Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Get HideMyAss! VPN, PC Mag's Top 10 VPNs of 2016 for 55% off for a Limited Time ×

Comment Re:It's your turn, Mr Assange (Score 2) 289

From the redacted emails that have been released, there have been numerous signs of separate crimes being committed surrounding both gross negligence and willful acts, including where she told her subordinates to remove origination headers, which implies classification (a crime to remove and separately to order others to do it), to send via fax (a separate crime). The same people that have been willfully blocking the investigation (yet another crime) assured the public that this was not classified content.

This is misinformation. Comey stated in the committee yesterday that it was well known in diplomatic circles that the particular phrasing she used meant making the material safe for a third-party and was not an instruction to remove classification headings. And I quote:

Comey said, “Actually it caught my attention when I first saw it, and what she explained and other witnesses did as well is what she meant by that is send it in a non-classified format," Comey said. “In diplomatic circles ('non paper') means something we could pass to another government.”

Comment Re:It's your turn, Mr Assange (Score 2) 289

Ok, how about this evidence:

She testified under oath that there was no classified information sent or received by her email server to the Benghazi Committee. The FBI just had a big press conference saying they found 100+ classified documents that were classified at the time of sending / receiving. The FBI director just testified under oath to the House Government Oversight Committee that there was classified material in the emails, which was classified at the time of delivery.

Pending perjury charges? Probably not, because no "reasonable prosecutor" has the balls to try it.

FBI director stated in the committee yesterday that none of the emails had the required classifications headers and that the only ones that had a classification (C) symbol were specified in the body, in a threaded discussion. There are no perjury charges because according to Comey, it is a "reasonable inference" that she didn't know the material was classified. But hey, don't let me interrupt the echo chamber.

Comment Re:It's your turn, Mr Assange (Score 3, Informative) 289

As compared to the president who thought there was 52 states?

Who was that? Obama looked to me to have started to say "all 50" states, but corrected himself down to 47 in mid thought/sentence, and said fifty-uh-seven. And didn't bother to redact his "fifty" before revising the number down to 47.

I'd hate to be a politician, a single slip of the tongue and a bunch of self-important twats will jump on for it. Here's the snopes that further elaborates on the event you are referring to in your comment.

Comment I like my Windows Phone (Score 4, Insightful) 456

Not ashamed to admit it. I loved my giant yellow Lumia 1520 and the HTC One isn't so either. I find the Metro UI (whatever it's called these days) to be really pleasant to use. In a way I like being the black sheep of mobile users, my phone solves the problems I need it to solve handily and looks good doing it and it doesn't look like the phones of everyone else.

Plenty of iOS devices have gone through our household and I resent how there's still a lingering dependency on them because of old iTunes libraries requiring them. I resent the iTunes interface and how poorly designed it is; a miscarriage on a dinner plate is more appealing than that shitty software. It feels like the whole paradigm is a way to fuck over people.

Android strikes me as a mass consumer oriented product which is probably why it's been so successful. Conformal and uninspiring in every way.

It'd be a shame if the whole Windows Phone platform just died off. I've always told everyone good things about it.

Comment Re:State doing the CYA thing (Score 2) 261

"though they were not classified at the time they were sent to Clinton's personal email"

Legally, it doesn't matter that the emails weren't classified at the time they were sent. Classification doesn't depend on markings, classification depends on content. If you strip the classified markings from an item that doesn't mean it isn't classified anymore.

The article says that the classification was upgraded later, not that it was stripped from the version she received in her email? Your comments regarding classification and markings are interesting but are they really relevant in this case? Maybe I'm missing something but if the information was not classified, and was subsequently released into a public domain, then the information is retroactively upgraded... it's too late, all originator controls are gone? How could someone be held accountable for something like that?

Comment Have you read Odyssey One? (Score 1) 64

A decent sci-fi read by Evan Currie, the book has a concept similar to this for the purpose of camouflage and defense against lasers. I wonder how longer it'll be until researchers can tune the wavelength dynamically as an active laser defense, camouflage or as protection against stellar radiation. Don't get me wrong, mirrors are, you know, cool and all...

Slashdot Top Deals

You don't have to know how the computer works, just how to work the computer.