Posts by Scorchio!!

Shetland 'Topiary' suspect extended in custody for 3 days

Re: The important question is

"Did Topiary hack GW Bush?"

What a disappointment it would be; nothing in the brain, or brainstem, except perhaps for a (cough) 'pretzel'.

Re: "Police landed in a light aircraft before grabbing their man and leaving"

"in a slightly heavier aircraft."

Hey, surely Neo has no weight?

UK Cops 'duped' into arresting wrong LulzSec suspect

Re: You mention falling?

Childish, but that roughly what I've come to expect from that side of the debate. In responding you took the comments completely out of context, which was the importance of conducting interviews in meat space. Billy Connolly? Things have changed a lot since since he flowered. Police officers even go to prison for perverting the course of justice, and more will in the near future. Just watch the NoTW debate, which will become even more torrid.

Re: Why the heck...

"Better, haven't they heard of Skype?"

Skype does not give full data on non verbal behaviour, thus is not very informative where a suspect is dissimulating. The other face of the coin is to be found in PACE, in which police forces are compelled to video record in such a way that the behaviour of interviewers can be assessed for threatening behaviour, as well as the behaviour of suspects.

There is also the small matter of keeping the suspect in jurisdiction so that information pertinent to the offence can be served up in real time for interview purposes, plus the need for interviewers to understand the local culture when interviewing. This informs interview techniques, including ways of tripping up an interviewee, knowing how valid their responses are, and so on.

This use Skype thing that occurs each time Assange and others are mentioned is a natural response amongst people who believe that electronic crimes can be investigated electronically, but it really does fall flat on its face as far as policing, forensic psychology and forensic psychiatry are concerned.

Re: Clarification

Sprecken sie Norn?

Re: Scots Law

He's wanted for questioning in the jurisdiction where the damage was done. That would be like Gary McKinnon, Adil Nasir, Carlos the Jackal [...].

Police arrest alleged LulzSec hacker 'topiary' in Scotland

Re: Interesting point...

"Anyone who isn't IANAL but wants to explain that to us?"

It doesn't take an Einstein or a lawyer to work out that the damage was not done in Scotland, UK.

Re: @Scorchio!!

"Given the living hell that kids go through in the Japanese school system, refusal to go is practically an indication of sanity."

Granted, granted. My point however was pertinent to my discipline; there is no such thing as such a syndrome as postulated. Cluttering up a taxonomical enterprise with mythical objects is the sort of thing that I'd expect from PC twats like the British Labour party. Oh wait... ...most of my colleagues are PC twats. I withdraw my respect for them unconditionally.

Re: Personally

I could do it. I use pattern matching software just for a start. HTH.

Re: RE: @Matt Bryant re : "Alledgedly" (sic)

The OP seemed to be engaged in a typo pouncing session. I touch type about 120 wpm, have reasonably good English and I make typos. You ain't alone.

Re: If he actually is Topiary

"My last comment in this thread was deleted by a mod and the only reason I can see is I said something specific about what he's meant to have done in LulzSec "

Nah, the moderators would NEVER delete comments that refer back to verifiable evidence in public ownership. They just don't do stuff like that, any more than commentards voted down truths they dislike!

Re: A travesty

"As a parent I am appalled that a vulnerable individual should be dragged all that way just because a few organisations can't run their web sites properly."

Although not a parent I agree. In fact I think we should prosecute the site owners, the police, the internet police and society should also be in the dock, especially rubber neckers like us.

Re: At least the English will find out where Shetland is now

Something the Scots do not like is the largely Scandinavian history of the Shetland/Orkneys. I'm away from my base for a few days, but have some interesting links on the dubious giving to Scotland of these islands. It was at the time the subject of strong dissent.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Possessions_of_Norway

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shetland

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norn_language

http://www.nornlanguage.110mb.com/

Their relationship with Scotland and the UK as a whole is reminiscent of Jersey. For more on the interesting relationship with Iles Chausey see this: http://uk.ask.com/wiki/Chausey As you browse remember that most Europeans are descended from some 11 breeding females.

Re: Psychological disorder

"....... or are we going to go with 'fear of Greek markets' again ?"

There is a relatively recent development from Japan. A disorder in which offspring not only stay at home, but remain locked in their rooms. Parental contact is almost completely reduced to mealtimes, when food is shoved through the door. This kind of silly crap will fog up the new DSM unless good leadership is exercised.

Here are some other specimens that I dug up when looking for a link to give you on the above. First of all we have 'school refusal syndrome':

http://www.usjp.org/jpeducation_en/jpEdProblems_en.html

Then we have, shock horror, 'Paris Syndrome':

http://forums.liveleak.com/showthread.php?t=81306

Paris, for obvious reasons.

Anonymous hacks Italy's critical-national-IT protection

Re: Is this actually hacking, or is this a leak?

Sent in by a hack journo, formerly working for the NoTW.

Grenade-gasm autogun gets Raoul Moat Taser shells

Re: Metal Storm, the reason why

It gets better or worse, depending on your choice of side:

http://www.metalstorm.com/release/Channel10news.html

Re: Nope

That's something that I could never work out; if they're dead how can they be killed?

'There's too much climate change denial on the BBC'

Re: Think you need to bone up a bit more Scorchio

WTH? I don't see why you pick an argument. All forms of energy are finite. The source of nuclear energy is by definition finite.

If you looked more carefully you would see that I favour nuclear power in the long run. It has a better safety record than hydro, coal and the others, because so few have died from it and so little damage has been done to the environment, and better longevity.

Read Fred Hoyle, Energy or extinction: the case for nuclear energy [ Something I've quoted on Reg fora before: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Energy-Extinction-Case-Nuclear/dp/0435544314 ]. We have been floating on the carbon bonanza for a long time, and most of the alternatives are not a substitute. There are wave solutions, but not all countries have a coast, and not all countries have sufficient sunlight to make our inefficient use of solar power effective. I favour this form of wave energy: http://www.searaser.com/ It beats everything that I have so far seen, but it is not enough.

I have read a lot about the subject. I am aware of the poor returns from solar power. Some figures from FoTH and GP have become nuclear converts. There is nothing like a long cold winter (ah, Cinderella, how are you tonight?) to make educated hypocrites think. Renewable energy is as much a gamble as hydrocarbon solutions are. Read Hoyle, observe his calculations, and you will see why. Don't return with a culturally relative "that's old fashioned" response, it does not count. The maths do not add up. Renewables are good, but not good enough.

And you chose to pick an argument with me? Silly, silly, silly. I'm fairly objective about the spectrum of energy supply and I have fewer hangups with nuclear power.

Re: I've seen it often

" Whenever I've seen the Environmentalists campaign against new nuclear or coal power stations. When the question gets asked - "Ok fair enough but what do you suggest as a viable alternative to help sustain all our growing energy needs over the next 100 years?" "

Only nuclear can do it, but even then there are limits on the material used. Even if we crack fusion there is a limit. Sadly.

Re: Please Professor do tell us from which fag packet you got that gem?

The trouble with so many anonymous posters is it's impossible to tell who is addressing whom about what.

I've got a few links on species latitudinal, elevatory and (effectively) temporal migration and related international data on ice if you are interested. They are a useful elaboration on the principle of testing something in different modalities to see if its effects are consistent. That's not to say that I think the correct term is anything other than 'climate change'.

Re: Global warming is a fact

"The deniers" [...]

Firstly, when people use the argumentum ad hominem, use aggression and and subjective terminology they are *not* going to recruit the sympathy, insight and cooperation of their targets. They will in fact inspire negative reactions, and that is piss poor psychology.

Secondly, the correct term is 'climate change'. This refers to the confusing constellation of phenomena, whereby some oceans have higher water levels than others, some countries have experienced drops in temperature, some countries have experienced increases in temperature, and so on. It's noteworthy that some species have had to migrate either upward or toward the pole in their hemisphere, because of local changes in temperature, and so on.

It's also worth noting that the immediate international restrictions on air traffic, particularly in the US, immediately after the WTC disaster resulted in brighter skies. A scientist in Israel had been measuring sunlight levels for some years and observed that the immediate drop in aeronautical exhaust trails counteracted the phenomenon often termed 'global dimming'. Technically global dimming should cause temperature drops.

These various phenomena highlight the need for terms that do not favour any particular explanation. Currently in the UK we seem to be experiencing lower temperatures than those to which we had recently adjusted, which were far hotter. These phenomena do NOT mean that we should favour an explanation in one direction or another. Certainly the Atlantic heat conveyor has been affected by climate change, but even then it's not certain if this will result in colder or even warmer weather.

The only thing that I can say for sure is that most negative portrayals of the hockey stick data start with data from only a short time before the 'stick' appears. If all of the available data are plotted on the graph it looks different; as a scientist I take exception to such misrepresentation of the data, which is worse than 'curve fitting' or 'bending', and resembles more closely the activities of Procrustes, who cut off the legs of guests that were too big for his beds, and stretched the bodies of those who were 'too short'.

We have to take the data as they are, over as long a period of time as possible (it's the average, the general, that matters, not the particular), and similarly treat with the world in a manner that is not deleterious. That makes good sense; it makes sense not to cause acid rain (as we in the UK once inflicted on Scandinavian forests); it makes sense to find non polluting power sources for transport, heating and so on; it makes sense to reduce our population [see http://populationmatters.org/ ]; it makes sense to grind rocks down and return more trace elements and minerals to the earth, both to undo the damage that centuries of farming have done, and to eliminate our reliance on phosphates, stocks of which are running low, while it is also bad for the health of people living near to farms... ...it makes sense to eliminate CFCs and other contaminants from aerosols [...].

There are many reasons to change our behaviour. It makes sense to refer to the tangible, kickable reasons whilst demonstrating the effects of such changes; it does not make sense to use the argumentum ad hominem in the 'climate change' debate, because it may have a worse effect than not saying anything.

Finally, it makes sense to remove the heat from the argument and point to tangible reasons for eliminating behaviours that damage us and our environment. For example motor exhaust seems to have an effect on health. Cutting down trees and thereby destroying root cultures eliminates the ability of an ecosystem to retain moisture, causes floods and droughts, and results in poor crops. The bigger questions we can handle later, when more data have been accumulated. For the now we need to tackle the obvious stuff, or the baby will be thrown out by the bath water.

So why not lay off the argumentum ad hominem? Why not use more tactful methods of recruiting collaboration and cooperativeness from the people you oppose? It makes as much as sense as the principle of changing behaviour irrespective of the climate change, because they are inherently better for us.

Data?

The twerp offers no data, no evidence, to back up his claims about critics of the BBC, aside from his cod psychology, which is barely digestible.

The Beeb is too large. Like everything the last government touched it has outgrown the house. It has become a powerhouse in the political correctness industry, and it takes good ideas to extremes.

LulzSec says it will partner with media on Murdoch emails

RE: So...

"To attack Murdoch for his alleged involvement in a media backing scandal, they're going to encourage the media to... get involved in another media hacking scandal.

Right."

Ah, but to paraphrase Robin Cooke, this would be 'hacking' with "an ethical dimension". [ http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/1997/may/12/indonesia.ethicalforeignpolicy ]

UK, Dutch cops cuff 5 more in Anonymous-LulzSec raids

Re: New laws

" "Next there will be calls for new (privacy destroying) laws to help them catch the cyber-terr'ists."

Yup.

And THAT is the real crime that LulzSec & Anonymous are committing - expanding the climate wherein *everyone's* privacy is further erroded and diminished. If I didn't think Gov't to be too bloody clueless to manage, I'd suspect them of being agents provocateurs. In reality, I think they're just self-absorbed idjiits with no eye to the long-term consequences. "

Yes. As surely as night follows day:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12007616

Re: The fun has just begun

Lots of people seem to think it's funny and that only the easy pickings will be nicked. Time will tell.

14 arrested in crackdown targeting Anonymous

Subject NK

These are the first of many. Lay in popcorn, Châteauneuf-du-Pape, Badger beer, Poachers ales, Jamesons, Bushmills or whatever hits the spot. There will be trails of tears across the world as people try to convince juries that they honestly didn't know what was happening. That includes the core members.

Assange™ in court to fight extradition order

Re: @Ian Michael Gumby

...and yet awhile, both Assange in meat space and his chorus here are labouring the point. A valid EAW for a specific offence has been issued, and Assange has contested it in a long route that seems so typical of (alleged) offenders these days, who never seem to hold up their hands. That would be, in this case, a man with 25 convictions, including; 1) stealing passwords from US Air force 7th Command Group in the Pentagon; 2) for hacking computers at two universities; 3) hacking computers at two telecommunications companies; 4) hacking computers to monitor the Australian Federal Police investigation into *his* criminal activities. Then there is the matter of his pre-conviction sexual activities with the 16 year old who bore his child, and more recently Wikileaks in which he's succeeded in making money from stolen classified data. One hell of a profile. One which involves giving only a small sum to Manning's defence fund.

Small wonder that the debate is so long, back and forth, though the denials on the part of his chorus (which initially included people who *denied* that he is a convict, roundly turning on me) are a little worn and hackneyed now, and even include something that I thought I would never see; minimising Assange's alleged offences by proxy. Thus it is that people have been speaking here of 'minor sexual offences'. Oh Ken Clarke must be amused by this case, and has I am sure had sight of the papers.

'Minor sexual offences' indeed. Leaving semen in the reproductive passage against the owner's will can cause death [ http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-10983227 ]. Minor indeed.

Re: @Norfolk 'n' Goode

Soon all will be clear:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14139329

I have a strong feeling that Julian will be leaving, 'on a jet plane, won't know when he'll be back again'.

Re: @AC

"The one thing I have to wonder about is mens rhea. That is if Assange does get tried on the rape charge, could he argue that he's innocent because of the absence of mens rhea?"

Thorny issue. In the UK where, e.g., stalking is concerned, the emphasis is not on cognitions, but a 'course of conduct'. That means to say that an individual by means of their behaviour is at risk in some way or other of harming another. As I've observed earlier, where accused parties invoke mental illness, they are effectively saying that they are not responsible for their behaviour and at risk of harming others in the future; this leads to section 37 of the Mental Health Act 1983 (and later additions) , a court order, and then quite possibly section 41, a restriction order. These are worse than prison. (Thus those who claim their offences are due to Asperger's syndrome are taking a huge risk; I have seen people in secure units claiming their Asperger's syndrome is the cause of their offending behaviours).

So should he claim a neuropsychatric condition or mental illness is responsible, he's probably taking a risk in most western countries.

The lack of mens rea could be attributed to ignorance of local laws, but that is close to irrelevant in modern legal systems. This is because the previously noted course of conduct criterion (derived from modern behavioural psychology) has usurped the emphasis on cognitions. Take the example of a poster who the other day accused me of ranting, where in fact I had merely produced a chain of reason; all attempts to point to mental states contained in the 'black box' of consciousness are doomed, since they cannot be seen. On the other hand, references to courses of conduct, facial expressions or any other example of behaviour, verbal or non verbal, are in principle falsifiable, verifiable, open to replication in psychology/other laboratory/experimental circumstances, across the world.

Consciousness is a fleeting thing, not verifiable. We do not even know what a thought is. It cannot be laid out on my laboratory bench and dissected.

So claims about mens rea are no better than claims about gods or fairies at the bottom of the garden instructing an offender to carry out an offence, unless mental illness is invoked. Claiming that he shagged a woman without using a condom and/or against her will, out of love, disregards the rights of the individual, so no, not possible.

Finally, local laws have to be obeyed, in the same way that western women are required to dress 'modestly' in certain Arab countries, though it has to be said that we here are not making a very good fist of imposing our equivalents of law onto newcomers and visitors.

If Assange tries to claim that Swedish laws are not valid where he is concerned, a claim of fairly extreme cultural relativism, he effectively says that almost anyone in any country, visitor or not, can decide that the laws of that country are not valid.

Interestingly this does put the matter of jurisdiction into the forefront and into context.

Re: @AC re SAPO ... Puleeze give it a rest...

"Will the UK let him back in? Maybe/Maybe not."

What an interesting question. If he is convicted of rape he will have to register as a sex offender though! This would mean that he would be required in law to give his address to the authorities, and perhaps report to a probation officer at specified intervals.

The possibility that he would have to attend a sex offender treatment course rears its head. There is no reason why any sex offender should be exempt on any grounds here. Whatever indications other Reg posters may wish to give, sex offenders are a matter of considerable concern in this country.

Also I should think that the humiliation he would endure might perhaps be too much for him. Everything would be game, right down to the 16 year old girl (as she then was) who gave birth to his son, and his status as a convict on some 17 counts in Australia, the matter of criminal profiles (progression from one offence to another, throughout the developmental process) and the relation of Wikileaks to his offending profile which, as I have already pointed out, already consists of multiple convictions. To correct my earlier assertion, it is as high as 25 counts. I underestimated his industriousness.

Re: So.....

"'Recipient of alleged materials'

So he's a fence, trading in stolen goods.

Ok, lets try - someone who enriches himself through the criminal acts of others and tries to wrap it up as 'public interest'. Isn't that like that dear lady who used to run the News of the World?"

That is similar to something I said a few months ago, pre-NoTW. Perhaps Wikileaks should henceforth be known, either as Leaks of the World, or Wikileaks on Sunday.

Re: One thing this case will do

"Is that the Assange case will be a test of how far the EAW can go, and the level of evidence that is required to extradite someone."

Far from it. Assange was to have been arrested - and as JMB points out that was preparatory to charges being brought - but flew the coop; whilst his lawyer claimed not to have had any contact from the Swedish police on the matter, he admitted in a British court that he had communications from them. That is as good as the Swedish lawyer admitting, in a court of law, with a judge as a witness, to lying. It is also the case that he appears to have colluded with his client, that is to say, he appears to have communicated information to his client that led him to flee jurisdiction.

So no, the Swedish CJS want their suspect back, and the lawyer really does need a good spanking. Test of the EAW? Oh FGS, this is far from a test, this is a routine process of recapturing a suspect who was to have been charged and would have been, but (it would seem) for the activities of his Swedish lawyer.

Whereas rights imply duties and vice versa (this is what is known as a necessary relationship), it is the case that, whilst the freedom of movement and trade throughout the EU is exists in law, it is necessary to create in law trans EU arrest powers, to match that freedom of movement and trade throughout the EU. It does not take much effort to consider what the implications are here; otherwise whilst the Costa del Crime could be resurrected, this is a point of law that can only be overturned by challenging the free trade and movement basis of the EU. It would be akin to instating the sort of draconian intra state restrictions on travel, trade in the former USSR. Or destroying the EU, which was supposed to have - in its early formulations as the coal and steel federation, EEC, and so on - bound Europeans together and prevent a third world war.

Ironically this legality is not matched by a set of fiscal, political and legal controls that would make the Euro a safe currency. That story is currently unfolding in the EU, with even Italy and Spain facing wrack and ruin, possibly us.

Re: @ratfox

"So I guess he's going to be laughing all the way to the bank."

Or to sharing a bunk with Bubba.

Re: I think he offered to talk to the investigators here...

1) It's been established that he fled Sweden when his lawyer advised him that an arrest warrant an interrogation were pending, 2) just as there is freedom of movement for people in an everyday sense, the EAW is not an extradition warrant, 3) the Swedes have made it clear that they could not extradite Assange to the US without UK authority, and appear in any case disinclined to do so, saying they would let the US have priority on him in the UK courts for the purposes of extradition to the US, and the US have made it clear that they do not yet have a case.

So the US stuff is irrelevant, and the determining factor here is Assange's flight from Sweden on being told by his legal representative there that the Swedish police were about to pull him in, for which said representative is in trouble with his own professional body. As to Assange's flight, it is a pity that the police trusted his legal representative, never mind the light in which Assange's behaviour has to be interpreted.

There is no longer any such thing as extradition between EU countries, that's the rationale behind the EAW. Pretty much the same arrangement exists between England, Scotland, the Channel Islands, the Isle of Man, Northern Ireland [...] which have different legal systems.

As far as the need for questioning in Sweden is concerned, it is their jurisdiction, their job to hold him whilst questioning, and it is necessary to have full access and a complete set of jurisdiction related resources for the questioning. That way they control access to him, thus (e.g.) preventing other witnesses or individuals associated with him from manipulating the case by agreeing to make statements that cast him in a good light and support him. That is the job of the Swedish authorities, in whose jurisdiction the allegations have been made.

It additionally bears mentioning that the legal niceties of the case itself are Swedish, not British/English.

The question of face to face interviews and body language has been mentioned (from the perspective of, e.g. PACE, and indeed modern forensic psychology and interviewing techniques) and, frankly, all suggestions of doing it via British police proxy, over the net, over the phone, or by popping by for a visit represent a complete lack of understand of several issues; these include jurisdiction and precedent, the use of body language during interviews as a means of detecting dissimulation, and as I say having him in jurisdiction enables them to hold him, check out the veridicality of his responses, return to tackle him on mismatches and so on.

No. Back to jurisdiction.

Re: Extradited for questioning?

"I did not know that this was possible. You live and learn."

EAW not extradition. Perhaps remedial reading lessons will help here.

"I will still laugh very loudly if after all that circus, he™ is found guilty of minor sexual assault, and given six months with probation."

Will you? Sex offenders worry you very little then. I see.

Re: I've an idea.

"If they just want to question him, and haven't decided they want to charge him, then someone could come over here and question him, yes? You could even do it over the phone."

No, for several reasons. Remember that his Swedish legal representative claimed the police had not been in touch to tell him they were going to issue an arrest warrant (and that Assange suddenly flew around that time), something which transpired to be untrue during the hearings in this country, when the lawyer in question looked at his cell phone and admitted there were communications from them. So there is a clear legal precedent, namely that the Swedish CJS wanted to arrest and interview Assange, who left Sweden before they could administer the warrant; Assange's legal representative is in trouble with his professional association over the question of whether or not he tipped off his client about the impending arrest and interrogation. This is the sort of thing that I would expect from a corrupt 1960s lawyer in respect of a criminal client, in the UK.

Secondly, interviews have to be conducted face to face, not over a telephone or internet link for a very strong set of reasons; just as under PACE all interviews for serious crimes have to be scrupulously video recorded so that the body language of interrogators can be scrutinised by the defence for threatening behaviour, so it is important for interviewers to be face to face and able to scrutinise their interviewee's behaviour in minute detail, even greater detail than a recording or internet connection would give. This enables them to detect changes in behaviour and tailor their questions accordingly. Non verbal behaviour is as important to the interrogation process as the spoken word.

This has to take place in the appropriate jurisdiction (one of the reasons why there is such a thing as the European arrest warrant, which arose partly due to the growth of the Costa del Crime), and more importantly in the jurisdiction where the original intention to arrest had been formulated and communicated to Assange's lawyer.

An interesting question has to be asked; aside from the illicit behaviour of a public defender in providing information that would enable his client to flee from arrest, Assange did leave the country before the warrant could be executed. Why? This does not strike me as the behaviour of an innocent man.

Clearly the Swedish police do not come out of this very well. They should not have communicated their intentions to the Assange side of things, and they should also have been prepared for a man with such an itinerant profile to flee.

Sunday Times accused of blagging Gordon Brown's records

Re: I always thought it was

Ooh Betty, I shall report you to (Shadow) Deputy Obergruppenführer Harriet Harman. She'll be on your roof in the morning! ;-)

Re: @JP19

Savour this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/9535374.stm

I've watched it 3 or 4 times, simply because I was amazed at the self belief and insightlessness of the 'journalist' who sat outside of Steve Coogan's house.

'Unconvincing' Met top cop Yates: My phone was hacked

Re: Exactly

"Exactly. If Vaz can have something bad to say about you, then blimey you must be bad."

Filkin enquiry, Hinduja affair, Nadhmi Auchi, suspended from House of Commons for making a false allegation against a former police officer, Eileen Eggington... ...isn't putting him in charge of this committee/enquiry a bit like allowing the Kray Twins to run the West End of London? His imperious flourish at the end, that he found Yates' evidence, unconvincing, is hilarious; I agree that it is, but coming from Vaz...

Wikileaks loses briefly-open Icelandic payment channel

Re: Private Eye

"Lyndon B. Johnson who happened to own all the radio stations in Texas at one time attempted to bias the election in his favour but was told by the FCC in no uncertain terms he was legally obliged to give equal airtime to his political opponents or be shut down.

Similarly, Visa and Mastercard have NO rights political or otherwise. They have OBLIGATIONS and failure in those obligations is a criminal offence, unless of course, someone else is calling the shots."

I have only just noticed this. From only a brief scan I noticed that you make a category error, by conflating banking with radio broadcasting during elections. There is nothing in common between the two. Banks can refuse business if they want, but do keep it up. As to private eye, another conflated issue; I have not seen them hosting thousands of secret documents, half inched from another government. Perhaps they're doing it quietly, right?

Re: If you piss in the pool....

"...you may be asked to leave."

What if he's also pissed in the gene pool, I ask rhetorically.

Hah

As a woman I know often says, "Shit happens when you party naked". Julian has been partying for a long time. Whining about the consequences is as silly as complaining when you bait someone with sharp sticks and they put your lights out... ...though of course this whining will, he thinks, gain him more support. However, the more I watch him the more I think of Rupert Murdoch; self appointed, not elected, inflicting his preferences on the world without consultation, or acknowledging the sovereignty of electorates.

Tomorrow Julian will I hope find that a legally applied arrest warrant is just that, and that flitting Sweden was a silly thing to do.

His legal council in Sweden may by now have been dealt with by his professional association, who appear to be very annoyed with him, on account of lying about being contacted by the police (in fact he magically found a text from them, whilst giving evidence in a UK court!). Then then there is the matter of whether or not he was complicit in Assange's flight from Sweden, thus evading the Swedish police's attempts to arrest and interview him.

Additionally, I would expect the Swedish police officer who notified Assange's legal council of his impending arrest to be the subject of disciplinary and retraining procedures. No one comes out of that incident looking very good.

ANONYMOUS: Behind the mask, inside the Hivemind

Re: @Scorchio!!

"The only thing that you have accomplished with your rants is to prove the old adage that one man's freedom fighter is another's terrorist, and another adage, history is written by the victors...."

No, that is a non sequitur conclusion and precisely what I am not saying, since I oppose cultural relativism, which you would understand if you read my words on logic, epistemology and axiology. Read again carefully; I am clearly saying that the Maquis, engaged in legitimate self defence, in contradistinction to internet vandalism/'lulz'. So your attempt at sophism/intellectual sleight of hand is failed.

The OP has effectively put the Maquis into the position of being terrorists when they opposed an aggressive, adventurist, barbaric and murderous enemy shared by most of Europe. (Perhaps you are not aware of what happened in mid 20th century Europe, though that stretches even my imagination to snapping point.) This is an exercise in cultural relativism and sophistry that a) enables others to claim that by (say) hunting you down and killing you they are fighting for a cause, b) enables states to hunt down and kill whomever they choose (other than cultural relativists who thought that destroying the WTC was 'good terrorism' and acted on said thoughts), and c) makes concepts in jurisprudence and law relative to the perceiver (this sort of argument allows for, say, Muslims to beat their wives, female circumcision, male subincision, judicial murder [...]). That you did so by employing the argumentum ad hominem, interpolating in an exchange where someone was called out and challenged to justify their response, failing to provide any data that would defeat the status of my argument, shows that you recognise the argument to be a failure and that you are trying to distract me from the original point. Calling reason a rant, and not focussing on the argument itself - the argumentum ad hominem - is piss poor logic/epistemology and a weak technique for justifying failure to address the facts. It leaves me feeling convinced that you know the indefensible has to remain undefended, finding the argumentum ad hominem an easier task. Oh, but that would be a troll, wouldn't it?

You can address this by dealing with the original point; demonstrate how people who do DDoS, SQL attacks, deface web sites, publish confidential information about other internet users [...] are as brave as, for example, Violette Szabo who died in Ravensbruck concentration camp.

So now I am calling you out too. Address the point; how do you compare internet vandalism with the Maquis and Violette Szabo's death in Ravensbruck conentration camp? Freedom fighters? Inane.

Re: @Matt Bryant

"They "want" to hurt corporations that step over-the-line with regards to freedom of speech/expression - something Socialist Worker is a heavy defendant of and Fox is an enemy of."

This kind of specious argument also informs things like the Warrington bombing, the Guildford pub bombing, the WTC attacks and many others, and that has been precisely my point all along; firstly there are greater consequences than anything originally planned (in the case of attacking the internet presence and activities of a commercial organisation that would be the investors, who in many cases just happen to be pension funds...), and, secondly, I've repeatedly made the point that people who do these things have no legitimate basis for doing so, that they are self appointed, that they are unsupervised and that they inflict their personal preferences on the world, rather than referring to some objective standard, or some attempt to produce something commonly accepted as being the closest yet to an objective standard.

IOW these people are criminals. Be sure of one or two things; people like Assange, the anonymous groups, Wikileaks as a whole, they will be penetrated and they will pay for what they have done. If you think it unlikely, remember that the various Baltic independence groups - Estonian, Lativian, Lithuanian - were seen as lost causes during the years in between the end of WWII and the downfall of the USSR. Once people thought that the Unabomber, Carlos the Jackal, the Angry Brigade, the Barclays Bank bomber, Milošević, Mladić even Arkan [the list is of course far longer, and the prisons of this world are filled with people who thought they would remain undetected] would never fall. Arkan, as you will probably know, was killed deliberately before his trial began, as was bin Laden for whom no trial was planned. Very few people will escape the consequences of these deeds, and people who value their freedom and well being need to remember this. Or face the consequences.

Re: "There is no comparison at all. No matter how hard you try you will not justify your attempt."

"Autotranslate: I can't coherently argue with you so I will just state you are wrong Because I Said So (TM)."

Insightless response. Demonstrate how they scale up alongside one another, making reference to (e.g.) Violette Szabo and other members of the Maquis, who put their lives on the line and ultimately died in concentration camps and other vile places.

As I said, there is no comparison between the Maquis and anonymous vandals who take elaborate precautions to maintain a gulf between their meatspace persona and their digital activities, to say nothing of what the Maquis were legitimately opposing. If you can find anything remotely resembling a comparison produce it. Show me how damn smart you are, that you are not merely an emitter of weak, risible easily iterated clichés.

I'm calling you out and, as I do, I note that you have offered no data at all, merely a reflex, that you have overlooked the examples that I cited.

Sloppy thinking. Anonymously, of course.

Re: Re

"I've rarely heard anyone refer to Tianemen Square Guy by name. I'm sure I could look it up, but its hardly a common name.

History picks out a few names for us to know about things like the underground railroad, but in truth there were hundreds of unnamed Anons running those ops as well."

It is correct to say that this is a difficult problem of identity. Even the Wikipedia entry's writer is cautious. Wang Weilin seems to be the most consistently named individual:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tank_Man

Whether or not his name is a common one I do not know. I have not seen the stats.

Certainly none of the 'lulz' and Anonymous twits have been as brave and as defiant as him.

In the case of Capt. Charles Upham (VC & bar), if anyone read the article (and I seriously doubt it from the votes on my first response), they will have seen in the closing paragraphs that he *sought* anonymity after the war, was self effacing and probably suffered badly for his experiences, including multiple serious injuries in a number of battles. There is utterly no comparison between the French Maquis, or any other fighting force in any physical war and the behaviour of self appointed anonymous digital vandals without popular/electoral mandate or authority, *none*.

The act of popping up out of a Tor exit node, proxying and then attacking, probably using an unregistered cell phone connection can hardly be described as better than the act of a vandal and coward trying to avoid the consequences of their behaviour, one prepared to overlook the RL consequences of their acts on other people in meat space.

Moreover, comparing the underground railroad to stealing personal data and releasing it into the public space, defacing websites, DDoS, SQL attacks, no matter how elegant and well executed is risible, vain, childish and would appear to indicate a lack of both insight and lack of a sense of proportion. The people who ran the underground railroad were doing something honourable, selfless and humane [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underground_Railroad ]. Destroying business, personal confidentiality [...] is no more honourable than any other form of vandalism. I hardly think that even a substandard troll is capable of believing this.

Re: thanks

"i need not reply in turn anymore, you have pretty much proven my point."

No, and you have failed to demonstrate this is the case.

"now that wasn't so hard, was it?"

Failing to justify your point? If you are satisfied this says much of you, and your ability to reason.

News of the World TO CLOSE

Re: Re: Rebekah Brooks

'"The incredible thing is that Rebekah B. still under full protection from Murdoch...."

Makes you wonder what else she knows about or has got up to over the years for News International to weather such a bad storm for her...'

According to one Beeb report she has said the revelations will continue for about a year. So the feeling of anger about this insightless creature's behaviour [ e.g., http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14088749 ] has to continue for a year. These people have to be given a whipping by public sentiment for their corruption.

Re: ... drinking at the last chance saloon...

"This is just more of the same from Conservatism."

It clearly is the case that Murdoch et al. should not assume sovereign powers and determine policies. Dismissive use of the argumentum ad hominem in a culturally relative form ("This is just more of the same from Conservatism.") is not even remotely valid argumentation, though I'm sure that you are satisfied with it, or you would not have used it; my point is that this (cultural relativism and the argumentum ad hominem) is the weakest form of logic and epistemology. Much better to go with the facts, and my purpose in citing the origins of the debate is, well, to lay down a marker in addition to the 1969 one that I cited later.

Listen to the latest World At One on the BBC's site and you will hear this clearly coming out from all sides. The end clip, with Murdoch accusing those who decry his sleazy journalism as jealousy, is enlightening. No words are added, and it is clear that the Beeb for once are allowing the interviewee to condemn himself out of his own mouth.

Murdoch et al. must go. However, it is not an easy task to break up a company. Monopoly laws are one thing but not, I suspect, relevant here since there are many competitors. Listen to Portillo and Clarke on the Daily Politics to see how this might play out. It will be complex. It will be painful. It may even be that Murdoch's anointed will find herself on the wrong end of her own tactics, as the sacked journalists bring out their personal compendia of notes, recordings, receipts and other forgotten dirt.

As far as deaths are concerned, this is just what happened to Denholm Elliot's daughter. I heard the NoTW journalist concerned apologise for it on Radio 4 the other day, whilst also admitting that this was fruitless because everyone concerned (mother included) is now dead; what he did was to write an article about her prostitution, drug addiction and so on. She hung herself [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denholm_Elliott and http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1433889 and http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b012bxf8

]. So yes, it has to stop and the only way it will stop if people participate. Perhaps at some point a critical mass can be achieved at the expense of this sleazy group.

This will be messy, and I hope that a lot of ordinary people put their weight behind the process of downfall.

I'm grateful to the Murdochs for their transparent and cynical ploy to stay in the game, by making The Sun a 7 day newspaper. This ought to be a knot in the noose.

Universal Music passwords exposed by Anonymous hack

Re: Those unbelievable fools

"I can't believe how many of these big firms are storing passwords in plain text. The first thing I did with the first online project I got involved with back in the 90s was encrypt all the password fields that had been plain text. I was fresh out of high school at the time. Explain to me how it is that a programmer with basically zero experience knows better than to use plain text passwords but all these big corporations can't seem to figure it out."

Meheh. Some people say the rot set in with OOP, which encourages programmers to be lazy with resources and slack with security. On its own perhaps not, but the original Windows share and enjoy philosophy seems to have interacted quite nicely with it.