Oh yes, now I remember why I stopped reading Slashdot back in 2001. It's full of 14-year old boys...or at least adults that act like them.

"I have no idea what I'm taking about, and I was in too much of a rush to First-Post so I did not bother to read the article. But I made an anti-American remark, and I was snotty, therefore, I'm an instant Slashdot expert! Modded up to 'insightful'".

What sort of fools modded this up?

By the way, if you had bothered to read the article, the research is at the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute. In the UK. That's not in the US, that's across the Atlantic Ocean, way on the other side.

I think you underestimated your own laziness.

Yes, I also found it amusing that this the same site were people argue about non-profits and fair use.

Exactly! What we need is a giant database that can be compromised by one overworked medical resident who has no real concept of data security.

I know of two cases where residents had a shared database of passwords to various medical systems at multiple hospitals stored on insecure public "document" sites. In one case, they all had a common password, and different groups of students/residents used it year after year (not even ever changing the username or password). When the IT people found out and blew a large gasket, the medical people honestly did not see what the problem was.

Someone modded this up to "Insightful"? Really? Are you from Planet Quendor?

If you needed real government-issued photo ID to commit identity theft, then most of the criminals would be out of business

.

You mean Medicare, not Medicaid, which is for the very poor or terminally ill.

The big prize here would be any Children's SSN's. Those are valuable for identity fraud because children have clean credit histories, and it takes months-to-years for the parents to figure it out.

I suspect "Anonymous" may be at work here, they've attacked Utah government and police sites before. They seem to support free speech, unless it's free speech they don't like, then it should be destroyed. Ironically, not only did they attack the wrong police department (Salt Lake City, not West Valley City), but they took down the site that allows the public to talk to the police. But I guess as long as you destroy something and screw up people's lives, that's good news for them.

Sony has become evil, and I hate them for it.

But, that does not make stealing something slated for later sale moral. If I want a new video game, and it won't be released until October, so I break into the store and steal a case of games in August, how is it a benefit to society? Won't society benefit more if they are sold legally? The kid working in the game store, the UPS man who delivers them, the pizza store next to the game store...they would all prefer the product to be legally sold.

Jackson recorded them for the purpose of making money and/or providing a funding legacy for "his" children. So I don't see how stealing them is somehow moral. If Sony had decided to never release them, this would be one thing....but it is not. Please explain to me how the fact that Sony had not sold them yet makes it moral to steal them.

Also what does the name "NITRO" have to do with this in anyway? The original plant was set up to make nitrocellulose, also known as gun cotton. What does that have to do with chemical weapons, Agent Orange, or herbicides?

Nitrocellulose was gun powder. It was also used to make cue balls, movie film, and wood coatings.

So what? Aside from being very flammable, it's not even that dangerous, nor is it an explosive...

Huh?

First of all, Agent Orange was not a chemical weapon. It was a nasty chemical and it injured my father-in-law and his children--my wife included--but that was collateral damage from what was intended as a defoliant. It was intended to clear tree cover and/or destroy food crops (though that was more Blue than Orange).

The really nasty chemical in Agent Orange was actually a contaminant; ,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin. It was not supposed to be there at all.

Agent Orange was supposed to be a 50:50 mixture of (2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxy)acetic acid and (2,4-dichlorophenoxy)acetic acid.

I agree with snowgirl, the article title was for emotional impact. It's like saying "KNOWN CHEMOTHERAPY INGREDIENT "NORMAL SALINE" FOUND DUMPED NEAR SCHOOL!"

How dare he be old! Stupid jerk...he should know that once you get old, you are instantly disgusting and should report to a Sleepshop on lastday.

If they're so tough, why do they hide under a rock?

Wish I had mod points. You've made the only intelligent argument in the thread today.

Exactly...does anyone here really have that "action movie" idea that some massive mainframe inside CIA headquarters is really running the CIA website? And that it's not just farmed out to some contractor like rackspace?

When a guy breaks into your house and steals your belongings, "Hey, he had a lousy alarm system and was gone over Labor Day Weekend, he was asking for it!"

A rapist: "She was wearing a provocative outfit! Anyone could see that she was asking for it".

Now these script kiddies: "Hey, we broke in and found plaintext! Sony was asking for it."

Same logic. "It's not my fault, you did not prevent me from committing a crime so it is your fault. I am not responsible for my criminal actions, you are. You are also responsible for the third-parties I hurt because you did not adequately prevent me from doing it".

Everyone should have learned the following quote in High School, if not earlier:

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

-- Evelyn Hall, in a summation of her read of Voltaire.

Wikileaks and their supporters claim to be for the unrestricted flow of information, even when this information could cost lives. I can understand their idealism; when I first read the Hall quote I was swept up in a patriotic-like fervor, willing to give my life for the cause of free speech. That idealism is why we send young men off to war...as we get older, we're less willing to just throw our lives away because somebody told us to. Men may still be willing to die for a cause, but the cause has to be greater.

I had assumed that the Wikileaks kids were under a similar grand unified cause, but as time has gone on, they seem to be targeting which causes they want to "attack". Big corporations and the USA/their allies. They don't seem to attack Russia or other powerful nations who may choose to fight back.

Even the famous video released by Wikileaks has been edited twice. We don't know what was cut out the first time, but in the second details like a man carrying a rocket launcher were removed. This is not "open", this is yellow journalism. I really wonder who is actually funding Wikileaks behind-the-scenes.

So I am not surprised that the Wikileaks people or their fan club attack their critics. When a show like Frontline shows them in a good light, they celebrate it. And when it shows them in a bad light, they attack, trying to silence the messenger.

"We don't like what you say, so you don't have the right to say it"

Clearly not something that would be promoted by Voltaire.