If the VA has been denying that dioxins in C-123s is a hazard, there are many possible reasons, but malice is the least likely of all. As in everything else, ignorance is always a much more probable reason.
If the person making the statement was simply ignorant of the facts he could look them up before acting. Wilful irresponsibility counts as malice in my books.
These extinctions always seem to take place at the transition from one period to another.
So I'd recommend being extra double careful round those times.
So you are saying slashdot beta could cause a mass extinction event?
Well, in the case of the United States the difference is about 11.7% in the conviction rate (99.7% versus 88%).
And in the case of the United States one needs to be a millionaire to have competent legal aid.
spying is not hostile.
When you do it by means of actually attacking something, be it a computer system or a person, it is.
Existential risk? Since 800 AD? Wars? Um, Finland has not existed at all as a country during most of that time.
Yes, existential risk to Finns .
Finnic tribe habitation. 800 ad
Finnic tribe habitation. 912 ad, also,
Earliest conflicts with Russians during existance of written records.
And by the 14th century we arrive at this
And the point is -- does it matter what is illegal for the Finnish government to do inside foreign nations, when that's basically like envisioning Queens and Brooklyn invading Jersey?
Well, Finland is bordering a nation with largest landmass in the world whose population has historically posed an existential risk to Finns with wars fought on the most centuries since pre-800 AD. It is in the interest of self-preservation to know what your neighbour has parked near your border and what he's up to if a successful suckerpunch will lead to the complete collapse of organized national defense.
For contrast, Finland has a population significantly smaller than New York City.
And the original question was "What country doesn't spy on allies?"
Nice observation there. What country doesn't spy on allies? Are you that naive?
AFAIK it is illegal for Finnish government agents to stage hostile operations inside foreign nations.
Related
They suggest that interbreeding went on between the members of several ancient human-like groups living in Europe and Asia more than 30,000 years ago
So were the offspring of these 'human-like' beings capable of reproduction? If they were, wouldn't they be just "human"?
The United States has waived sovereign immunity to a limited extent, mainly through the Federal Tort Claims Act, which waives the immunity if a tortious act of a federal employee causes damage
Intentional torts
Torts against the person include assault, battery, false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and fraud, although the latter is also an economic tort.
Property torts involve any intentional interference with the property rights of the claimant (plaintiff). Those commonly recognized include trespass to land, trespass to chattels (personal property), and conversion.
Further, in the article talking about the specific Federal Tort Claims Act...
However, the FTCA does not exempt intentional torts for "investigative or law enforcement officers," allowing aggrieved individuals to bring lawsuits
Attacking a civilian owned computer system is definitely violation of property rights.
Also, the action they are taking is directly forbidden in the United States constitution.
Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution
...
The Fourth Amendment (Amendment IV) to the United States Constitution is the part of the Bill of Rights that prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and requires any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause.
...
One threshold question in Fourth Amendment jurisprudence is whether a "search" has occurred. Initial Fourth Amendment case law hinged on a citizen's property rights—that is, when the government physically intrudes on "persons, houses, papers, or effects" for the purpose of obtaining information, a "search" within the original meaning of the Fourth Amendment has occurred.
...
The Fourth Amendment proscribes unreasonable seizure of any person, person's home (including its curtilage) or personal property without a warrant. A seizure of property occurs when there is "some meaningful interference with an individual's possessory interests in that property"
I'd argue that inserting malware is again, "meaningful interference with an individual's possessory interests in that property".
If you have a procedure with 10 parameters, you probably missed some.
