733 posts • joined 25 May 2010
Re: Stop who?
People, like you, who believe that the illusion of security is an acceptable trade for liberty are those against whom I the struggle must be directed. Your misguided beliefs must be changed so that the people can stand united against those who would seek to rule us.
So how is that one working out? Speaking as one to whom you have already directed a stream of abuse .... evil, cowardly etc etc. I find your extensive rhetoric and arguments unconvincing.
Re: I know the Reg hates Google but @Howverydare
Thumbs up from me How! Mind I suspect you may have touched a nerve and am now expecting a conflated and massive polemic on the evils of anybody Trevor doesn't agree with ...... regardless of the reality of the situation.
Re: Whereas if it was a bank doing these transactions @Mark
Straw men are usually quiet.
Having conceded that you are the 'Straw Man' ..... there is not much point discussing this further.
I originally considered your posts to be essentially a 'pump and dump' effort from somebody sitting on a whole stack of bitcoin trying to shift them before the bubble finally bursts .
Re: Whereas if it was a bank doing these transactions @Ben
Banks are subject to both regulations (one being capital adequacy), and in quite a lot of Nation States a depositor guarantee. Thus should the bank either get it wrong, or be subject to criminal activity, there is a good chance that losses will be restored.
Also when "robbed" what you find is a lot of places have organisations called Police. The job of these people is to go and find the people who "robbed" the bank and get the money back. It would seem questionable both if this is the job of these Police organisations, or indeed given the anonymous nature of bitcoin if this is even possible.
A question for you Ben, are you either just naive, or sitting on a whole stack of bitcoin trying to shift them before the bubble finally bursts?
Re: Whereas if it was a bank doing these transactions
And yet the bitcoin evangelista have gone strangely quiet.......
The problem with Bitcoin @justin - it has no sponsor
I agree the techo babble does not make bitcoin a currency. But it is worse bitcoin does not have any strong sponsor backing up it's value.
As illustration of the risks of Bitcoin as opposed to the more established FIAT consider the following hypothetical situation.
Take for example a small country previous part of a union with another larger country declares independence and starts to print exact copies (forgeries) of one of the popular FIAT currencies. How would the state whose currency is being ‘forged’ react?
I am guessing that after a certain amount of diplomatic ‘cease and desist’ the respective owners of these currencies will react as below:
GBP - SAS slips across the border destroys the printing plant and all stocks of currency
EUR (France) – the Foreign Legion invade the place, destroy the printing plant etc. Plus the DGSE sink any ships registered to the example country
USD – take off and nuke the place from orbit
And so on ….. oh yes and what does the bitcoin hegemony do?
Bitcoin – anonymous attack randomly selected web sites
Oh really ?
Re: ... Blood from a stone? @Sparticus Just over an hour ago
How could you say such a thing Sparticus? Yet another
hilarious but all too apposite comment cruel slur of bitcoin. You have to understand that bitcoin is or may possibly be a FIAT currency used only by either criminals or naïve idealists where the former want money laundering facilities and the latter are too stupid to think through the risks is a pure Cypto-currency untainted by the corruption and thievery of the existing banking system.
Exchanges such as MtGox are
probably run by the same sort of criminals, and naïve idiots …. In fact who in the holy name of deity thought they would get the money back? the very pinnacle of the bitcoin utopia. You would have to be totally mad very cynical to think that the these self-same bunch of criminals and losers who barely understand finance committed people involved with this ideal aren’t either laughing all the way to the bank or stunned by the shafting that they just took respectively trying to move heaven and earth to restore the losses of the investors.
Also remember that MtGox is
the first with every indication the rest will be following down the pan shortly but one of the exchanges and whilst the failure a humorous indicator of the bitcoin trend and is with any luck the death knell of this techno babble an unfortunate blip . The bitcoin systems is without doubt a house of cards waiting for a puff of wind robust and hopefully not scam too many more idiots will fulfil its noble ideals.
Since seeing this article I
haven’t stopped laughing have sold my, house, car, wife and two of my three children so strong Is my belief in this pure and noble cause. I should coco suckers … the great thing about currencies outside of either government control or for that matter other control is that nobody is responsible I intend to invest all of my considerable fortune yea right in restoring the bitcoin system to its rightful status.
So Sparticus final word on this one
top comment entirely worthy of an up vote if for that matter I cared one way or the other … actually I do think I should get some recognition for all my down votes perhaps in future you might chose knock it on the head son, I have lost a keyboard and should probably be working to post comments that are a little less ignorant of bitcoin really I mean really are there people so stupid as to believe this nonsense …. Ah well I guess the phrase is ‘One Born … ‘ ?
Dammit Sparticus next you will be suggesting that these fine upstanding members of the legal profession
are in fact the circling sharks who have smelled the blood from a suitable shoal of fools prepared to throw good money are just out for money from the self righteous idiots who bought into this nonsense tragically defrauded bitcoin investors.
You have to remember this is
tulip mania or the south sea bubble, a get rich quick ponzi scheme a legitimate crypto-currency. I frankly can't feel sorry for these chumps feel nothing but sympathy for all the deeply wronged investors and will struggle to contain my mirth ... particularly for those who have down voted my posts suggesting that this might happen my grief at these tragic events.
Finally all I can say is
as a future thought, to all you bozos, there is a lot of sense in the phrase "if it seems too good to be true ... it probably is" my thoughts go out to the those who have lost so much and their families .... I genuinely feel for you all. Just wiping a tear s of mirth from my eye s.
... Blood from a stone?
that it may have lost hundreds of thousands of Bitcoins "through the abuse of a bug in the Bitcoin system"
Whilst they may not have very many bitcoin left surely they can just mine some more?
Re: I do wonder @stizzleswick
Yes ... absolutely. What the Bitcoin banks need to do is either outsource or better still offshore all of their admin to India. All the proper banks have done this and have a great story to tell.
I'm sure there was a lovely story of RBS off-shoring and how well things were going ..... ah hang on. Then again ....
Re: And yet... @Tim
I agree. I do wonder if this isn't just a classic 'Dead Cat Bounce' pattern?
Yes .... sadly it won't work. As I understand the situation, whilst you can buy and sell BTC on Mt. Gox, having bought the the BTC you can't get them off the exchange.
Re: Not quite the same
Presumably it is fine for the North Koreans to arrest and harass people there, if they find them to be in possession of information contrary to NK law?
Perhaps if North Korea behaved in the same way as the UK in this instance the UN might not be comparing them to the Nazi regime.
Are you seriously trying to suggest that stopping David Miranda to recover 58,00 sensitive documents is the same as North Korea? In North Korea it would appear that you can be executed for watching South Korean movies? Was David Miranda executed? ..... No they let him go.
Re: Not quite the same @Mad Mike
@Mad Mike I've read it (on GOV.UK) and not that I can see, unless you are employed in one of the listed categories, which he wasn't. So, the Act doesn't apply to him. In fact, the Act specifically says you have to be informed previously that the Act applies to you. Don't think he was!!
I can only hope that you now realize this wrong......
5.2 Did he disclose it? No. Not willingly anyway. Possibly when threatened by the police.
The police stopped him as they had a suspicion, subsequently proved correct, that he was carrying the information. Failure to comply with a request to hand the material over would then be a breach of the OSA.
5.6 Two defences. Firstly, he didn't disclose. Secondly, it didn't come into his possession because of a breach of the Act. It came from the NSA and it was willingly given to them. So, it came into his possession possibly through a breach of an American law, not a breach of the Official Secrets Act.
Before suggesting that other people read the OSA if you bothered to read the act yourself you will find that obtaining materials from a foreign source is covered.
6.2 Again, no disclosure.
Not required it just has to be in his possession.
8.4 Was he asked to return it? No.
How do you know this? ..... I would have thought this would be the first question they would ask given that he was stopped because he was suspected to be carrying information.
Did he get it from a Crown servant or government contractor? No.
Read the OSA carefully.......
8.5 Was he officially asked to return it? No. Therefore he can't have failed to return it.
8.6 Again, no disclosure.
So, he hasn't breached the Official Secrets Act in any way. He hasn't breached any of the sections you've highlighted, largely because they never actually asked to him to do anything (such as return it) and instead turned into the Stasi and escalated the situation potentially without need.
The Stasi, or indeed the Egyptian secret police (mentioned in the article) probably wouldn't have let him go. They stopped him on suspicion which was then confirmed how was this esculated?
I am quite aware the act doesn't need to be signed, hence my use of quotes around it. The act of 'signing' is simply making sure a person is explicitly aware.
You may be aware that the act doesn't need to be signed .... you didn't seem to be aware that it also does apply to people who haven't worked for the government.
Re: Not quite the same @dogged
In the court summary the documents are described as classified as either Secret or Top Secret. The definition of these classifications is information that is directly or indirectly useful to an enemy. The wording is different along the lines of putting individuals or the state in danger .... so you might have to think about this a little.
It is of course possible that the Police asked David to return rather than disclose the information? Maybe that's why he wasn't charged and they let him go after 9 hours?
Re: Not quite the same @Mad Mike
A summary of the provisions of the Official Secrets act that apply to people who haven't signed is 'disclosure of or failure to return information which has been subject to the Official Secrets Act' is an offence.
The paragraphs are -
5.2) Subject to subsections (3) and (4) below, the person into whose possession the information, document or article has come is guilty of an offence if he discloses it without lawful authority knowing, or having reasonable cause to believe, that it is protected against disclosure by the foregoing provisions of this Act and that it has come into his possession as mentioned in subsection (1) above.
5.6) A person is guilty of an offence if without lawful authority he discloses any information, document or other article which he knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, to have come into his possession as a result of a contravention of section 1 of the [1911 c. 28.] Official Secrets Act 1911.
6.2) Subject to subsection (3) below, the person into whose possession the information, document or article has come is guilty of an offence if he makes a damaging disclosure of it knowing, or having reasonable cause to believe, that it is such as is mentioned in subsection (1) above, that it has come into his possession as there mentioned and that its disclosure would be damaging.
8.4) Where a person has in his possession or under his control any document or other article which it would be an offence under section 5 above for him to disclose without lawful authority, he is guilty of an offence if—
(a)he fails to comply with an official direction for its return or disposal; or
(b)where he obtained it from a Crown servant or government contractor on terms requiring it to be
held in confidence or in circumstances in which that servant or contractor could reasonably expect that it would be so held, he fails to take such care to prevent its unauthorised disclosure as a person in his position may reasonably be expected to take.
8.5) Where a person has in his possession or under his control any document or other article which it would be an offence under section 6 above for him to disclose without lawful authority, he is guilty of an offence if he fails to comply with an official direction for its return or disposal.
8.6) A person is guilty of an offence if he discloses any official information, document or other article which can be used for the purpose of obtaining access to any information, document or other article protected against disclosure by the foregoing provisions of this Act and the circumstances in which it is disclosed are such that it would be reasonable to expect that it might be used for that purpose without authority.
It is, as I understand it, a common fallacy to assume that the act either only applies to people who have signed it or worked in an official capacity for the UK government.
Re: Not quite the same @dogged
Are you now telling me that it is illegal for some information (regardless of type) to be carried in the UK?
Yes ... OSA, Espionage these sort of laws. You will find that for certain jobs in the UK there is a requirement to sign the Official secrets act, this is to ensure that you are aware of the act. The Act Itself applies however regardless.
How can it possibly be illegal to carry information when one has broken no other law?
See above or read it yourself ......
Re: Not quite the same @Richard Tyler
He as a foreign national was carrying just over 58,000 stolen highly classified UK intelligence documents .... I guess they must have got past the encryption. Like it or not as a minimum this would be against the official secrets act.
Not quite the same
He was stopped and found to be carrying information contrary to UK law. Whilst I don't think anybody would argue that he was a terrorist the information he was carrying would certainly be useful to terrorists.
Your comparison to councils is not dissimilar to comparing the detention of Al Jazeera journalists in Egypt with David's detention (and release). David was detained for 9 hours found to have been in possession of documents against UK law, the journalists in Egypt seem to have been detained indefinitely.
Re: Bubble has burst ..... ? @Daniel B
By definition BTC could be called a “fiat currency” insofar as the believers say “it shall be”. That said an analysis of other currencies suggests that for a “fiat currency” to be successful it needs a critical mass of support, stability (low levels of either inflation or deflation) and this is a point I have suggested before a powerful sponsor. So for example looking at the currencies you have quoted above USD, GBP and EUR all of these three currencies have a vast circulation, and powerful economies sponsoring the use of the currency.
Whilst you might by definition argue that BTC is a “fiat currency” the question is more will it be a “successful fiat currency”. Questions you need to think about are:
Who uses bitcoin (and why)?
Is it stable?
Does it have a powerful sponsor?
I would suggest that BTC success as a currency will be determined by these questions.
On the point of me being a right wing I guess you might assume that because I am saying that a currency needs a powerful sponsor (Banks/Capitalists/Armies ….Tanks, Guns etc). FYI I am commenting more on the reality of the world not the morality of the situation. From a financial point of view I could probably accuse you of the same in that you appear to have money to burn for BTC speculation whereas I don’t.
Bubble has burst ..... ?
Looks like from the high of $1000 Bitcoin is now down to $250 ... just maybe people are getting bored with tulips?
Isn't what you write more your truthful interpretation of events?
Re: Register needs an alternative funding model and #MDFC
.... so-called journalists are actually knuckling under to blackmail ...
My theory would be that these 'so called' journalists may have a different point of view about the situation.
Re: Don't bother.
Saves a stamp at least :)
Re: "Upvote this post if you want to end government snooping on our private data"
Yes this will have NSA and GCHQ quaking in their boots. Well assuming that you can get boots for their slimy spy person web feet.
Re: ObnoxiousLiar DDOS
Now about this "sheeple" word you so like bandying around, you do realise that sheeple are people who believe and follow what their leaders say without question...
People unable to think for themselves.
Those with no cognitive ablilities of their own.
All the teens were wearing bell-bottoms because they were sheeple.
So looks to me like a person either unthinkingly following the governments position or indeed following the paranoid herd mentality about GCHQ/NSA etc, could equally well be described as a sheeple.
... our glorious state in action, the more I feel like throwing up. Disgusting.
I just can't understand your nausea as in this instance the state took action to disrupt the activities of a group known for it's illegal activities.
Or are you really saying that you want to live in a place where any group is allowed to steal your credit card details, suppress the right to free speech, and so on?
Re: What is it about gaining power in Westminster?
I do wonder if public opinion goes with the popular newspapers. But I have already speculated on that one in an earlier post.
A new theory .... could it be films. In ours the spy's are usually good guys, and in the US not so much?
Re: If there was any doubt @Mary
Not on this story .... compare and contrast the stories on the front of the Guardian/Independent with Sun/Express/Mail. On the one hand 'Ed Snowden announces latest spying outrage' and on the other either 'Some horror story where intelligence services didn't spy enough' or 'Intelligence service success story'.
Now think which newspapers do more of the public read?
Re: I'm On A Rant!
What is to stop any of the NSA/GCHQ staffers (800,000 work for the NSA) from using any of the information they come into contact with to bribe someone?
The fact that it would be totally illegal and if caught they would face a very substantial custodial sentence......
Mind if you do feel the need to 'do the neighbour' my advice would be make sure it is either an MFF or MMF... and your significant is involved anyway.
Re: Look you have all taken this the wrong way. @Veti
My opinion is very much based on exactly the same understanding of the way things are in the UK as yours. Even the dates :).
The question then is this a either good or bad thing? My opinion is that Cameron is right on balance the UK public accept domestic spying ....
The net was created by the military in the first place ..... enough said.
My argument being that certainly in the last 50 years this country, the USA and your country probably have been subject to what you might describe as dragnet surveillance, although I would not see the monitoring of communications traffic as such.
As has, been rumoured but never officially confirmed, there has existed collection of communications traffic information by intelligence services. Just to explain this would be the details of who has called who, and not the content of the message. Where an analysis of traffic information has revealed cause for concern thereinafter, and with the appropriate authorisation, monitoring has also included the content of communications.
It is my opinion that the Snowden revelations are nothing particularly new. Now in the last 50 years of so I have felt largely that I have lived in a society with a strong principle of personal liberty. In your terms I do not think that either I or society has given up any liberty comparing now to say 1960.
So have you actually got any coherent argument to counter this opinion? As I have said previous perhaps this time you could take this opportunity to leave aside your somewhat bombastic and frankly insulting rhetoric.
OK attempting to strip out the direct personal insults... seems to leave your first paragraph.
The argument has been made and made again thousands of times throughout human history. Every time people forget that liberty is too high a price to pay for the illusion of security really bad things happen. Fall of empires kind of bad.
Your entire argument appears to be that when people forget liberty empires fall. I have to assume that by 'forget liberty' you mean 'spy on other people is bad'. That said so how do you view the activities of GCHQ's predecessor in cracking the Enigma ciphers?
Looking at the rest of your post all I would say that you may have over estimated my place in the grand scheme of things.
You openly preach a doctrine of fear ... As far as I am concerned you are a coward and a traitor to our entire species. ... I cannot comprehend how that individual is any different than an individual who would blithely see me murdered or enslaved for $self_serving_reason. Life without liberty is no life at all. I will fight against people like you who would see me stripped of my liberty with every last ounce of strength, iota of influence, and every bent copper I have......
I have almost no influence on any of the above apart from a vote for one of three parties all of whom generally seem to approve of that which you seem to disapprove.
That said it is still my opinion that the most effective defense against terrorism is police action supported by effective intelligence.
You, sir, are a coward. A dishonorable coward. One that would sell out not only your own self but the rest of your species out of abject fear. I despise you and all who are like you. I am repulsed and offended by your mewling weakness, your greed and your selfishness. I am distressed to know that we share a common genetic heritage. It sickens me..
I will not really go into my opinion of you, other than to say a personal attack on doesn't really provide much to strengthen your argument.
Re: Oh Titus, please look at the actual casualty figures... @NumptyScrub
I'd also invite you to look at the numbers of lives (potentially) saved; feel free to peruse this list of UK terrorist attacks,
The point I am making is that during the last 40 -50 years the UK has always, or at least it is rumored, had in place a communications traffic monitoring system. The monitoring of the Internet as revealed by Snowden is just an extension of the systems.
As I mentioned before if we hadn’t had these systems how many more attacks would have been successful?
So, you think this intrusion into "ordinary" lives can prevent tube attacks by extremists. So why did it not work?
Have there been any attacks on the tube recently?
Do you really think the loss of freedom is worth the price of... How did Britain survive the IRA for so many years? ... Fortunately, mass hysteria against Irish accents did not occur and fear of visiting the Tower of London was not apparent.
During the time of the IRA there wasn’t as such an Internet. But that said it is rumoured that GCHQ did collect traffic information. So a question for you do you think that some, maybe even quite a few, of the attacks by the IRA were thwarted by this monitoring? Possibly allowing the lack of fear of people with Irish accents, visits to the bloody tower and so on …..
Grow up and accept that nasty things do happen ... change our own lives more effectively than the terrorism itself. ...... Hmm.
I don’t think of the Internet monitoring as much of a change between now and say the 1970s and 1980s. I would see this monitoring as very similar to what happened with telecoms but extended to encompass the Internet. How do you see it?
Leave the hay where it is, and give up the search for needles.
You do have the luxury of commenting from a country where, to date, the level of Islamic terrorist activity is very low.
I had friends on tubes when Islamic extremists blew up London. Lucky for them they got away with it that time.
This doesn’t seem to have happened for a while. That said there seems to have been plenty of needles in other places. Personally if the intelligence services are responsible I would rather like them to carry on reducing the frequency of this sort of thing.
Re: AC Wow.... I accept your challenge sir. This is no place for consensus
'..... some of the strongest retention laws imposed on their telecoms industries in the World. The NSA is on record as saying they envy what they see as the more shielded and hidden operating environment the European spooks have (especially the GCHQ).'
Sir you say that like it is a bad thing ?
Re: @Vic Not "complying" is the crime, not the results of complying.
A Section 49 notice may be issued by a number of people detailed in Schedule 2; each must have been granted permission to grant Section 49 notices by a member of the judiciary, but each individual notice does not require judicial oversight.
IMO, this is way, way too lax...
That isn't the way I read the law ......
Schedule 2 (1)Subject to the following provisions of this Schedule, a person has the appropriate permission in relation to any protected information if, and only if, written permission for the giving of section 49 notices in relation to that information has been granted —
(a)in England and Wales, by a Circuit judge [or a District Judge (Magistrates' Courts)
(b)in Scotland, by a sheriff; or
(c)in Northern Ireland, by a county court judge.
I would read this as a permission is given for a specific instance of a section 49 notice by variety of magistrates .......very much analogous to a search warrant.
Re: Not "complying" is the crime, not the results of complying.
A section 49 request, which may then lead to prosecution under section 53 has to authorised in the same way as a search warrant.
Re: Not "complying" is the crime, not the results of complying.
I struggle to see what is wrong with this law. This is just an extension of the law to take account of technology. Just as the court can issue a warrant to allow a search of premises for evidence, the same applies to encrypted information.
In any event, in this case, I definitely can’t see what is wrong the defendant has already been convicted of terrorism offences.
Frankly, is this another "incite idiots to talk stupid, then arrest them under terrorist offences" kinda shit blue forces are pulling all over nowadays?
No. This looks more like an arrest of terrorists having been tracked the Security Services.
The men were arrested following a series of raids at their homes in April last year after an intelligence-led joint operation by the Metropolitan police counter-terrorism command and the security service.
Looks to me like an example of exactly what the Security Services should be doing.
NSA and GCHQ
All generations of the threat bear the hallmarks of state-manufactured malware rather than something geared towards conventional cybercrime but Kasperky Labs researchers are not speculating on its possible origins.
Maybe some of the folks who comment on NSA, and GCHQ activities should bear this sort of thing in mind.
Re: Tulips ! @ Mark
Bitcoins value is determined solely by the belief of the market that it has value. The problem with bitcoin is that unlike money as such it has no powerful sponsor.
So for example above 'rm -rf' quotes the Swiss Franc which has value because the Swiss government and banks say it has value (as do probably a lot of well heeled people holding bank accounts in Switzerland).
The key question then is why people (other than for use in illegal markets) will exchange bitcoin for other currencies. Particularly if more established fiscal markets start to either warn against, reject or outright ban bitcoin.
This is happening now and as I have speculated above may well be having a direct effect on the value of bitcoin. Personally I would assume that if there is sufficient adverse bitcoin news from reputable fiscal organisations it's value will collapse completely.
The volatility may also have a fair bit to do with the news around Bitcoin. As mentioned in this report the EBA have issued a health warning, and China appears to have banned Bitcoin.
In other news the US have been issuing warnings to do with Money Laundering on Bitcoin businesses. These would seem to be appropriate given that one of the most well know marketplaces was closed down by the FBI for trading stuff that would require money laundering....
Re: Yet one more reason
The trend does seem to be down .... last bitcoin price seems to be $732. I guess if you were a 'bitcoin' millionaire now would be a good time to sell?
Re: Remeber "Hypocrisy is the vaseline of politcal intercourse"
Also with a predilection for web sites of dubious morality ..... well certainly Methodist morality anyway.
Re: massive blackmail database being compiled...
Have you got any actual proof that this is happening?
- Does Apple's iOS 7 make you physically SICK? Try swallowing version 7.1
- Fee fie Firefox: Mozilla's lawyers probe Dell over browser install charge
- Pics Indestructible Death Stars blow up planets with glowing KILL RAY
- Video Snowden: You can't trust SPOOKS with your DATA
- Hands on Satisfy my scroll: El Reg gets claws on Windows 8.1 spring update