Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Boils down to: be reasonable, do what is expect (Score 1) 362

uhm, the Prosecutors have pushed for and received broad, sweeping laws from Congress and the States that allow them to "crack down on crime." The problem is as the net has gotten bigger, there are cases everywhere where small fish get caught up and suffer tortuous charges for very petty things. That's how our Liberals and Conservatives in the country can sleep better at knight knowing that their jack-booted law enforcement is on the case. I had to hire an attorney a few years ago for my son because he decked a kid in school who'd taken a swing at him. He was facing a misdemeanor assault charge with up to a $4000 Fine and 6 months in jail. This was at 14 and happened because the schools are now treating petty incidents as crimes and it's happening all over the country because of the war on drugs and zero-tolerance policies. It's a direct result to make our schools "safe."

It doesn't make them safe and schools all over the country now resemble prisons in terms of their policies and on-site police to enforce bullshit. It's a great lesson to teach our youth. How about breaking your arm for leaving crumbs on the ground? Doodling on your desk? Flying a paper airplane?

Yet, you want more laws to reign in prosecutors? We have enough laws and enough police all wearing their swat gear and bullet proof vests all supplied with funds from the DHS. While we were sleeping, this nation became a Police State and from your rights on the street to the prosecutors the deck is stacked against you and while we fault the Prosecutors here, which they should be, we also have to remember that if there wasn't a set of laws on the book that they could charge him with there wouldn't be a problem. The CFAA is overly broad and needs to be changed, narrowed or eliminated but the risk here is that we could get worse legislation by that band of Retards on Capitol Hill.

Swartz is one case, he at least had visibility. Think of all those souls in Prison who had a public defender and a plea deal lessening the charges or the duration of the sentence possibly faced. That's the game, build a case so big that if you go to trial the Prosecution by leveraging these vague laws will try to throw the book at you and put you away forever. That's why Aaron took the route he did, a big case, felony charges, years and years in prison and the Prosecution had the tools to do it. He should have put his faith in a Jury and the Legal Process and fought, instead he died and everybody is still debating it but not really doing anything about it. Why? Because we've become accustomed to all these new broad laws and powers we put in the hands of our government. That's so we're taking an active part in stopping crime. Crime is bad, so let's give the police and the prosecutors the tools they need to fight crime. The problem is broad-scoped laws can be used against you even though you send one too many e-mails or encourage to your members to do so.

It's time that the American public took back it's government and removed the Democrats and Republicans or at least took the approach of voting out all the incumbents. That's your last bastion of hope here folks because if you don't you'll get the same bunch of retards being re-elected over and over again and since they don't fear the voter, they'll be in the pocket of every special interest group in the country suckling up to that big money trough in every State and in DC.

Comment Re:We lost a good one here. (Score 3, Interesting) 236

Kind of like every time there's a problem with a plane they roll out "Miracle on the Hudson" Capt. Sullenberger?
Clancy did a lot of research for all of his books, you have to give him props for that. While he never served in the Military he
knew a lot about the motivations and the technology which made his books more realistic.

Comment Re:Worthless (Score 4, Informative) 199

He doesn't have too, it appears that the Key exchange protocols were weakened and it's not necessary to break AES but extract the keys during KEP negoitiation.

You also have to remember that it's a negotiation and unless you set your browsers up and websites to use more secure protocols you could default to say RC4-RSA under SSLv2.0. There's acknowledged flaws in TLS 1.0 (SSLv3.0) but it wasn't until a couple of months ago that Firefox supported TLS 1.1 and it still doesn't support TLS 1.2. Chrome (Version 30+) and IE (9+) support TLS 1.1 and TLS 1.2. So you should see more and more websites turning on TLS 1.2 support and turning off TLS 1.0 and 1.1 if they can.

I've already had change requests come in from customers to get away from AES and to push more TLS 1.2 out there and you're already seeing companies and other government agencies distancing themselves from NIST blessed standards and that's lamentable but the credibility of the organization has been irreparably compromised by NSA influence. As a result, may see more ChaCha or more TwoFish implementations start to come into the mix over this, which is a good thing because it means that we have diversity in ciphers and less reliance on NIST and its standards processes.

Comment Re:cry me a river (Score 1) 1532

It's funny but we haven't had a budget since 2009. Blame Harry Reid and the rest of his cronies for that one. The endless Continuing Funding Resolutions and stop-gap appropriation bills are what's been keeping things afloat, that and endless spending. It's impossible to be fiscally responsible without a budget, therefore every member of congress should be fired because they're not working off of a plan other than to get re-elected and run up record deficits. Raising the debt limit needs to be done, but not without a budget and a constitutional amendment for a balanced budget to be submitted to the states for ratification. That's the only way to force these fucktards to actually start doing their jobs and stop blaming each other for the mess we have. They're both to blame and continue to fiddle while Rome burns.

Comment Re:You know this makes America ... (Score 1) 1532

Uh, how about Italy? You have a former PM, convicted of Tax Evasion threatening to break the coalition government because he wants to throw a tantrum.

I'm not trying to deflect from the current situation in the US but we don't have a lock on stupid. Also you'll find out as well that usually members of Congress will still get paid or will have their back pay paid in any deal that goes forward.

Comment Re:Complete whackjob (Score 1) 513

I've dumbed it down a bit, but you are still finding an prosecuting bad guys for doing illegal things. It is just done illegally.

I used the term fake evidence chains, I probably should have said "Fake Chains of Evidence" which is tantamount to tampering with evidence. I would argue that now we have a lot of convictions of Drug Pushers, Importers, Kingpins etc. that would have to be retried and with a fair judge, there may be motions to supress anything that was from a made-up chain of evidence that the DEA can't back up any other way. We may not have a perfect legal system but the fact that now you have prosecutions that could be called into question because of questionable evidence may mean that a lot of dangerous people get released or we spend millions of dollars on re-trials. The other question is that if the DEA is making shit up just to get a conviction, what other government agencies are getting spoon fed info from the NSA in order to convict people of crimes in the same way? If it's just a few clicks on a computer, a phone record here, a GPS location from a cell phone there you could probably convict somebody just for being in the same area at the same time something happened even though you had nothing to do with it. Let's see, you were in the Park last Saturday and a Kilo of Cocaine was sold. You were over by the swing set, they were over by the bike racks but your GPS is the same as theirs, and your phone records show that a friend of a friend of a cousin of a friend knows the seller, therefore you're in their social network graph.. Guess what! We can trump up evidence that you're involved and get you convicted as well. That may sound extreme but logically I think it can already happen and maybe already has.

Comment Re:No Surprise (Score 1) 513

Europe is complicated and while I'm no economist I can say that Banks, the EU and Germany wants austerity but the problem with that is with high unemployment and an expectation of high social program spending, where does the revenue come in? You can only tax the wealthy and corporations so much before that money shifts somewhere else. With the "strings attached" bailouts in Greece and other nations in the EU, you have governments having to accept terms and conditions that make them unpopular with their citizens and actually create more misery. You also can't keep spending more than you take in and while raising taxes and reducing programs is a start in these countries I don't think you'll be able to ween people off the government teats. It's a vicious cycle and as Margaret Thatcher said "The problem with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other peoples' money." So what do you do then? You've taxed everybody to the point of hilarity and yet you're still spending more than you can afford. People and Companies with half a brain and money will move to countries that are more favorable in terms of tax policies which makes the situation worse. It's already happened in the US with states like Maryland passing additional taxes on high incomes to balance the books, with negative results.

But back to third parties. I wouldn't advocate having 30 parties in this country but what about the ability to write-in candidates? In all states it requires petitions with 10s of thousands of signatures to be eligible to run for state office, that takes resources and only the Democrats and Republicans can consistently get their candidates on a ballot, why? Because they wrote the rules and they have huge coffers and committees dedicated to getting slates of representatives elected in multiple states. That squeezes out the possibility of an independent or a third party candidate from getting any kind of momentum and in the last presidential election where a third party candidate made an impact, was 1992 with Ross Perot where to the chagrin of both parties he took votes away from their candidates, almost 20 million. Clinton that year only won with 44 million votes so what Perot did was quite significant and it probably cost GHW Bush the election.,_1992 That was over 20 years ago and no third party candidate has made that kind of impact. Sure, Perot threw tons of his own money into it and that's my point about money in politics, whoever has the biggest war chest usually wins. Republicans and Democrats have spend decades tuning the funding system, the coffers are full and big money is not playing a bigger part with folks like the Koch Brothers pushing their draconian agenda into the fray. But they're not the only ones, Defense Contractors, Government Contractors and a slew of special interests constantly bombard DC with their lobbyists and their money, buying access and ultimately they get the ears of the representatives. It's so bad now that members of Congress don't even write their own legislation, they get it from lobbyists and plaster their name on it as the sponsor. So, the only way to cure it is to get the elected elite out of office, push alternative candidates from alternative parties and to get campaign finance reform in place then maybe you'll see some true intellectuals and leaders step up, ones that don't have the connections or the money backing them but ones who can actually lead and who have a vision.

Slashdot Top Deals

Whoever dies with the most toys wins.