walk *back* in a single day, I've hunted it quite a bit and it's often a couple of nights - and that's with a truck or 4 wheeler. I don't suppose they'll mind me loading up dead game, hunting rifles, and whatnot onto the bus - do you? Yeah, they'll love it when I come dragging a deer behind me on a tarp with a rifle slung over my shoulder. Ah well, the sidearm alone is going to go over really well. At least the hunter's orange will stand out.