The whole point of brute-forcing is that you don't need human evaluation. Are you really planning on a human evaluating the results from all 2^128 possible keys? How many universe lifetimes do you have to crack this thing?

Many of whom are twisting logic to unrecognizable proportions to support the NSAs activities. Where's the guarantee he would have got a sympathetic Member of Congress, rather than a "Wow. Let me look at these documents. I'm just going to go over to <somebody's> office to show them this revelation. Wait here." <30 seconds later, police burst into the office and shoot Snowden in the head for resisting arrest with a stapler>?

Considering they still don't know everything he took, I'm thinking you're giving the NSA a little too much credit, here.

Hahaha.. Good one! Oh..wait....you're serious?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

So all that national security classified shit is going to be paraded through an open courtroom? How naive are you? All the evidence against him will be classified, and conveniently, neither Snowden nor his lawyer, whoever that is, will be cleared to see it, so he most definitely will not be able to face the evidence presented against him. Once he can't face and challenge the evidence, anything else you claim also cannot be faced.

How come all the blind schmucks who keep claiming this are ACs? Is the cold_fjord account banned by too many people now? Seriously, everybody who claims the government broke no laws, and that court rulings have been in the NSAs favour, are all ACs.

You can say that again.....

So I'm guessing from your choice of words, that you're part of that corrupt government, then?
Sheesh. The training they give shills these days. It's like trying to get competent tech support from a foreign call center. At least make sure they know not to give away their position through a couple of pronouns....

That's exactly it, though. He sold out his government. Not the country. Not the citizens. Not anybody that actually matters in a "for the people, by the people" kind of country. He sold out a traitorous government to their bosses, the people.

He didn't share anything with enemies. He shared with a UK journalist, but the UK is an ally of the USA. It was that journalist that published, allowing "enemies" to read it.

Having said that, someone else posted that countries nowadays are rivals, not enemies, barring the occasional nutjob run state like North Korea. I tend to agree.
Those nutjob states, though, that could actually be classifed as "enemies," have leaders that are so mind numbingly paranoid, that they probably wouldn't believe anything that came from the media regarding the NSA, as they'd think it was planted propaganda.
So, basically, the only thing this has done is embarrass the bureaucracy, and convinced those nutjob leaders that the released documents are definitely not describing what is actually happening.

There has been one court ruling that I know of, which stated the NSA was not breaking the law. This ruling was full of "this is a useful program to the government" bullshit, with virtually no references to the law itself. In other words, possibly came from a corrupt judge, and is almost certain to be overturned on appeal, barring more corrupt judiciary.
There has been at least one court ruling stating the NSA did, in fact, break the law, as well as several government committees that came to the same conclusion. The number of rulings from courts and other sources stating that they did break the law is much greater than the number stating they didn't break the law.

Maybe you should remove your nose from the NSAs collective ass, and pay attention to what's being said.

Then you haven't been paying attention.
Oh, but you're cold fjord, so you've probably had your nose so far up Clapper's ass that you haven't been able to see what's going on around you. Come to think of it, how do you manage to type to post on /. when you're too busy licking boots and buttholes to be able to see the screen?

Believed by whom? Anonymous Crackpots on the Internet? Sure. They're completely trustworthy.
The only people who say Snowden was working with the Russians are the various lawbreaking members of the US government, who are actively running a smear campaign against Snowden. The FBI, however, has maintained for some time that Snowden acted alone.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-25806855
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/01/26/usa-security-snowden-idUSL2N0L00BR20140126

If "everybody does it, it's just that the USA got caught" as has been claimed by various pro-government trolls on /., then the USA's reputation has suffered no damage, because everybody already knew they did it, just as their own countries also do it.
If everybody else *doesn't* do it, then the USA deserves their damaged reputation, and they deserve it.

Do you think Rob Ford's reputation as a crack smoker was caused by Gawker, or by Rob Ford?
If the USA's reputation has been damaged by this, it is entirely the US government's fault, rather than Snowden's.

You're trying to blame Snowden for the US government's failures. That's why you were downvoted.

Straw man much?

Because if I decide to move that backup machine to a different piece of hardware, it means copying a folder of files, and moving a single drive. Were it a background process, I'd need to do a bunch of configuring and testing on the new machine to get things working and verified. VMs are easy. Background processes aren't, necessarily.

Something breaks on a 13 year old car, and it gets fixed under warranty? Really?
What auto manufacturer, anywhere, worldwide, at any price point, offers a warranty that long?

Hint: None of them.

It was a safety defect that was found, and remedied, free of charge. Which, incidentally, " increased its security and resilience to accidents." For free. On my 13 year old car.

Great horny toads! What are ya doin' down there upside-downy?

A mirror 2.5 light years away!