Isn't /. composed solely of sub-atomic articles? Why is the discovery of new ones newsworthy, somehow? Wouldn't that happen daily, or possibly hourly, at /.?

Stupid American! .000001 Euros, obviously, in stolen electricity... wait, no - abstracted.

I suppose it isn't the economics of it, but the principle involved. If they let one person get away with it on the grounds that it makes absolutely no difference to the owner of the electricity or anyone else, anywhere, ever, then soon they could have literally dozens of people eventually doing so, unrepentantly and without negative consequence... but what about that original complainant? Why shouldn't *they* get to impose *their* will on others? *They* have a *uniform* ffs.

So, I suppose the term "abstracts" is used when there is no physical object to show as evidence? It kind of makes the whole complaint seem silly. Not that I would ever want to suggest that the local constabulary in any given jurisdiction might be better off focusing on what people call, for lack of a better term, real crime. That would seem disrespectful. Kind of like arresting someone for a few -- insert term for small measure of currency in your land here ---'s worth of electricity that would have gone unnoticed but for the remarkable detective work of this brave first responder.

Actually, if you try to use a credit card analogy, you would cut up the card and still be getting new charges on it in businesses you go to. The photos are the charges, the photo subjects are the new stores. Be honest - is that how you think credit cards work? The previously published photos, or charges from when you were actually using the card, remain until paid off. That is reasonable. The new ones seem an issue.

All TV shows get cancelled. Except The Simpson's, and even that may get the axe, one day. Crystal Pepsi is a stripper name I am not familiar with. I am sorry to hear she died, but I was not a fan. Microsoft is not a hardware company, so the Zune was never a good investment.

On the other hand, I did love my Betamax by Sony. Does that count?

How do *your* theories start? Mine begin by looking at known bits and pieces and looking for alternative explanations. That kind of requires speculation, and imagination.

Actually, if the braggart was there at the time that bombs took the target down, that is sad. If he was not there, chances are he does it again at another location. Bang-zoom. More dead C&C, easy peasy.

If they did not know a piece of information, they are not a dumbass. That makes them an ignoramus. If they were a principal of a school, that only confirms it.

So much for my insightful "Yeah, and Al Capone went to jail for tax evasion, where he died of syphilis" comment being original and thought provoking. Most people disapprove of child molesters using a position of power to gain sexual satisfaction for themselves. If money laundering sheds this pustule from the herd, well, good on thems as prosecutes him, imo.

Should We Identify the Crooks Who Deploy It? Yes. Thanks for asking.

Because you say so? To paraphrase Peter O'Toole's character from The Stunt Man "Give me thirty seconds of film and I can create, then destroy, entire worlds, complex civilizations!" You should not sell those concepts short, even if, or perhaps, just because you do not know how to code in that language.

Citations needed.

If you want to be able to have sharp focus, maybe you do.

If you can't make an image with sharp edges, who cares what the pixel count is?

Perhaps. Perhaps not.

As things stand, the majority of Americans who care about this are willing to accept that the North Koreans did this. The Venn Diagram showing People Accepting This + People Who Have Technical Knowledge of This Area seems to be a null set. (Please keep in mind that saying publicly "X is the Gospel truth" and believing it are two different things.)

The people in charge of communicating this information seem fine with that. They probably have spent enough time and energy to insure that this story doesn't play major havoc with any coming election that they have a reasonable amount of confidence in that outcome. Some substantial percentage of the people running this show really only care about that, about the "average" public perception in the voting population. The second set of individuals from the above cited diagram are just not satisfied. Chances are this group will not be satisfied until the powers that be decide it is worth their while to provide genuine evidence in lieu of the narrative, innuendo or circumstantial evidence proffered so far.

So, maybe doing that would be disastrous. Or, maybe, it would simply lead to a different approach by bad actors that would then have to be dealt with by the "Good Guys" (ie, hackers on our payrolls) which means it wouldn't be easy, and there would be financial cost associated with it. Or, presumably, not. I mean, I would hope we actually have people on staff who are paying attention to this area, anyway. If they have to do a little more work to deal with a modified tactic, doesn't that seem like it might make us more safe, rather than less? Why is it better that they should maintain a status quo that apparently did not keep us all safe from this in the first place?

Which may make it sound like I have a rather cavalier attitude about security. I do not. But, I do have confidence in a well motivated counter-force's ability to maintain a secure environment, given a decent management structure. So far, I am not seeing that in this so much as I am seeing the marketing department trying to tamp it down.

Je Suis Charlie. Pass it on.

Technically, let's just call it the Korean Network (KN) to distinguish it from the nation of North Korea (NK) and move on.