Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Military

United States Begins Flying Stealth Bombers Over South Korea 567

skade88 writes "The New York Times is reporting that the United States has started flying B-2 stealth bomber runs over South Korea as a show of force to North Korea. The bombers flew 6,500 miles to bomb a South Korean island with mock explosives. Earlier this month the U.S. Military ran mock B-52 bombing runs over the same South Korean island. The U.S. military says it shows that it can execute precision bombing runs at will with little notice needed. The U.S. also reaffirmed their commitment to protecting its allies in the region. The North Koreans have been making threats to turn South Korea into a sea of fire. North Korea has also made threats claiming they will nuke the United States' mainland."
Electronic Frontier Foundation

DOJ Often Used Cell Tower Impersonating Devices Without Explicit Warrants 146

Via the EFF comes news that, during a case involving the use of a Stingray device, the DOJ revealed that it was standard practice to use the devices without explicitly requesting permission in warrants. "When Rigmaiden filed a motion to suppress the Stingray evidence as a warrantless search in violation of the Fourth Amendment, the government responded that this order was a search warrant that authorized the government to use the Stingray. Together with the ACLU of Northern California and the ACLU, we filed an amicus brief in support of Rigmaiden, noting that this 'order' wasn't a search warrant because it was directed towards Verizon, made no mention of an IMSI catcher or Stingray and didn't authorize the government — rather than Verizon — to do anything. Plus to the extent it captured loads of information from other people not suspected of criminal activity it was a 'general warrant,' the precise evil the Fourth Amendment was designed to prevent. ... The emails make clear that U.S. Attorneys in the Northern California were using Stingrays but not informing magistrates of what exactly they were doing. And once the judges got wind of what was actually going on, they were none too pleased:"

Comment Re:Many mobile browsers do this. (Score 1) 200

Not necessarily. That depends on the network topology and their server setup. The data might be going over an Ethernet connection in the clear at some point. And you wouldn't necessarily need direct access to the private key, either, depending on the setup (though if it was as secure as it could be, you'd need access to the machine the proxy is running on). No one is saying you can waltz into any Nokia office with your laptop and open up Wireshark. It'd have to be an inside job. And it's likely that the insider would get away with it, if they were careful.

Comment Re:Yes, our real God. (Score 1) 231

Frankly, who cares? I think when most people say "Jesus never existed", they mean he didn't exist as described: working miracles, being born asexually, resurrecting, etc. I guess some people can dislike a person/idea so much that they deny basic established facts. (see Obama/Birthers)

Comment Re:To answer your question (Score 1) 153

Thanks for the response.

As for "gay rights", the church leadership supports homosexual civil unions, just not calling it marriage. In the same vein, you can believe me or not, but we don't sit around much and talk about gay marriage. A little, but not much.

I take issue with this. Your church should not be pushing its definition of marriage into law. If a gay couple can't be married at a Mormon church, that's fine with me. They can always leave. But that couple should be able to elope at a local courthouse. Civil unions do not provide the same rights, privileges and responsibilities under current law that marriage does.

Comment Re:Mormons help people who are not mormons (Score 1) 153

I fail to see your point. To me, the church and the government here are doing the exact same thing: taxing people and giving them benefits in return. The "heart of the problem" isn't how people feel about receiving benefits. It's the fact that in our society, some people often get ahead at the expense of others who are left behind. That's called "capitalism". Some people, like the Mormon church, don't think that it's right for the system to leave people behind. So they come up with safety nets. I fail to see anything wrong with that.

Comment Re:Mormons help people who are not mormons (Score 1) 153

Interesting. Have you personally seen non-believers receive assistance? If so, are they expected or encouraged to give back to the church in some way? I personally would feel guilty about receiving assistance from a church. Welfare works because people who aren't actively using it are still paying into the system. I wouldn't feel as guilty about receiving unemployment (for example) since I have paid a lot of money into that system. It's too bad your church spends money on things I don't support, otherwise it might be worth joining just for the safety net. =) Maybe you can come out with a non-believers insurance plan - a mere x% of your income, and you too can have guilt-free access to these excellent benefits! ;-) Just need to hire a good accountant to make sure you aren't spending that on anti gay rights propaganda.

Slashdot Top Deals

You knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Fred. -- Superchicken

Working...