Posts by Matt Bryant

Re: Ian 55 Re: Automated driving in North London

"......if I were a lawyer, I'd probably step out in front of one just to be able to sue everyone from the owner / 'not driver' down to the programmers." Hmmm, a device that promises to monetarily cripple Google and at the same time prompts lawyers to commit suicide? MAKE THEM NOW!!!

Re: Jamie Jones Oh bugger!

"....I hope you are adressing the commentards generally - I don't think that at all...." Maybe you should, seeing as the doubts over Truecrypt have been circulating for a while, and the recent drive to vet the code seems to have severely annoyed the developer(s). Probably not the Big Bad NSA, but maybe another Big Brother(ski) instead.

Re: Jamie Jones Re: Oh bugger!

Apologies if you were waiting for me to reply, I was too busy laughing at the sheeple getting in a state over this. If you seriously think the NSA did this then you really are beyond delusional, I suggest you consider a few more likely options:

1. A 'concerned activist', such as paedo Oliver Drage, got caught with a Truecrypt partition and found out it didn't save him from jail time, and is subsequently miffed enough to have hacked the site and added his 'warning'. You could add to the list of suspects such 'delightful' nonces as the Lultwatz, the Anonyputz 'no leaders' leaders, etc., etc. In which case you might want to worry that maybe the NSA and chums have backdoored Truecrypt, but it is still unlikely.

2. Some skiddie is having a laugh, you know, just for the 'lulz', and is probably pissing himself laughing at you and the rest of the sheeple as you bleat in fear. In this case the problem is security amongst the developers and, when you finish bleating, you can carry on as you were in your normal state of paranoid self-delusion.

3. A member of the Truecrypt team has found some incriminating evidence that he/she (OK, more likely 'he') actually shows that the app has been backdoored and has taken unilateral action to stop anyone downloading the backdoored version. Actually not that unlikely given the average Githubber's level of communication skills, but it could be a backdoor planted by anyone from the FSB to criminal hackers to the Chinese Army to members of the Lultwatz themselves (OK, the last is the least likely given their level of 'skillz'). In which case, ignore the reality that someone who had hacked Truecrypt would be unlikely to warn you they had, you ALL need to be very worried, immediately disconnect your self from the Internet and head for hidey-holes in the Ecuadorean Embassy.....

/Pointing and laughing and ROFLMAO.

Re: Paul Crawford Re: Whitter

"....If you don't know the key because you never memorised it nor backed it up...." This app just deletes keys out of memory, it does not go around clearing up all other copies of the key. And then you still have to convince the authorities that you don't have the keys, and if they are convinced you do then you go to prison. The Reg has covered this previously - http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/10/14/ripa_self_incrimination_ruling/

"....I'm pretty sure any attempt to jail you for lack of knowledge would fall foul of the human rights act...." They would jail you for declining an order to provide the keys, the HRA has nothing to do with it. Ask convicted terrorist Syed Hussain or paedo Oliver Drage how that worked out for them.

Re: Paratrooping Parrot

"....Look at how much free publicity You kip got from the BBC." The Bolshevik Broadcasting Corporation only highlighted UKIP because they hoped it would steal votes from they Tories and gift Labour a win.

Re: asdf Re: Filippo Too smart for their own good?

".....Do you have a citation for that claim?....." Go do some research of your own, you ignoramus. Here, you can read how the Japanses had broken the US Army and Air Force codes but couldn't break the Navajo Code at Spartacus Ed., a suitably Leftie site even you would have a hard time ignoring (http://spartacus-educational.com/2WWnavajo.htm).

Re: boltar Filippo Too smart for their own good?

".....then those captured navajos were seriously brave given the depths od depravity the japanese were quite happy to descend to in WW2." Unfortunately, the Japanese had a problem in picking out Red Indians, in a similar manner the typical Westerner would have a problem differentiating Chinese from Japanese. Several Hispanic-American soldiers were reputedly also tortured by mistake, along with at least one Italian-American.

Re: boltar Re: Filippo Too smart for their own good?

".....If the germans had figured out which language it was and somehow got hold of a navajo speaker without the americans knowing...." The trick was first used in WW1 (with Cherokees, IIRC) and the Germans learned of it between the Wars. Hitler was so concerned that he sent teams of anthropologists to the States to try and learn all the Indian languages but they failed due to the diversity of the languages. The Germans passed their knowledge on to the Japs who screened all captured Americans for any they thought looked like Red Indians, and tried to coerce them into translating recorded Navajo messages. They failed. The USMC already had a plan in place to switch to another Red Indian language if the scheme had been compromised, they had plenty to choose from.

Re: Filippo Re: Too smart for their own good?

"There's little text in Indus Script....." Apart from the 4000+ examples found so far you mean? The Rosetta Stone provided insight into three different Ancient Egyptian languages with far less.

"......and none of it has a translation......" Again, you are failing to see that pattern matching alone should identify common terms, which implies there is more to the scripts than just jottings. The obvious example would be the predecessor of diplomatic codes, ancient civilisations such as the Assyrians having a completely separate language for their diplomatic missives.

".....Are you suggesting that a good encryption algorithm should only be used for a handful of messages in the whole world...." Well, that is the idea behind a one-time pad.....

"....and said messages should never get translated into cleartext?" The most secure instant communication system used by either side in WW2 was the Navajo code talkers, American Indians embedded with the troops that could instantly talk to each other in their own language without needing to waste time encrypting or decrypting messages. It is a classic example of parallel thinking producing a far simpler and more secure system than 'pretty' maths. Or maybe combine maths with non-mathematical tools.

Re: Anon Cluetard Re: Too smart for their own good?

"The problem with the Indus Script isn't pattern matching but rather figuring out the rules of the script....." Which implies their 'rules' are a lot better than 'pretty' mathematical solutions. Instead of thinking only in terms of maths, which will always just result in a mathematical task to break the cypher, maybe we should be a bit more imaginative.

"....It also doesn't help that Indus Script is so brief...." Whilst the instances are indeed short samples, there have been over 4000 examples of the script found. Please try a different excuse for the mathematicians.

Re: Boring Green Marsbarbrain @Matt Bryant - Christoph

"You asked for a thread-related comment, I gave one in good faith......" Yawn. Apart from the fact there is no good faith in your attempts to obscure and divert from the actual topic of the article, you did not post any such comment other than whining about names. That has nothing to do with the thread and all to do with your bruised ego. And I note - as expected - you again ran and hid from the challenge of providing any evidence of any innocent being harmed in any way by this NSA action.

".....My views on the NSA were not relevant....." You stated you and the rest of the sheeple needed to know the extent of the NSA's activities in this operation and the intelligence so you could form an opinion on the merits of the operation, whereas the truth is you have already been spoonfed an opinion and actually only want the information in a mindless desire to limit the activities of the NSA, regardless of the actual value they provide. Your actual statement in this thread was: '.....I think I already laid out my position above, to recap, then, that claims be verifiable, which tends to imply that the NSA's work be accountable to somebody, not necessarily public, but some trustworthy independent other party. Then, rather importantly we can judge whether all this spying is producing a proportionately useful result, or is effectively a waste of money.....' But you clearly already have a strongly-held position which denies any other viewpoint, so your demand for more information to form an opinion is simply a lie. So, yes, exposing your hypocritical statements and views is relevant to the topic, much more so than your bruised ego and evasions.

".....That was the question. I've asked 3 or 4 times...." That was the irrelevance you attempted to use as diversion and evasion of the real subject matter. After all, in numerous threads, I have asked many more than three or four times for you to provide proof of harm to innocents, of the supposed blackmail and intrusion you lot in the flock insist must have been going on for years, and yet you always avoid answering. Surely, if the Big Bad NSA is so evil and intent on controlling us all there should be some proof of such oppressive activity? But there's none, and you hide from any discussion of that lack of proof because it neatly implodes your paranoid-driven fantasies. Face it, all you do is bleat male bovine manure because you are too uncomfortable with actually answering real questions that challenge the 'views' you have been spoonfed.

Re: Boring Green Marsbarbrain @Matt Bryant - Christoph

".....Then, rather importantly we can judge whether all this spying is producing a proportionately useful result, or is effectively a waste of money...." But you and the rest of the sheeple already made it very clear that you have no interest in weighing up the results. You are far too happy living your paranoid delusions about being individually spied on.

"....Once someone's credibility is blown, it's very hard to regain, and the NSA do not appear to have been very truthful....." So first you say the NSA is an Uber Big Brother organisation with superhuman eavesdropping capabilities, but then you try and say that they are totally ineffective. You can't have it both ways, either they are harmless and you can quit whining about it, or they really are über and therefore excellent value for money in securing us against criminals and terrorists.

".....To be honest, Matt, we've gone over this a hundred times so I don't know why you keep asking for more....." You mean you have made boring and repetitive evasions a hundred times when you can't answer the simplest of questions. Here's a simple one you always run away from - show how this exercise harmed any actual innocents. Don't get in too much of a fluster trying to think of an evasion, I honestly don't expect you to even try a straight answer.

/seriously need a 'Yawn' icon for use with this member of the flock.

Re: Boring Green Marsbarbrain @Matt Bryant - Christoph @Plump'n'Bleaty

"Could you answer that question....." Post a question or argument related to the thread rather than another desperate attempt at diversion and suppression of dissenting thought and I will.

Re: Jamie Jones Mark 85 Just the beginning

".....why do you trust 'some random civil servant' over 'some random internet user'?...." What a stupid question. Because the 'civil servant' will have been screened, trained, told the legal ramifications of dicking about, and then monitored during their work, whilst 'some random internet user' will just be doing what he likes. A direct comparison would be the extensive training a policeman goes through before being allowed to police the streets - you don't just let any moron play vigilante. If you really can't see the difference then you are as monumentally stupid as your posts make out.

".....when I just asked an honest question you assumed to be stupid...." The bleating naïveté of your posts is not doing anything to reduce that assumption.

".....Neither deserves (or can deal with) a constructive response....." How would you know when you never post any constructive responses? Your whole, dribbling, whining post goes on for paragraph after paragraph but has no content relevant to the topic of the thread. Get over yourself, stop whining and try a lot harder.

Re: Boring green dan1980 Will Godfrey @Plump & Bleaty

".....makes claims without verification. Could you repost please?" I forgot your lot don't view drug smugglers and the like as criminals, just as suppliers.

Re: Boring green Re: dan1980 Will Godfrey @Plump & Bleaty

"......What good work is this?" Go read the article and the links included, it states the authorities were very pleased with the intelligence they received which helped them investigating such gangs. Oh, sorry, you never read the article, you just rush to bleat what you have been told to bleat.

Re: dan1980 Re: Will Godfrey

"Is it not equally possible that the US's increased noise about Chinese spying/'hacking' is a reaction to the bad publicity they are getting - a 'look over there' tactic?...." No, because the US was complaining about Chinese state-sponsored hacking long before Snowjob even started contracting for the NSA.

"....Is it not equally possible that the US, with their vast spying and data collection efforts, found out that there was going to be a new release of information and pre-empted it with their naming of the 5 Chinese 'hackers'?....." So you want to fall back on the standard sheeple paranoid delusion about the All Seeing All Omnipotent Big Brother? Puh-lease, if that was the case then Snowjob would never have even got hired and the Chinese would have been facing the naming of their hackers years ago.

"....Snowden passed all his information over to the press...." Apart from the fact Snowjob handed (or more likely sold) his data to Greenwald and Poitras, he has made intimations in interviews that there is 'other stuff' he did not pass on. Hence his need to hide behind Putin's skirts.

".....and they choose what to release......" Having seen the type of loon that Poitras and Greenwald associate with, I would not be surprised if the Chinese government is being kept well-informed of their plans, even if we want to be generous and say not intentionally by Greenwald and Poitras. Personally, I would say that I think Greenwald and Poitras have a monetary interest in keeping the focus on the NSA, and it's not like China and the old Soviet Russia didn't regularly pay such 'dissident voices' to shout when required. Greenwald's income depends on maintaining the myth that the NSA is a unique and pernicious threat to all mankind, something he cannot do unless he also tries to smother other information sources exposing the good work the NSA does. So, no, I don't think it a con-incidence at all.

Re: Boring Green Marsbarbrain @Matt Bryant - Christoph @Plump'n'Bleaty

"Graham's point was allegorical......" Marsbarbrain's non-point was a vacuous attempt to sound smart whilst implying the NSA are 'evil'. Still, whilst it might only hit a one-out-of-a-hundred on the relevance scale, compared to your contributions it was a pearl of wisdom.

Go waste electricity elsewhere, you have again failed to add anything to the discussion other than your transparent attempts to suppress a viewpoint that does not match the one you have been spoonfed. We all know dissent in the flock is verboten, but please realise we're not all sheeple like you.

Re: Boring Green Re: Marsbarbrain @Matt Bryant - Christoph @Plump'n'Bleaty

And another fact-free and argument-free post from Boring Green. Not really a surprise. We really need a yawn icon for his bleating.

Re: Jamie Jones Re: Mark 85 Just the beginning

It's ironic how you are unable to argue the fact that you are the minority so instead just trot our childish blathering. Actually, it's not ironic, it's just sad. If you want to be taken seriously post an actual argument or counter or leave the discussion to the adults, mmmkay?

Re: Marsbarbrain @Matt Bryant - Christoph

".... attacking the poster rather than addressing the argument." You didn't post any form of argument whatsoever, get over yourself.

Re: Marsbarbrain Re: @Matt Bryant - Christoph

".....now you give the Devil the benefit of law!...." Nothing illustrates the extent of poor Graham's paranoid delusions than his insistence that the NSA is The Devil. For sheeple like him it really is a religion, based on faith and unquestioning belief in The Cause. So sad.

Re: skelband Re: Mark 85 Just the beginning

"......We, as the common people, don't want the government to track our mail, monitor our web activity, listen to our phone calls...." Oh, so you want to claim you are the '99%' again? News flash for skelband - the majority are actually on the side of law and order. The majority are sick of Internet scams and e-crime, and they don't see why crims and terrorists should be allowed to hide away on the Internet or any other form of electronic communication. They realise that your Internet playground is used by criminals and terrorists and want them found and stopped. They want more legal oversight, not the lawless Wild West Internet that you and the rest of the skiddies and hippies dream of. This fact is demonstrated in the US by the complete inaction of Obambi on the issue.

Obambi is the typical popularist politician, super-sensitive to public opinion. If he thought it was going to cost him real votes he'd be tearing down the NSA and rushing to affirm a 'free Internet'. So what has he done? Apart from a bit of window-dressing, Obambi has done SFA to reign in the NSA, because he knows you lot are just a very vocal minority, and that the NSA and their work are tools that the US needs. This very SOMALGET program has happened under Obambi's administration so you lot can also stop trying to blame Bush for every NSA operation.

On our side of the pond, Cameron has likewise done nothing to impinge on the work of the GCHQ. Merkel has shrieked for a few votes in Europe but has also done nothing to stop the BND working with the NSA or GCHQ. Same goes for France, Holland, Italy, Spain, etc., etc., etc. Face it, your cause célèbre is just bleating into the wind, because the majority actually WANT it. If it were not so you would see a rush of democratic politicians racing to implement vote-winning restrictions on the spooks.

And that's what really upsets you, which is why you and the rest of the sheeple huddle together and bleat so loudly, because deep down you know you are actually the 1%, you just hate to admit it. Enjoy!

Re: Mark 85 Just the beginning

"You are persistent in your picking of nits.... " And you lot are very persistent in ignoring the realities that you don't want to see.

"......Yes a warrant was issued. Yes there are successes......" Waiting for the 'but'..... Of course, I'm sure the fact this action helped stop criminals floated right past your sense of moral outrage.

"....I think it's the "all mobile calls" part that is the issue....." And why, because you like the idea of all-encompassing surveillance? Because it feeds your paranoid delusions? Once again, you are ignoring the reality you don't want to see, namely that the vast majority if the calls were NEVER listened to by a human being.

".... It would be like having a warrant to search all white vans or all green houses." No it wouldn't, it would be more like knowing who owned all the white vans but only stopping and searching the ones actually linked to criminals. Are you going to insist the traffic cops drive around blindfolded, just in case they see some innocent driving a vehicle other than a white van? So your melodramatic comparison is just as flawed as the rest of your blathering.

Re: Sir Runcibke Loon Re: skelband re: Matt Bryant Mark 85 Just the beginning

Start thinking for yourselves for a change then.

Re: Mark 85 Just the beginning

".....probable cause must be established....." And yet you ignore the fact that a warrant was issued, i.e., that this was not some uncontrolled over-reach by the NSA, but a proper and legal investigation under careful control and legal oversight. I bet you also would like to deny the successes the SOMALGET program brought to the law enforcement agencies fighting drug and people smugglers in the region? Maybe you should read some of the actual memos (https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/1164088-somalget.html) before going off on autobleat.

Re: skelband Re: re: Matt Bryant Mark 85 Just the beginning

".....Who is to say what is not much?...." I suppose it was a bit much to ask you sheeple to stop hysterically bleating long enough to actually do the maths. I apologise for thinking you might be capable of such mental exercise and I promise to try and not suggest further strain on your obviously over-stretched brain.

".....To record details of phone calls indiscriminately is either right or it is wrong....." And once again we're back to the insistence that it must be wrong because ALL the calls just must have been listened to by a human, when the reality is they were not. The vast majority were deleted without ever having been heard by a human ear, but don't let that simple fact get in the way of your melodramatic shrieking.

".....Is stabbing OK, as long as you only stab a very small number of people? Is theft OK as long as you don't get too greedy?....." Both criminal acts with a direct effect on the victims, whereas this was legal and warranted activity in the pursuit of criminals. In other words, stop spouting male bovine manure. Instead, please show how anyone other than criminals were actually impacted by this exercise? Oh, you can't, because there was ZERO impact for anyone other than the crims. The only impact to the general public was more earache from the over-loud and automatic bleating of the sheeple.

".....It never fails to amaze me how quickly and completely people like Matt are willing to give up the freedom and privacy of others." It never fails to amuse me how complete nonentities like skelband insist anyone would be interested in either their public or private communications. Get over yourself, you're just a paranoid delusional sheeple.

Re: re: Matt Bryant Mark 85 Just the beginning

"Cherry-picked that one, didn't you." It is so often the one very obvious and simple point that demonstrates the stupidity of the sheeple's bleating, and the fact the exercise was done under a legal warrant and with the strict intention of assisting in prosecuting drug gangs totally undermines the shrieking, melodramatic insistence that 'They are watching ME' as bleated by so many sheep here.

But to take the dismantling of their paranoid fantasies a step further, how many of them made a call from the Bahamas in the period mentioned? Probably none. Did they stop to think a 100m calls a day is actually not that much, the daily average for the US is well over 3bn calls? Or that the average mobile user spends about half-an-hour a day on calls, so extrapolate by the population of mobe users and you have an inkling of how much actual airtime would have to be listened to, well beyond the capabilities of the staff involved, which is why the majority of the Bahamas sweep would NEVER get listened to by a human being.