In other news Barack Obama will be paid $400K for one speech. Which is what his annual salary used to be, while in office.
I wonder, who was more ruinous to the enterprise they were charged with running...
I can't believe, this is happening without the FCC or a similar government organization mandating it — driven simply by the KKKorporate greed and the fear of competition...
Some of the Biggest Economies Aren't a Big User Of Social Media
Is there a lesson here? Maybe, use of Social Media impedes the economic growth?
England was paying for information, paying informants, paying propagandists, jailing and killing people who spoke out publicly against the Crown's control
Citations would've been most helpful here, but let's stipulate, it is all true.
So, in the 18th century Britain was already doing all of that. And in the 20th it did too — and we still regard Alan Turing's efforts as nothing but heroic and decisive in turning the war in the Allies' favor and saving thousands of lives.
Why, then, are so many folks — yourself included — denouncing Turing's descendants at CIA, NSA and their British equivalents in the 21st century? Yes, they could spy on their own citizens illegally and it, likely, does happen — including political opposition. But they do, unfortunately, have a vast number of legitimate targets and their secretive efforts continue to save lives... To sabotage all of their efforts because they could sometimes be abusive is like banning cars because some times people die in them.
It is most refreshing to have a mainstream media outlet call the "leaker" a "traitor", but, when he is found, we are likely to discover, that he was lead to these actions by the Western public's suicidal attitudes towards earlier traitors — Snowden and Manning.
Yep, me too... I was in fifth grade, our new Astronomy teacher — I'm about twice older now, than she was then (darn!) — offered the class to write a program for her for extra credit (I am pretty sure now, she needed it for her own class in college).
I took my dad's Fortran book and coded the thing up — something really simple, a loop doing something with an array... I never got to test it on anything, but I did get the extra credit...
There is reasonable evidence that the Obama Administration used the intelligence apparatus of the U.S. to spy on his political opponents
Yes, that's entirely possible. And yet, the technology has plenty of legitimate uses and should not have been sabotaged.
At the time, workers at Khrunichev were cutting pipelines and removing other components of the module's propulsion system, in order to reconfigure it from its original role as a backup to the Zarya FGB module into the MLM. For example, a set of six tanks, which would be used for refueling of the ISS during the FGB mission, were removed from the exterior of the spacecraft in order to make room for scientific instruments and for the attachment of the European Robotic Arm, ERA.
The official conclusion of the probe said that the contamination had stemmed from the "lack of methodological and technological support for the operations of cutting pipeline connections in the pneumatic and hydraulic system, PGS, which was needed to guarantee the meeting of requirements for ensuring the sterility of the internal cavities in the pipelines and system hardware." It is essentially bureaucratic speak for letting metallic dust formed during sawing off the lines pour into the interior of the remaining components.
According to one legend circulating at GKNPTs Khrunichev, the workers who were sawing off pipelines from the module thought they were dismantling the entire spacecraft for scrap. That story would sound completely unbelievable if not for other almost as incredible incidents of carelessness, poor quality control and incompetence within the industry in recent years, such as the installing navigation sensors on a Proton rocket in the upside down position or loading a Block DM-03 space tug on another Proton with too much propellant.
It is most revealing of the overall systemic problems within Russia's aerospace industry.
As if the the fact that intelligence agency could possibly use a preinstalled microphone of an electronic device, is in any way non-obvious or as if it's problematic that the 'intended' knows about this.
If it really were as trivial as you imply:
Since all of the above did happen, it is not as trivial as you imply. More than likely, some of our enemies have been eavesdropped upon with this tool. And, just as likely, most of them will now make it impossible — endangering lives on our side. Our efforts to thwart them have been impeded and the millions spent on this efforts — wasted. Thanks to the traitor.
Truth is that all terrorists so far used unencrypted normal SMS services and burner phones, or the unencrypted chat services of various Playstation games.
Those are means of communications. When communicating a person may wonder, who else is listening. TVs are used primarily for entertainment — it does not occur to most people, an adversary can spy on them in their living room.
This leaker can only be defended by people, who view NSA (and Britain's equivalent) as the adversary. Presumably, you aren't one of them, are you?
What, you want to make it a secret that intelligence agencies can see the chatlogs of Playstation games, too?
If a dumber among the enemy is still unaware of it, yes, I'd like to keep them ignorant. Even if only 5% of the enemies have a Samsung TV today, I would've liked them to keep on using it — so that my employees at the NSA can be privy to their conversations.
Whoever leaked this is a traitor. It is no different from informing Kriegsmarine, their Enigma codes have been broken.
Yes, the "Weeping Angel" could be used against civilians. But the same was true about Alan Turing's crypto-breaking machinery and their listening for any and all radio-traffic as well.
Like any other weapon or tool It could be abused, but publicizing it defeats its effectiveness against the intended — and perfectly legitimate — targets and is thus bona fide treasonous.
The American Revolution is proof that you are wrong, as they won the war using only paper money.
Nope. They tried using fiat money and quickly realized, that's a losing proposition. Hence the gold standard, which lasted until Roosevelt.
One need only read Plato's Laws to understand how money was always recognized as political, and the gold fetish was alien to Civilization.
Ah, I see, where you are confused... You took my post as advocacy for "gold standard" — which it was not. I merely objected to the GP's claim, that money is: a) inherently corrupting; and b) its importance is somehow new — he used the word "nowadays". The historical examples we both are citing defeat that claim handily — money always was important. Was it always dangerous? Yes — much like an energy-storing battery can explode and/or cause fire, the value-storing money can cause bad things to happen.
Money is not a store of value.
It is a unit of political capital, the value of which is entirely dependent upon the power of the sovereignty that issued it.
Here you are talking about a government's fiat money, which does indeed have the drawbacks you list. But that's irrelevant to my original point.
This is clearly another case of too many mad scientists, and not enough hunchbacks.