Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Hide the Knowledge (Score 1) 118

it's probably more important to give accurate information so people who might try it don't in advertently poison themselves

the way it's presented in Breaking Bad you'd go right down the wrong path

Basically the producers of the show want people to poison themselves when they try something illegal. Technically it is not captial punishment.

Comment: Re:Starship Diversity? (Score 1) 392

Generation ships docking in space is an interesting concept.

Before ships couple their docking ports and become as one, they should first make sure that the other ship is trustworthy, it's intentions sincere, their expectations compatible. They should spend some time communicating to get to know each other before physical contact. There is also the magnetic potential to consider.

Once engaged, there will certainly be a lot of transfers between the ships: data, crew, atmosphere, maybe even liquids, but there is also the potential of communicable diseases spreading from ship to ship, that one crew or the other might not have built an immunity to yet.

Comment: Re:Politcs vs. Science (Score 2) 291

by Synonymous Homonym (#46647585) Attached to: NASA Halts Non-ISS Work With Russia Over Ukraine Crisis

The U.S. didn't benefit from the Iraq vote (most of the oil contracts went to non-US companies).

Saddam Hussein wanted to trade the oil in Euros. With the new government, Iraq's oil is still traded in Dollars. In which country the oil is traded is immaterial; it is exported mostly to the USA anyway.

I think the U.S. was wrong to invade without UN approval

In fact, it was a war crime, violating article 2.4 of the UN charta, and public international law.

Russia did benefit from the Crimea vote - they annexed a huge amount of territory.

And Crimea's debt, which they now must help pay off. At least in the short term, the annexation of Crimea was a loss for Russia.

If Russian had simply stood by the sidelines

Their naval base in Sewastopol made it impossible for them not to be involved in some way.

demanding secession from Ukraine

The Autonomous Crimean Republic had existed since 1921. It was put under Ukrainian governance in 1954. When the Ukraine seceded from Russia in 1992, Crimea became an autonomous republic again, albeit as part of the Ukraine.

the results are indistinguishable from if they invaded and held a rigged election.

Crimea invited international observers to the elections because of these concerns. There is no evidence of vote rigging.

Comment: Re:Warrant? No. (Score 1) 137

by Synonymous Homonym (#45649519) Attached to: Insight On FBI Hacking Ops

The spyware was installed on a computer in Iran. If installing spyware is illegal in Iran (as it would have been in the USA absent a warrant), then the FBI has commited a crime.

if war is a necessity, it will be because of crazy leaders in Iran more then anything else.

What does that say about the leaders in the USA that they went to war with Afghanistan because of a crime commited in the USA?

Installing software that exposes the location of a computer used in violation of a country's laws should not be an act of war under any sane interpretation of any country's sovereignty.

As long as the interpretation is sane: In 2011, the USA have declared that they might retaliate against cyberattacks with a nuclear strike (though to be fair the cyberattack would have to be on the scale of Stuxnet).

Comment: Re:Warrant? No. (Score 0) 137

by Synonymous Homonym (#45631377) Attached to: Insight On FBI Hacking Ops

The FBI is a police organisation, not a spy organisation (though catching spies is also part of their duties). So everything you said about spying is not relevant in this context.

You have a point in that they first needed to find out what country the person of interest was in. When they found out it was Iran, it should have become the responsibility of Iranian police.

Whether Iran would have to hand over one of their citizens for crimes comitted in the USA depends on whether Iran and the USA have a mutual extradition agreement.
It is possible (IANAL) that the FBI violated Iranian laws by installing spyware on someone elses computer in Iran. (They didn't have a warrant from an Iranian judge.) Would the USA be willing to deliver those responsible, or would they rather harbour criminals within their borders and make war "a necessity"?

Comment: Re:Another Ministry of Propaganda piece. (Score 0) 137

by Synonymous Homonym (#45631195) Attached to: Insight On FBI Hacking Ops

The point of the article is that if you are not American, you have no rights. Even if you did nothing illegal in your own country, the FBI will still get you. If you are American, don't leave the motherland if you know what's good for you.

The other point is that having to get a warrant hampers police investigations, so let police do whatever they want to whoever they want whereever they want already.

"Once they go up, who cares where they come down? That's not my department." -- Werner von Braun

Working...