Feeds

* Posts by Matt Bryant

8107 posts • joined 21 May 2007

NSA: Inside the FIVE-EYED VAMPIRE SQUID of the INTERNET

Matt Bryant
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: Marsbarbrain @Matt Bryant - skelband Outrage

"....I disagree with you because I think you are *WRONG*...." Oh, I know you want to baaaah-lieve I'm wrong, it's just you hate the fact you can't prove I'm wrong. You're now going to post paragraph after paragraph of denial rather than admit (a) people put their secrets up online all the time, and (b) you cannot provide any proof that your coms have been listened to, because (c) you cannot show any harm or the 'chilling of liberty' you insisted is happening.

"....The rest of your response, however is completely irrelevant to the point, so I won't waste time addressing it....." Actually it is very relevant, it's just you CAN'T disprove it, so you pretend you don't have to.

".....It is not whether they are "looking at everything"...." You insisted the NSA and GCHQ already are. Backtrack much?

"...,., it is that they are *trying* to do so...." Bullshit. Why on Earth would ANYONE be interested in your bleating? Please do post even one slightly believable reason why you would be of interest to anyone other than a psych major doing a thesis on paranoid delusions? Please show in any of the Snowjob 'revelations' where it states the NSA or GCHQ want to read everyone's coms. Once again, I expect you to avoid answering that and divert off into another bleating denial.

".... Well firstly I'd say that they should do this by actually using targetted intelligence ...." And how do you expect them to get that targeting intelligence, by calling 0800-finda-jihadi? This IS one of the targeting systems.

".....the Security Services and Police and other such agencies *have* actually been able to do this in the past ...." Big hint - this IS what they have been using for decades! What, you thought the SAS got the Gibraltar Three because they kindly sent a postcard telling Special Branch they were planning a bombing in Gib? You are simply too clueless and naive for words.

"....,Ah, the classic cry justifying State snooping. Why not add "Won't you think of the children" whilst you're at it?....." And why don't you try actually answering a point instead of just evading it. Well, actually it's patently obvious you can't.

"......Trying to dismiss examples of what is happening in other countries as irrelevant just shows that you are simply attempting (as always) to move the goalposts to where you've "won"....." And again, no answer, just denial and evasion. YOU mentioned China as justification for your claim the NSA and GCHQ were 'chilling liberty', now you just don't want to admit what a stupid thing it was to bleat. Yes,I I am 'winning', mainly because you haven't the capability or knowledge to be able to fight back, hence your continued evasions.

".....Like people being convicted of a crime for failing to reveal their passwords *even when* charged with non-terrorist offences....." Apart from the fact that has nothing to do with the NSA or GCHQ, I note you studiously avoid supplying any details. What, don't want to admit your desperate denial is based on paedos?

"......Like someone being arrested and charged for threatening to blow up Robin Hood airport...." Complete failure! That case had NOTHING to do with the NSA or GCHQ, the moron's statement was reported by a member of the public. So you still have provided zero proof off this 'chilling of liberty'.

".....Like the Government wanting ISPs to pre-emptively block "unacceptable" web content based on a secret filter list....." What secret list? The Government has been very open about what illegal activities, such as paedo photo exchanges, it wants to stop. Once again, just because you have a paranoid delusion does not make it reality.

".....Like the State being able to require telecommunications providers to give them people's communication data without any evidence of wrongdoing...." You mean under a warrant, as part of a criminal investigation to find evidence of a crime? If you want to pretend otherwise then please provide a verifiable case of it happening or admit you're just making stuff up.

".....According you, it seems, we should not be concerned about any of these...." Oh, I think your doctor should be very concerned. Enough to refer you for psychiatric treatment.

".....but some of us are not so blindly accepting of the State's intrusion....." Not only do you blindly baaaah-lieve in this imaginary 'State's intrusion' into your private affairs, you do so even when you cannot provide a shred of verifiable proof. Every point I challenged you to provide proof on you have simply ducked. TBH, that's just sad.

1
1
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: Marsbarbrain Re: @Matt Bryant - skelband Outrage

Oh dear, Marsbarbrain has to disagree because.... well, because he just has to disagree with anyone that is not in the flock.

"....First mistake: Not everyone does that....." Agreed, I certainly do not. The amount of sheeple that do and then moan about it seems to be a massive correlation though. I used to work with people that used to set up honeypots, they also used to have success setting up fake Facebook and MySpace groups and 'underground' chatrooms to help them find new skiddies and card cloners hitting the scene, and it was amazing just how stupid some of these people were with their privacy information. It may have escaped your notice that a massive chunk of the NSA's efforts were in gaining access to the unencrypted Google backend because they know that some of the people they need to find are just as naive about security as the average sheeple Not all of them, but some of them definately.

".....Assuming that if people *do* put information on Facebook or Twitter or anywhere else, it gives permission for the authorities to say "well, if they do *that* it justifies us looking at *everything* they do simply because we can"....." Apart from the fact THEY ARE NOT LOOKING AT EVERYTHING, they simply do not have the bandwidth, if you put stuff up on any public social media you give EVERYONE the right to look at it - the Mafia, the skiddies, the PETA morons (oh, you uploaded a picture of your girl in a fur coat?), the marketing junkies (he likes fur, quick, send him lots of fur-related marketing). Oh, and Google/Facebook/MySpace/etc retain the right to give your info to anyone that pays for it, regardless of how private you think it is. Just look at the current noise about the right to be forgotten (which Google et co will use their cash to make sure only ever gets implemented in the lightest of forms).

".....Fourth mistake: Assuming that it makes it easier to find a needle in a haystack by making the haystack even bigger....." So, you would be happy with Police that only patrolled one street in every city? Sure, it would make them really great at fighting crime on that one street, but the rest of the city might be a bit upset at the way crime was ignored and allowed to mushroom elsewhere. That is EXACTLY the problem the NSA and GCHQ face - there is not just one tiny little niche that could be used by terrorist or criminals for communication. Whilst it is easy to say 'just watch the mujahadeen websites and you'll pick up all the sympathisers' (which they do), it does not cover the experienced mujahadeen that might steal other people's online identities and create email accounts and other websites in their names. Serious crime types have been working on anti-surveillance for years, they often employ security experts to try and keep their coms 'clean'. Even the 'amateurs' are getting better at hiding, the Police already have examples of this with paedos hiding their pic exchange websites behind legitimate websites the paedos have hacked. And then we have the other responsibility of the NSA and GCHQ - finding foreign spooks - do you really think the foreign spooks are not hiding amongst the daily traffic, that they use specially designated 'spy-only' coms?

So, saying that they are just making the haystack bigger is moronic, the authorities actually need to cover the whole field as much as possible. The problem then becomes one of analysing the data because NO-ONE HAS THE RESOURCES TO LISTEN/READ/WATCH EVERYTHING, let alone store it. Go back, actually READ the Snowjob 'revelations', you might notice that the vast majority of the data is sifted and deleted without ANYONE actually reading/watching/listening to it BECAUSE IT IS OF NO INTEREST TO THEM. No-one, and I really mean no-one other than your equally deluded flockmembers, have even teh slightest interest in your moronic dribblings. GET OVER YOURSELF.

".....This is not "targetting" anything, unless you think that if you make enough targets you're guaranteed to eventually hit *something*..." So, how do you expect them to find terrorist or foreign spies or criminal coms? How do you think the Police do preventative work, do you really think the coppers all sit around waiting for a crime to happen before they start looking for criminals? Would you really want the authorities to wait until AFTER another 9/11, or 7th July Tube attack, or Madrid train bombing? No, even the sheeple want to be protected. Do you really think the 'bad guys' make it easy for the authorities, that they only use a specific tool or one IP address? Instead of shrieking and whining imaginary fears, if you think there is a better way to do it then please do post it instead of your moronic bleating.

".....Try looking at what's happening in China....." And saving the best for last, there we have the standard sheeple response when challenged to show how the NSA or GCHQ actions are directly affecting them - 'look at China'. Which has nothing to do with the US or UK. It's a separate country with its own and unique security apparatus, moron. There is simply no comparison with either the UK or US, no matter how desperate you are to try and make one. The truth is you KNOW you can't show any harm or 'chilling of liberty', just like you cannot show any actual benefit to the laughable idea that the spooks are building up 'blackmail files' on us all. You want to pretend that your freedom of speech is curtailed yet you bleat all kinds of stupidity right here in these forums without restraint, which would seem to show YOU ARE TALKING MALE GENITALIA. Because the 'harm and the 'chilling' and the 'blackmail files' only exist in the paranoid delusions spoonfed to you and you have zero actual proof of any of the 'nastiness' you claim.

0
7
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: Dylan Failure Re: If only...

"If only we spent as much on 'helping' our neighbors with clean water plants, power plants, cheap communication access, we'd be rolling in the riches of cooperation and team work....." So your extensive research into that 'idea' missed the fact that the US is the single largest contributor to the UN program's that do exactly that? And also the single largest provider of aid to other countries. And the country that generates the largest amount of private charitable donations to other countries. It seems you would reap a lot better understanding if you actually bothered to do some research.

0
5
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: YetAnotherCluelssSheep Re: Outrage

"Do you not realise that your liberty is completely gone if someone else had every scrap of data about you....." Seriously, unwrap the tinfoil. Do you sit down every day and dictate your life-history in an email, web chat or phone call? I know you sheeple have some serious paranoid delusions, but please do explain how Big Brother is supposed to find and store that data on EVERYBODY as you want to baaaaaaaaaah-lieve. TRY THINKING BEFORE BLEATING!

".....I see you as a 'threat' so have a close look at your file....." Ignoring the fact, as admitted in Snowjob's own 'revelations', the vast majority of the data is never even looked at before being deleted. It would seem you need to do less hysterical bleating and a lot more reading before you form another 'theory' - and it is generous to describe the drivel you posted as a 'theory'!

".....just call up the local political elite and use some of the data on them to have a nice law passed....." Yeah, that would work so well, right up until you hit the politician that decided they could make better ratings by exposing the attempted blackmail. And again, if a politician had such a big secret, why the fudge would they be dictating it down a phone line?

0
9
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: skelband Re: Outrage

".....As a race we have a need to privacy..." Apart from the fact that is not illustrating a loss of 'Liberty', you lot also dump tons of private data onto social media such as Twatter, Faecesbook, etc., with gusto.

"....Free speech is chilled by the threat that all is recorded...." Again, you have failed to show that it is actually being chilled at all. Indeed, going by the amount of complete cobblers passed off as 'free speech' on these forums, you're once again talking male genitalia.

"....It gives the illusion of security while providing none....." So you really don't understand that this IS the mechanism that provides the targeting information for more focused activities. Major fail.

0
9
Matt Bryant
Silver badge

Yawn.

Before all the sheeple join Duncan in hysterical shrieking, maybe they should stop for a moment and consider the actual physical evidence.

Firstly, let's look at the claim that vendors are deliberately sending or letting the NSA send out tampered kit 'everywhere'. Duncan, Greenwald and the rest of the shepherds like to claim this is widespread and a threat to us all. Really? If so then we must all be getting duff kit, right? Or at least a large proportion, maybe? So where are any examples of the supposedly 'mass-deployed' kit? Can Greenie (or Duncan) provide a single example of a CISCO router with such an 'extra' loaded? No. But they want to insist it is a widespread threat to everyone's privacy? I do have no doubt that the spies do use specially hacked kit to gain access to foreign secrets on a very limited basis (network printers with hard-drives in Iran spring to mind), but that would have to be a very limited deployment, otherwise some geek messing around in his spare time would have found an example of it by now. So, it would seem that much-hyped 'threat' is actually just that, hype.

Secondly, there is the concentration on the data being gathered, not what actually happens to the data. It is easy for the shepherds to state 'all the coms down a tapped submarine cable were gathered and stored', it generates the right level of paranoia without actually looking at the reality of what happens to the data. The vast majority never even gets watched/read/heard by human beings, being swept for metadata by computers. It is not stored 'forever' but is regularly flushed to make room for new data. This was admitted in Snowjob's own 'revelations' on TEMPORA. Metadata and keywords are used because the whole sifting job is about targeting for further analysis - no-one, not even China, has enough resources to actually sit and read/watch/hear every single communication on the Internet. If China could then they wouldn't need the Great Firewall, they'd simply let everyone talk on the Web, sift out and then arrest all the dissenters. Instead, they had to build a clumsy and incomplete barrier.

Which brings us to the third point - desire being passed off as reality. Duncan even is forced to admit in his article that a lot of what him and the shepherds like to imply is a threat to everyone's privacy now is nothing more than goals that NSA and co aspire to. It is also an aspiration to end World hunger or send people to the next galaxy, we even have some of the technology to do so, but that does not mean those aspirations are going to become realities today. But such qualification doesn't sell copy, advertising space or books, does it?

Which raises another point - why would the NSA actually want to know all our secrets? Does it really add any value? In a few, very rare cases there might be some gain through blackmailing a specific person, but for everyone? Many of the loudest bleaters like to claim this info could be used to rig elections - how? Please do explain, are the NSA going to try blackmailing all the voters of one party? Or just maybe select politicians? The latter would be very risky, it is just begging for exposure, and definitely not guaranteed, so why would the NSA risk it? And it also comes back to the question of if it is only targeting select politicians, surely that means Joe Average is again of zero interest to the spooks? So, no, everyone's secrets are not being listened to, and if they are inadvertently heard due to a sifting error then they are disregarded as unimportant anyway.

And then we have the snarky description of those that would disagree with the shepherds as 'apologists'. LOL, it's just like the AGW debate - 'if you don't agree with AGW then you must be an apologist in the pay of the oil companies!' Thanks, Dunc, but I think it's more of a case that some of us that were already well-informed can do a little more thinking for themselves.

2
12

Anonymous plans hacktivism against World Cup sponsors

Matt Bryant
Silver badge
Stop

Self-defeating?

So, the local Anonyputzs are claiming to be upset at money being wasted? So their great 'idea' is to alienate the corporations that might want to invest in Brazil; get the Brazilian authorities to waste more money trying to defend against their childish DDoS attacks and hacks; and make the companies that would possibly like to use the World Cup facilities after the event has finished (which would make return on the investment that could lead to greater spending locally) think twice about hosting events in Brazil. Wow, these guys are even thicker than the usual Anonyputz norm!

I suspect the reality is these are typical wallflower skiddies that were either too fragile to do sports at school or had no athletic skills. They resent the 'jocks' and their sports and therefore feel the need to throw a tantrum.

1
5

Vodafone: SPOOKS are plugged DIRECTLY into our network

Matt Bryant
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: Anon Cluetard

The Force is seriously weak with this one, the 'arguments' are limper than five-day-old lettuce! It's probably good you post AC to avoid the embarrassment of people laughing at you.

"....Whether that is true or not (and I will only posit that it depends upon the sophistication and precautions taken by the parties concerned), it has absolutely nothing at all to do with a government's mass surveillance of its entire populace. FAIL....." You are desperately trying to avoid admitting that (a) the people likely to be emailing their mistresses are really too stupid to be foreign spies, serious criminals or terrorists, so it was a stupid example to make, and (b) it would be far too likely that people of conviction would reject and report the attempted blackmail, exposing the NSA process - where has this happened, please do provide an example? - and (c) you are wrong again.

".....Er, no I didn't. My original post talked, at some length, about how leverage can be used to yield influence. Going public with that leverage is the "nuclear option". Far more often, the information would be used to exert pressure on the individual and/or their confidantes. FAIL...." Again, you avoid admitting (a) it was a stupid example because it really does not hold enough threat for the majority of people to actually make them unquestioningly comply, and (b) it would be far too likely that many would reject and report the attempted blackmail, exposing the process - where has this happened? - and (c) you are wrong AGAIN!

"....Believe it or not, many medical issues carry significant social stigma. Drug addiction, HIV, mental health issues, erectile dysfunction, cancer... FAIL...." And now you are just avoiding admitting (a) that HIV is still very rare, as is drug addiction, mental health issues, etc., so the chances of a member of the public having any of those conditions is so laughably remote as to make the idea too impractical for mass blackmail and too stupid for words, and (b) that none carry enough stigma for the majority of people to make them unquestioningly compliant, which means people would reject and report the attempted blackmail and expose the blackmailers - where has this happened? - and (c) you are wrong again, again!

"....The mere fact and timing that one is arranging legal meetings could in itself provide significant information....." Yes, that's the targeting information the NSA and GCHQ would be looking for on the tiny minority of calls they are actually interested in intercepting AFTER they have sifted the wheat from the chaff. But that's not what you insisted. You insisted that EVERYONE was having their privacy 'invaded' because they were having their secrets 'exposed' by being caught up in the trawling exercise. Again, you are wrong and just don't want to admit it.

"....conversations with one's legal advisers are PRIVILEGED and it is unlawful for the government to intercept them. Yet they do so. FAIL....." And your proof that they are deliberately intercepting and listening to such conversations? Oh, you don't have any, it's just more of your hysterical bleating. If you read the article on the Bahaman wiretaps, the NSA admitted that, if they realised a recording was of an US citizen and outside their warrant then they deleted it. They would do the same for any conversations covered by US law, but conversations between foreign criminals and their foreign lawyers are not always covered. Oh, but you didn't know that, because you prefer bleating to reading. For privilege to apply under US law, the conversation must be between an US citizen and a foreign lawyer OR between a foreigner and a qualified and registered US legal representative (a member of the US bar or an US court or their subordinate) and for the purpose of legal advice. For example, if an US citizen rings up a foreign lawyer and just brags about a crime as part of a conversation, and that foreign lawyer is not involved in defending an US case against that specific crime, and the call was not regarding legal advice, privilege does not apply. What's more, if the purpose of the call was to commit a crime, then it may also not be covered by privilege even if the call was actually for legal advice. You seem to like throwing around legal terms without actually knowing SFA about them.

"....You're welcome to your opinions....." The problem for you and the rest of the sheeple is my opinions come backed by facts, whereas yours are based on whimsy and wanting to baaaah-lieve.

"....it appears from my vote count alone that my post *was* of interest to more people than yours...." Well, you sheeple do like to flock together. I find it very amusing that you base the value of an argument not on its merits but how many sheeple agree with it. Very illuminating as to your desire to 'belong' and your limited ability for independent thought.

"....your totally unnecessary recourse to childish namecalling...." Aw, don't cry. I find it very hard to believe you have led such a sheltered life that someone hasn't called you out on the stupidity that you present as 'thought' before. Maybe you need to grow up a bit more?

"....For that rudeness alone, I shan't reply to you any further...." Because you know you've lost the argument, so now you're pretending at offence to get out of being exposed for an idiot. Enjoy!

0
5
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
FAIL

John Smith IQ of 19 Re: Does the phrase "right to privacy" not register with some people?

".....Not to be recorded and scanned later, along with everybody else......" You fail to supply any detail as to why you think your dribblings would not be ignored by the spooks. Let's suppose they are using the keyword Cameron for example, it would generate thousands of hits daily just from news articles being emailed about. The idea that your bleating would get some special attention just because you want to baaaah-lieve it would is moronic. I would suggest the spooks, having had decades of practice, and obviously having put more than the five minutes of limited 'thought' you put into the matter, are using far more sophisticated filters for even the first pass of the probably very extensive sifting that happens before any such conversation gets to be actually seen/heard by an analyst.

1
5
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: Anon Cluetard

".....And if a person is having marital difficulties, they're supposed to contact their counsellor/mistress/etc without using email? If a person has sensitive healthcare issues, they're supposed to arrange appointments with their doctors without using the telephone? If a person wishes to speak with their legal advisers, they're supposed to do that without using any form of electronic communication? And you dare to call ME a fantasist?!...." Yes, you are a compete fantasist. For a start, any moron that contacts their mistress by email is simply too stupid for words as it is just too easy for their partner to find the evidence. But you also fail to explain how that would be so destructive a secret that it could make someone into Big Brother's unquestioning slave. If you haven't noticed, people get divorced all the time, it's hardly front page news even for senior politicians. And medical issues? Please do explain what possible medical issue could be so implausibly destructive that you would buckle at it's revealing? Before you bleat the usual tosh about transgender or the like, please do look at how incredibly rare that is, even in today's liberal society. And then you suggest you are going to have long, in-depth conversations on legal issues over the phone? Get real - if it was that big a secret you'd only use the phone for arranging a face-to-face meeting. In short, you are not just a fantasist but also a dreadfully unimaginative one at that.

And the you want me to post my details? Seriously? There is a massive difference between the carefully screened and overseen surveillance of trained spooks and the idea of giving details to complete morons like you. Get over yourself, you are simply not of interest to anyone.

0
4
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: Capt DaFt

".....the equivalent of a gang of masked persons of unknown provenance following you around everywhere, taking copious notes of everything you say and do...." Which is not what is happening. The GCHQ and NSA will scan through the metadata to find the very small number of targets for the kind of surveillance you want to baaaaah-lieve is happening to everyone.

1
5
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
WTF?

Re: Anon Cluetard

".....Let's see, what dirt can we find? *scan through the communications history of you, your family and everyone you know....." Which is where the whole paranoid delusion falls down, unless you are in the habit of periodically recording all your sins in an email. What, you're a Catholic and do confession via Gmail? TBH, just baaaah-lieving that kind of stupidity just makes you a menace to yourself, and very unlikely to be clever enough to be a danger to anyone in power. A Chinese finger trap will be sufficient to render you completely incapacitated.

0
5

Report pegs Apple for October smartwatch release

Matt Bryant
Silver badge
Happy

Re: JDX Re: Tringle

Hook, line and sinker! Seriously, if your life is so empty that the release of a (probably girlie white) electronic bracelet excites you then you really are the type of person whose company I would avoid.

0
3
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
Happy

Re: Tringle

"So from October it will be even easier to spot fashion victims....." We should thank Apple for giving us a simpler means to identify those it is simply not worth wasting time with. After all, some of them actually hide their iBones in pockets and bags.

0
3

Brit lands on Rockall with survival podule, starts record attempt

Matt Bryant
Silver badge
Joke

It takes all types, I suppose.

"....and anyone who can't really see the point of his escapade....." OK, I could see the point if it was sixty days stuck on the rock with a suitable bird for company, but just seagulls....

1
2
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: cordwainer Re: Maybe YOUR government didn't make them join the army....

"But here in the US we have something called the "draft"....." Help For Heroes was set up to help those servicemen and women hurt in British military ventures, not Americans. It has nothing at all to do with America or the draft other than how they often co-operate with similar charities in America. So please take you politics and shove them where you have so stupidly placed your own petard.

1
7

Google reaches into own silicon brain to slash electricity bill

Matt Bryant
Silver badge
Facepalm

Re: Destroyed All Braincells Re: Meh.

".....the companies that actually are at the coalface of large-scale deployment work......" Whilst Google certainly are at the coalface, you do not show that they are ahead in developing their solution over commercial offerings. We were making use if similar tech in production DCs waaaay back when Carly Fiorina was still selling us her Adaptive Entreprise kit (Proliant G6 days?), and I'm pretty sure then or then abouts with IBM Power gear too. Google are simply trying to cut out cost by building their infrastructure themselves, but they would seem to be following in the footsteps of others rather than blazing a brand new path.

0
2
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
Meh

Meh.

So, Google have their own trays, in their hand-designed DCs, and they have the problem that their previous energy control amounted to two States - core on or cores off. So, now they have sensors that allow them to match demand by tuning kit up and down. Yay, go Google! Yawn.

This illustrates exactly the problem with DIY solutions over the integrated solutions you get from Dell, hp, Fujitsu or IBM - you have to make the clever stuff yourself. Intelligent system management that looks at what the systems are doing and adjusts power (and intelligent localised cooling, something I assume Google are still working on) have been around on COTS gear for quite a while now. And it's not just the hardware vendors, VMware have had the ability to set power policies in vSphere for a while too. So, yes, Google are clever boys and girls, but this seems to me to be just catch-up with commercial capabilities.

1
2

Piketty thinks the 1% should cough up 80%. Discuss

Matt Bryant
Silver badge
Angel

In the words of Big John.....

"......when I was a sophomore at USC, I was a socialist myself—but not when I left. The average college kid idealistically wishes everybody could have ice cream and cake for every meal. But as he gets older and gives more thought to his and his fellow man's responsibilities, he finds that it can't work out that way—that some people just won't carry their load ... I believe in welfare—a welfare work program. I don't think a fella should be able to sit on his backside and receive welfare. I'd like to know why well-educated idiots keep apologizing for lazy and complaining people who think the world owes them a living....." John Wayne.

1
2
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
Go

Re: Loon AC Another "stop picking on the rich" article

"....One day maybe...." Proceed!

1
2
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
Joke

Re: Loon Re: AC Another "stop picking on the rich" article

Nudges the Piketty fans and points - "Get him, he's one of The Evil Rich!"

1
2
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
Boffin

Re: Loon Re: AC Another "stop picking on the rich" article

"....There was nothing wrong with the mathematics, although to imply that a millionaire and working person earning $100k had a similar standard of living is a bit of a stretch...." Agreed, it is a stretch, but it's meant to be a discussion piece and highlights the difference between disposable income and 'wealth'.

"....The millionaire doesn't have to work for his portfolio income...." True, but then he does have to be clever with it or his wealth will be gone. The history of Europe is littered with examples of 'the rich', even whole countries, that made bad decisions with their wealth and ended up ruined. The Spanish Armada is a perfect example of such an 'investment gamble' that ended up not delivering a return and destroying wealth, effectively bankrupting the Spanish Kingdom. But Piketty bases his whole assumption on the idea that once you are rich you can only get richer, an obvious fallacy as demonstrated by the number of bankruptcies even in 'good times'. A simple example is that of SUN Systems - from a market cap of $200bn to being sold for about $4bn in only a few years, it made a big dent in the portfolio of a lot of techies I knew, and I'm sure it turned some SUN stockholders from 'paper-millionaires' into 'paper-paupers' at the time.

"....The millionaire has a financial cushion should his portfolio stop delivering 10%...." Again true, but then he is disposing of his 'wealth'. Should he not find another means of income then he will eventually burn through his cash and end up one of the 'poor'. If he has never worked and has no skills he is unlikely to find as good a paid job as the man with experience and skills from an $100k job. I can't remember who made the quote, but one British earl, when asked why he insisted his children went to uni and got real skills and jobs, said something along the lines of 'all the rich are one bad day on the Stock Exchange away from hard work'.

".....As a an extra bonus, I'm pretty sure the millionaire would find it much easier to secure lending for a more grandiose business proposition than the worker....." Possibly, but if his investment gamble fails and he loses his fortune, the worker with the skills and experience is probably better placed to pick himself up and try again than the now ex-rich. Again, if Mr Rich isn't smart with his money it does not guarantee he will always be rich, whereas at least the $100k ex-employee has the chance to earn new income in a new job.

1
2
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: AC Another "stop picking on the rich" article

"Finance and Economics have very clearly defined terms......" Wow, you really just can't stand having to admit you were wrong! And - boy! - are you sooooo boring! I can see why you would take comfort in all the careful-constricted statements that Marx makes in Das Kapital, never once stopping to look beyond the clever prose to realise that mankind simply does not work by such rigidly imposed and uniform 'rules'. You are the typical mathematician's failure, thinking that everything can be broken down and reconstructed with set terms and precise mathematical theorems. When all else fails you try and split hairs over definitions. You really do need to get out in this place called The Real World once in a while, chum.

0
2
Matt Bryant
Silver badge

Re: AC Another "stop picking on the rich" article

"....Post the risk-free rate bootstrap calculation....." Puh-lease, you only posted that because you were desperate to avoid the admission your earlier statement, that you could easily debunk my simple example of a person with an income of $100k could live like a millionaire.

".....I'll give you a hint....." Seriously? Apart from the fact you could get that off Google (or Ivestopedia), you are still only avoiding the much simpler mathematical challenge you set yourself earlier. Gee, I wonder why that is - not!

".....the first interview question when you want to get a finance job at a bank...." LOL! Apart from the fact I don't work as an investment banker, I work in computing (big hint - it's a computing website!), I have designed the systems that do those calculations FOR the bankers. What, you're still using a pencil and slide rule for your yield curves? - how quaint! I'm the modern and better option the banks choose because you're obsolete.

As part of my degree I had to cover economics amongst other subjects, hence the additional (and very boring) reading that promptly got forgotten, along with a shedload of other 'clever stuff' (such as the similar curve calculations for predicting decay in transistor junctions at different temperatures, voltages and currents, which I'm sure you won't have a clue how to do). Like a large chunk of those peripheral subjects I studied I simply have never had to make much use of the knowledge.

The difference is I have applied and learned other knowledge in depth, whereas you seem to be stuck at the regurgitating-my-undergrad-reading-list phase. As shown by your reflexive denial of my simple example, declaring it 'bullshit' out of hand, yet then realising that you can't disprove it. First rule of any maths - don't rely on gut answers. So, do you finally want to admit you were wrong or do you want to try some more mathematical willy-waving in an attempt to avoid the fact? It's alright, the rest of the readers have probably guessed long ago that you've just been childishly trying to avoid that admission.

0
2
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: Another "stop picking on the rich" article. to Matt Bryant

"...."Where do you get 10% interest on a deposit from all this?"....." I said investment, not a deposit. Friends in the City assure me it is still quite possible to see such returns on LARGE investments, not kiddie savings. Besides, I picked the 10% figure as it made the maths so simple I was hoping even the sheeple could follow it - apologies for over-estimating your capabilities again.

But, if you like, we can do the sums again with a figure more to your liking, they actually only strengthen my position - that someone earning an $100k income can live like a millionaire - and undermine your insistence that is 'bullshit'. If we adjust the sums and Mr Rich inherits his $1m, if he wants to maintain that amount (and ignoring tax and the long-term loss due to inflation) then he has to live off the interest as income. If you want to drop the rate to say 2.5% (again, I'm hoping that's going to be an a easy figure for you to handle, but maybe you should seek the help of a responsible adult?), then his interest before tax drops to only $25k, giving him an income that is not going to be buying yatchs or attracting supermodels. Which means the prior example of a guy earning $100k is now equivalent to someone trying to live off the income of a $4m deposit!

So, thanks for helping to destroy your own argument even further. Are you sure you really want to try debating this anymore, given your total lack of success so far? We can always re-do the sums with the Fed figure of 0.25% you mentioned if you really want to make yourself look even more stupid.

0
2
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: AC Another "stop picking on the rich" article

".....time to put your math where your Internet is...." Gosh, you're not STILL desperately avoiding providing the debunking of the simple example I made!?! AND after you insisted the only reason you couldn't was because you didn't have the time to waste, yet here you are posting more twaddle. Is someone telling porkies....?

0
2
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: AC Another "stop picking on the rich" article

".... which is where I did my undergrad....." Nil point! Just because the institute had an illustrious record does not mean you have or will have one at all. For all we know, you could be George Soros's love-child and he bought your degree.

"..... I'll make sure that the faculty is put on alert of your findings." Please tell them they also - very obviously - need to tighten up on their admissions policy.

1
2
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
Happy

Re: Tom 13 Re: Another "stop picking on the rich" article

"....because it's crap, long, crap, boring, and crap." Tom, you are taking the fact that it is crap and boring and assuming that the crappiness would discourage a reasonable person from reading it. Therein lies the fault in your otherwise splendid logic - peoples of one religion or another often aren't what might be considered reasonable. They often glorify those that claim to have studied their religious texts, so it really should not come as a surprise that there really are those, like our poor AC, that think reading Das Kapital is a great educational and social achievement.

1
2
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
WTF?

Re: Chris Wareham Re: @ Tom 13

"....to remove us from the EU, making trade with our biggest export markets even more difficult...." Aren't you just repeating the FUD that leaving the EU means the automatic severing of all trade? After all, the rest of the EU does a lot of trade with us, so they would be cutting off their own noses to spite their faces if they decided to get too sulky. The Fwench might go for punitive tariffs it but the Germans probably would be more practical. And sitting outside the EU would allow us to retain control and avoid EU meddling in the one market we are actually much better at than the rest of the Europeans, the financial one you slighted.

1
2
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: JLV sisk

".... I really doubt you care how the majority of the world's people live...." Apart from the fact you seem to have me confused with someone that would actually consider your opinion of any worth, you know that you in fact know SFA about what I do or have done, either here or abroad, so your baaaah-lieve as to my charitable activities are not based on fact but sulking spite. If you wish to prove otherwise then please do supply details on my past. In essence, all you are doing is dressing up your lack of counter to my point with something you like to think is insulting, based on a fallacy you want to baaaah-lieve, but actually makes no impression whilst exposing to all your desperation. Please do fail more, it's quite amusing watching you wriggle and bleat.

".....Judging by the amount of downvotes you tend to collect...." So your analytical capabilities stop at following the opinion of the flock? Wouldn't it be novel if you tried actually thinking rather than simply following the lowest common denominator.

".....You read like a member of the subspecies of American right wingers who thinks social conservatism and dogmatic laissez-faire automatically results in effective economic policies....." Wandering much from the thread? Could it be because you can't argue the points raised? Gee, the sheeple have never used that tactic before! Seriously, we need new sheeple, these ones are getting boringly predictable.

"....I am pretty sure we are both in agreement that Hollande is a looney...." That should be 'loony'. And Hollande is just a typical popularist politician trying to garner support by sticking it to the rich. That doesn't make him a loon, it just makes him smart as he has managed to pull off such an obviously daft ploy and get away with it with the voters. As Depardieu showed, if you annoy the rich too much then the global market makes it vey easy for them to take their toys and cash elsewhere. It would be interesting to see if the change did lead to a noticeable drop or increase in tax revenues, but what Hollande really cared about was keeping his base happy in tough political times.

".....Your "ideas" have about the same dogmatism and absence of rationality behind them....." It is a simple fact that the majority of the World's population do not have clean drinking water, electricity or even regularly assured sources of food, let alone indoor loos or many of the other creature comforts we would consider normal at the 'poverty line' in the West. If you wish to pretend that my 'idea' is not true, that the statement has an 'absence of rationality', then please do provide some figures to prove if only so the readers can laugh at you more. You may wish to gain some insight here (http://www.unwater.org/water-cooperation-2013/water-cooperation/facts-and-figures/en/ and http://www.wfp.org/hunger/who-are and http://www.unesco.org/new/en/education/themes/leading-the-international-agenda/efareport/ and http://unstats.un.org/unsd/demographic/products/socind/Dec.%202012/4e.xls).

".....Also because few people really take you seriously...." Once again all you are exposing is your desperate desire to be part of the flock, to be accepted, to 'adjust' your views so that they are applauded by the sheeple around you. Individual thought is obviously not just unappealing to you, you actually think someone should be ashamed of it! Unlike Hollande, I am not in the business of popularity so I can speak my mind as much as I like, especially as I also have no great concerns about not fitting in with the flock. Please try not to assume everyone succumbs to the same character failures as you commit with zeal.

"..... I never claimed third world isn't dirt poor and more so than anything hereabouts. I only called you an idiot for using it as a justification that makes it OK to disregard homegrown poverty....." So, finally, after paragraphs of your vacuous venom, we finally get to your grudging admission that you can't actually disagree with what I stated, but then you try to diminish your surrender with a lie. I never said I was justifying homegrown poverty, I actually said some of us would use the raising of the poverty line as a way of hopefully advancing the lot of ALL in our society. What I objected to was your fellow-sheeple sisk's stupid claim that 'poverty is poverty'.

".....Let's just stick to the main point then: I called you an idiot and am happily restating that position." Which is the sum of your contribution - no facts, no figures, no independent thought, just bleated attempts at insults to dress up the fact you have lost again. This is my surprised face, honest! TBH, your efforts are quite yawn-inducing.

2
2
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: AC Another "stop picking on the rich" article

"..... I don't have time debating YOU. YOU are a waste of time....." Excuse my obtuseness, but didn't you insist that my simple example was 'bullshit' and easy to debunk, so it really shouldn't take much of your uber-econimically-knowledgeable time to disprove, right? After all, you say you have no time to waste but have posted many times since first querying my example, so it would seem you DO have plenty of time to waste. Or is it that you now find that you have painted yourself into a corner? LOL!

".....Marx, DeSoto, Keynes, Friedman, Samuelson, Krugman, are not a waste of time, they are quite an interesting read...." You could argue the same about thousands of texts, but the real value - which you seem to be in short supply of - is the ability to take their teachings and APPLY them to discussions. Rote learning for the sake of rote learning is just a trick for parrots. I do hope your parents took advantage of the free education available, and didn't pay through the nose for your wasteful time spent ticking off titles on your reading list whilst learning SFA. Seeing as that TLA is not in Marx, Engels or any other of your religious texts, you may need someone who spent more time outside the library in the real World to explain it to you.

"....But it's good to know you are comparing your own Internet posts to Marx, Keynes or Krugman....." No I didn't, but it is revealing to see you have now fallen back on simply making stuff up to fit your story - a true Piketty fan! I suppose it was far too much to expect you to add to the discussion once you had stopped bragging about what you considered an extensive reading list. Once again, either debunk my simple example of how a million in cash can equate to an earning of 100k - as you stated you could - or go sulk in the library.

2
2
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: JLV sisk

Yeah, whenever you finally get round to admitting you were wrong just remember to wake the readers up, they will have fallen asleep trying to read your lumbering evasion from the simple fact the majority of the World's human beings don't have indoor toilets connected to a proper sewage system.

2
3
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
Happy

Re: AC Another "stop picking on the rich" article

"....I'm done trying to reason with you...." Which translates to you having finally realized you should have beaten a retreat a long time ago.

".....You are a waste of time...." So you have all that time to read all those (boring) economic texts and Marxist claptrap yet simply don't have enough time to debate them? And yet you claimed you could debunk my 'bullshit' maths with ease! Wow, how do you run so fast with your tail between your legs? ROFL.

2
2
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
Happy

Re: JLV Re: sisk

".....Matt, I assume your local building codes allow fireplaces and outhouses...." So there are no BBQs in your neighbourhood? And the UK Building Regs simply state there has to be a toilet connected to a sewage tank or to the main sewer with a new build home, not that it has to be indoors one. But I do laugh at your attempt to avoid the issue that what we consider essentials would be considered outright luxuries in a lot of countries.

"....Apparently you wish to compare living conditions in say, Haiti....." It was sisk that insisted "poverty is poverty" because he had no real World experience to gauge the realities of poverty with, not me. I suggest you point out the example of Haiti to him, but before you do you may want to consider the number of Haitians that seem desperate to avail themselves of 'poverty-line' living in the States.

".....I am soooo glad you are on my side, as you obviously have a way with convincing people who might think otherwise....." Sorry to disappoint (not), but shortly I will be swanning off into the sunset to laze out my days on my cache of filthy lucre, so I really couldn't give a fudge which numpty you vote for as it will have zero impact on me. But you go, girl, and don't forget to remind the scroungers to vote or they may lose the cushie free ride you will be paying for. Enjoy!

3
4
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: AC Another "stop picking on the rich" article

"I can't counter bullshit. Your calculations are not only wrong, they just aren't calculations at all...." So it should be really easy for you to debunk them then, right? This should be entertaining! Do you wish to argue that 10% of 1m is not 100k? Or maybe you have a problem with my pegging inflation at 3-5%? Or could it just be you're just lost because Keynes doesn't have a chapter on calculating the returns on investments?

.....You take the initial hypothesis "become a millionnaire in 10 years by earning £100K/year" - which is mathematically impossible because of the economic reasons I've already outlined....." Again, try actually COMPREHENDING rather than skim-reading. You would find I posted no such premise, I actually suggested the 'rich kid' that inherits a million and then lives off the interest from investing it has the same effective income as someone that earns $100k per annum, therefore the person that earns $100k, whether it is over one year or ten, is 'living like a millionaire'. It seems the only area you are consistent in is your ability to fail to comprehend. Are you dyslexic?

".....To this hypothesis you add some unknown-about investment fund which was never part of the initial hypothesis...." Actually, that was my hypothesis. You do know that they first thing they teach you in school is to READ and UNDERSTAND the question before you try to answer it?

".....Do you even understand the difference between bullshit and math?...." It seems you do not, seeing as you have provided neither mathematical proof nor been able to prove my simple example is the 'bullshit' you claim it is. Please do remember, you don't get any marks if you don't show your working out, and just leaping to a wrong answer without showing any working out is a guaranteed path to failure.

".....You cannot alter the initial hypothesis during the course of a logical reasoning....." It seems you were so filled with righteous moral outrage you have confused my example with the original posters, can I suggest you go back, read the thread, take a chill pill and then try again? Just to give the readers some more comedic material.

3
2
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
Facepalm

Re: DavCrav Re: TheOrherHobbes Rustident Spaceniak Theoretically speaking....

".....Alan Sugar is an example. I can show you a lottery winner as well: doesn't prove that the lottery is a game with anything other than slim odds of success." Yeah, but I note you cannot disprove that he is a very good example of exactly what is trying to be denied, that it IS possible to work your way up from 'the bottom'. Nice try with the lottery, but I bet Sir Alan would have a few choice words should you ever imply to his face that he got where he is just by luck. And Sir Alan is an extreme example, there being plenty of other people from low-income beginnings that have worked their way up to comfortable living if not the riches of Sir Alan.

0
2
Matt Bryant
Silver badge

Re: sampo Interesting Analysis Applied to the Wrong Subject

".....My point is that we don't have the level of public benefits that offset income inequality to the degree that is found in Europe and the UK...." Many benefits in the UK are means-tested, which means if you have any form of income, savings or property then you don't get the benefit, no matter how many years you have been paying taxes into the system.

0
2
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: sisk

"....Until you go hungry for a few days so that you can feed your kids (a pretty common situation for families living on the poverty line) don't go telling me how great it is to be there....." Thanks, but I have actually been to many Third World countries and seen real poverty, and there is nothing like it in the West. When you meet kids that happily tell you they ate yesterday so they won't be eating today and they accept that as not just normal but good, then you can come and talk to me about poverty. Until you do you're talking out of your rectum.

Major denial - ".....100 years ago you could cook on your fireplace and have an outhouse...." There is nothing to stop you doing so today, and many families in the developing World still only have that option, but we in the West CHOOSE to insist on a higher standard of living as the baseline we consider acceptable. If you took a starving family out of somewhere like Ethiopia and gave them a council house with heating, running water that is safe to drink, cooking facilities and an indoor loo, plus free education and healthcare, but tell them the benefits system and cost of living means they can only shop for food and clothes at Asda, please do pretend they'd refuse.

"......The bottom line is that poverty is poverty." The constant steam of illegal immigrants desperate to get to Europe or the US just to get that 'poverty line' living you insist is unacceptable just goes to show you don't have a clue about the realities of the World or real poverty. Kindly do yourself a favour and go get some real World perspective.

3
5
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: AC Another "stop picking on the rich" article

"....That's not the complete list of Economics book I've read in my entire life....." I don't doubt you have read a great many books, you just seem to be lacking in the ability to apply their knowledge. After all, reading without comprehension is simply gathering educational Brownie points to try and impress the rest of the chattering class. For all the relevance you seem to be able to bring to bear you might as well have studied the economic theories of Brer Rabbit.

".....But, perhaps you can provide a reference in support of your earlier millionnaire calculations." The fact that you seem unable to counter it gives lie to your pretence at economic superiority. I admit the sums are simplified but surely you don't need Keynes's help,to prove or disprove it, or is it that all you can do is regurgitate the thoughts of others rather than actually doing the test of the theory yourself? If you wish to pretend the simple sums I posted are tosh then please do astonish us with your insight.

2
2
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: AC Another "stop picking on the rich" article

"....I say this with love." You may say whatever you like however you like, that is your prerogative, but I note you are unable to post a counter to the quite simple post. Do you really need a calculator to handle 10% of $1m? Or were you hoping no-one would notice?

1
2
Matt Bryant
Silver badge

Re: AC Re: Another "stop picking on the rich" article

"..... I had to spend time reading and understanding these books." The problem seems to be that you read them but failed miserably on both comprehension and application of their theories, probably due to the preconceptions you lumbered yourself with before starting your 'study'. It's ironic that you list Keynes and Freidman seeing as the latter became one of the former's biggest critics. Maybe you should take the time to,go,back and read them again?

2
2

Whoops! Google's D-Day Doodle honors ... Japan

Matt Bryant
Silver badge
WTF?

Re: ridley Re: Gordon 10

"Having a jet engine which only requires an overhaul every 120 hour of flight time is perhaps over the top if the expected life time of the plane is considerably less than that...." The Germans certainly never planned for their aircraft to only have a service life of twenty hours, neither did the Allies. Many Allied pilots flew one aircraft through a whole tour and many German pilots, even in 1945, were confident enough in the length of time they'd be flying the same aircraft that they decorated them with personal emblems. I think you are confusing this with the short flying life of the average newly-qualified Luftwaffe fighter pilot in 1945, many of whom only got about twenty hours in before they died, were wounded too badly to fly again before the end of the War, or were captured. But again, the Germans certainly didn't plan for their contribution to be so limited.

".....I once worked on a TI system built into a tank and I was shocked when we had to change the barrel after it was worn out and becoming inaccurate after 40 rounds or so**....." Well, TBH, I don't know what stage your targeting system's development was at, but most such targeting systems have been capable of adjusting for wear for decades. Even the L30A1 gun on the Callenger2, which is a rifled design and so I would expect to suffer more from wear than the smoothbore M256 on the Abrams, still has an expected service life of 400 rounds. I suspect your team's need to change the barrel was because they wanted to measure accuracy of your system over as small a range of wear as possible. I have heard the German 120mm rounds use a propellant that is much more corrosive than UK rounds, but I'd be very surprised if they managed to drop barrel life so drastically as to make the tank need a new gun every time they bombed up.

7
2
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
Boffin

Re: YAAC

"That only the US took part, they won the battle of Britain while cracking the enigma and inventing radar and the jet engine?" Whilst it is easy to point and laugh at Hollywood's take on history, it should in no way be used to belittle the actual sacrifices of the US servicemen (and women) on D-Day.

16
6
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
Boffin

Re: Gordon 10

".....And weren't the Germans well ahead in jet engine research?....." No, they weren't. It is a commonly-held misconception that the Allies were behind on jet engines due to the performance of the Me262. The reality is the Me262, like other such projects as the Me163, was a massive gamble on unproven and unreliable technology in an attempt to leapfrog Allied developments and re-gain air-superiority. The result was partially successful with the Me262, but at a massive cost in reliability. The axial-flow jet engines on the Me262 averaged only a seven-hour service life before they had to be stripped down and rebuilt or blew up. The Allies, who already had air-superiority with conventional designs, concentrated on technical developments that could (a) be implemented before the end of the War, and (b) could be reliably employed. The main Allied jet development of the day was in the simpler to develop and far more reliable centrifugal jet engines, the RAF's Meteor Mk1 jet fighter having less-powerful engines that had a life of over 120 hours between strip downs. Meanwhile, in the background, British engineers were already working on a secondary program for axial jets such as the Metrovick F1/F2, which was developed into the post-War Sapphire engine that powered, amongst others, the Hawker Hunter. It is a measure of German desperation that the F2 had already been tested in 1942 with more thrust than the BMW-003 jet of the Me262, and had a superior service life of over fifty hours between rebuilds, but was considered 'too unreliable' for service use.

17
2

TrueCrypt considered HARMFUL – downloads, website meddled to warn: 'It's not secure'

Matt Bryant
Silver badge
Facepalm

Re: Goopy Re: Jamie Jones Oh bugger!

I assume the issue preventing you from posting a thorough, detailed and referenced analysis of the arguments presented in this thread was your mother telling you it was time for bed? I presume that, when you have more time, you will be posting a longer précis that will give a greater insight into more than just the limits of your intellectual capabilities. I, for one, simply can't wait to experience the eloquence and intelligence which, no doubt, you will dazzle us all with.

/Your biggest fan. Honest.

0
2

TrueCrypt hooked to life support in Switzerland: 'It must not die' say pair

Matt Bryant
Silver badge
Joke

Re: New name for TrueCrypt?

Surely, as it is supposed to provide a unique encryption tool for every user, it should generate a unique application name every time the code is compiled.....

1
2
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
Boffin

Maybe wait a bit before forking.

Whilst it would sound quite possible for the FOSS crowd to fork the earlier version, it might be best to wait until after the code revIew has been completed. Probably twice. After all, as the Seggelmann incidents demonstrate, often there are flaws even the supposed geniuses miss.

0
2

REVEALED: GCHQ's BEYOND TOP SECRET Middle Eastern INTERNET SPY BASE

Matt Bryant
Silver badge
Boffin

Re: Big_Boomer Re: Anyone know what this is?

"Looks like an antenna array to me....." Real listening kit will be hidden, from before the point of installation. Like the arrays 'discovered' on the British Embassy roof in Germany, they will be inside domes or covers that stop people simply looking at them to guess wavelengths and transmitter/receiver power. Dummy domes may even be built to lead spies into thinking listening gear is more widespread than it really is or to distract those that might seek to attack the listening gear. Allegedly, the gear could be in any 'building' on site as any of the buildings could actually be a fake constructed of wire and plastic or cloth panels, so it looks from a satellite shot or to some guy in the road like a hangar or garage, when in reality it is just a cover for the real array.

But, in this case, Snowjob talks about submarine cable taps, so there is no need for an array anyway. Which means the array openly displayed probably has a quite harmless ATC or communications role.

0
3
Matt Bryant
Silver badge
Stop

Re: Alan Brown Re: TRAITORS

".....It's poverty and deprivation which breeds extremists....." Bullshit. Bin Laden was a millionaire from an extremely influential Saudi family. Al Zwahiri comes from a well-off Egyptian family who had an university education and worked as a surgeon before dedicating his life to killing infidels. The nonsense that all extremists are just poor souls that need a little love, cash and education is so easily debunked I'm amazed anyone is still trying to peddle it.

0
2

Deploy a fake Bitcoin wallet to save your own

Matt Bryant
Silver badge
Happy

Re: Cliff Re: So 2010's

For the believers - http://teespring.com/bitcoinrich

For the realist - http://www.cafepress.com/mf/77586229/survivor-tshirt-white_tshirt?productId=836331457

For the already jailed - http://www.spreadshirt.co.uk/keep-calm-use-silkroad-silk-road-bitcoin-t-shirts-C4408A24257183#/detail/24257183T812A1PC122109605PA1667

2
2