You seem pretty certain about that, considering it's really not an issue with a lot of legal certainty at this point. If it was as simple as saying "DDoS is against the law", slashdot would quickly find itself in a world of painful litigation.

Because cyber-crime doesn't refer to a mere specialized type of crime, but an entirely different paradigm. This new paradigm of crime not only requires completely new types of training and skill-building, it will require well-written and clear laws that don't yet exist if we're ever going to get out of the "wild west" in which we currently reside.

Giving it a label helps to identify it and differentiate it, which is probably beneficial.

We call it cyber-crime because of the special skills and knowledge required to appropriately investigate and prosecute it. I really don't want a beat cop who makes arrests for street muggings responsible for investigating high-tech crime. Specially trained members of law enforcement will probably be required to enforce especially complex types of crime.

In the future:

Desktops will be dead. No one will have them.
Laptops will be your workhorse. Many will have them for work.
Netbooks will be your casual computing device. Some will have them for novelty.
Phones will be your go-to interface for day-to-day needs. Everyone will have one.

Which is why they should be damn sure of their accusations before they issued the warrant, otherwise they may end up causing irreparable harm to the victim of the false accusation. If there is a process for reviewing a lower-prosecutor's decision to issue a warrant, that process should be completed PRIOR to the issuance of the warrant.

If a man can be publicly accused of rape, a warrant issued for his arrest, and his name splashed all over the international media PRIOR to you being 100% sure you want to bring him in on those charges, then I would say something is seriously wrong with your system of justice.

Music to Google's ears.

For those interested in the study, you can find it on IHS Global Insight's page: pdf here.

someone needs to teach the US gov how to micromanage their units better. fortunately for us we seem to have early expansion down pretty well.

maybe the koreans can help?

You know between this and the Education speech, Obama must be getting kind of tired of having radical extremist political parties censoring his otherwise basic and principled messages. Good thing that kind of thing doesn't happen over he... wait...

Why can't open-source, verifiable software be part of your hallowed PROCESS? It can. And ought to be. Software engineers have a legitimate seat at this table.

I would draw comparisons between this and the Simpson's Monorail episode, but at least the Monorail got built before they realized it was a gigantic waste of money. The bullet-train would simply be a financial quagmire for this fiscally irresponsible state.

Worth noting:

"Report details why high-speed rail won't meet ridership predictions, deliver on promised travel times, or meet emission reduction targets."

I'm going to comment instead of mod, since this topic is so dear to my heart. Let me wholeheartedly agree and go one step further than bashing targeted ads.

I'm against ads, period. Advertising has gone beyond informing me of a product to the point where advertisements, especially in TV and Radio, are manufactured specifically for the purpose of manipulating me into desiring the product being advertised. It is no longer, "Hey, buy this product if you're in the market". It is now, "Hey, watch as we manipulate you with images and sounds that play on your politics or emotions so that we can manufacture a desire for you to buy our product that you do not need."

Not only is this manipulation occurring, but many times it is occurring so blatantly and unabashedly that I become offended that the ad is being shown. Think: Chevy's ads juxtaposing classic Americana and John Mellencamp to sell their trucks (link). That I, as a watcher/listener of that show/channel/medium, am considered to be so stupid that I will bite on their emotional/subliminal advertising garbage, is so enraging to me that I will completely disassociate myself from the show/channel/medium in order to get away from advertising.

So I have abandoned commercial radio and television, and, frankly, I don't miss it. Advertising has gone from annoyance to something that I consider to be unethical and a serious contributor to our problems as a consumer society.

If you want constant internet access, you must not go where there is no signal.

If you want to go enjoy remote places with no signal, you cannot have constant internet coverage.

Pick one.

Why would I buy an e-reader right now when the cost for books is often equal to the cost of their paper-printed brethren? I rarely take more than 1 book out-and-about with me. Without a cost benefit, all I see are negatives: expensive gadgets that can break, DRM, compatibility problems, content management, and on and on...