|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On March 13 2019 01:50 Mohdoo wrote:
My understanding is that simply by having control over the equipment, there are some very basic approaches that can be used to monitor data. That and the fact that the code for these devices is probably amazingly complex and easy to hide things in.
The service providers manage and configure their own equipment, not the vendor (ie Huawei). The code is written in a language that's over 40 years old.
Also no telco would ever go with a single vendor for a variety of reasons.
|
On March 13 2019 01:58 ticklishmusic wrote:The transcripts were leaked in January, and AFAIK no one made a big deal about it being "times up" for Mueller. And somehow I doubt xDaunt has actually read through all 360 pages to make that particular conclusion.
My impression is that xDaunt will see some conservative he follows say something doom'ish about Mueller/FBI/Clinton/Uranium/Soros, so he excitedly skips over to TL to dump the link on us, as if he just dropped the world's biggest mic.
|
A July 13, 2018 transcript from the girlfriend of a FBI agent is totally going to have all the information about the investigation. Sure, she used to be a lawyer for the FBI, that that still doesn't' give her unlimited access to investigation's case files. And these being dumped without context or annotation is in completely good faith.
You have to be a special kind of gullible to believe this is anything more than Republican Rep trying to defend Trump by releasing half baked information. Or think this will do anything to the investigation.
On March 13 2019 01:58 ticklishmusic wrote:The transcripts were leaked in January, and AFAIK no one made a big deal about it being "times up" for Mueller. And somehow I doubt xDaunt has actually read through all 360 pages to make that particular conclusion.
This is hilarious because it is front page on the Hill right now. No one bothered to ask: Didn't we already cover these?
|
On March 13 2019 01:20 CorsairHero wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2019 00:30 Simberto wrote:On March 12 2019 23:51 Vivax wrote:I've spotted a really weird article today. Weird as in, worrisome. It is subscription locked, but I'll put the source here for the sake of having one. + Show Spoiler +https://www.wsj.com/articles/drop-huawei-or-see-intelligence-sharing-pared-back-u-s-tells-germany-11552314827
What is it about the clinch US&Canada with Huawei? Why is the US blackmailing Germany to work against Chinese internet like this? It seems to be very hard to proof that a 5G infrastructure device that you built can not be used to spy. its pretty easy to prove if they provide the source code and compiler tools what methods of spying are you referring to here?
Source code isn't enough. Huawei can and does(and I'm sure other companies do as well) have spying modules inside the microprocessors themselves that do absolutely nothing 99.999% of the time, but 0.001% of the time will send data to somewhere. Non-programmable and non-readable.
Even if the vendor provides their own code it doesn't stop this from happening.
|
The transcripts haven't been fully released until now. There's a difference between leaking the transcript to a media outlet and outright releasing the transcript. Collins isn't doing this on his own accord. Someone is green lighting this. And the timing is coinciding with the apparent end of Mueller's investigation.
|
This Boeing 737 Max crash is really having an impact, they are grounded nearly everywhere now. Not in the US yet, FAA still deems them safe.
As reaction on the crisis, Trump commented on it by saying planes are too complicated, flown by computer scientists and he doesn't want Albert Einstein flying his plane.
+ Show Spoiler +
I kind of expected some ' American made is great' defense for Boeing giving the stress they are under now internationally. Did they slight him somehow?
|
On March 13 2019 02:09 Amui wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2019 01:20 CorsairHero wrote:On March 13 2019 00:30 Simberto wrote:On March 12 2019 23:51 Vivax wrote:I've spotted a really weird article today. Weird as in, worrisome. It is subscription locked, but I'll put the source here for the sake of having one. + Show Spoiler +https://www.wsj.com/articles/drop-huawei-or-see-intelligence-sharing-pared-back-u-s-tells-germany-11552314827
What is it about the clinch US&Canada with Huawei? Why is the US blackmailing Germany to work against Chinese internet like this? It seems to be very hard to proof that a 5G infrastructure device that you built can not be used to spy. its pretty easy to prove if they provide the source code and compiler tools what methods of spying are you referring to here? Source code isn't enough. Huawei can and does(and I'm sure other companies do as well) have spying modules inside the microprocessors themselves that do absolutely nothing 99.999% of the time, but 0.001% of the time will send data to somewhere. Non-programmable and non-readable.
you have a link for this?
|
There is a lot of speculation about why these transcripts none of us have been able to read were released and the deeper meaning as to why. Like a whole lot. And a lot of assuming when the investigation will end, because none of the previous times people have speculated it would end have come true.
|
On March 13 2019 00:55 JimmiC wrote:
But should it be? Many of the best coaches and GM's in sports have never played the sport at the highest or even a high level. (Bill Belichick is a perfect example) Perhaps they should look else where than just soldiers for who might be the best strategist. I would think the skill set that it requires to be a great soldier and a great strategist might be very different.
An important aspect of war is the human/emotional aspect, which is very difficult to know unless you've been in the situation yourself. It's easy to send 4 marines on a suicide mission to kill drones, but it isn't, and shouldn't be, as easy to just send 4 people to murder civilians in an enemy city. It's effective for sure, but not exactly ethical, and it will lower the morale of all your other soldiers (if they don't just straight up refuse the order, as they should). Another example is longevity. Is it really a good idea to use the squad who's been in the field for a month on low rations? Etc etc
|
On March 13 2019 00:45 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2019 23:27 ticklishmusic wrote:On March 12 2019 12:59 Mohdoo wrote:
I wish more than anything I could have a career in military intelligence doing wargames. It is honestly my dream job. Given this is a starcraft forum, I find this wholly unsurprising.  the first job requirement is that you’ve actually been a soldier in a war
It''ll suprise you to know that isn't the case. I'll leave it at that.
|
|
|
On March 13 2019 03:23 Dangermousecatdog wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2019 00:45 IgnE wrote:On March 12 2019 23:27 ticklishmusic wrote:On March 12 2019 12:59 Mohdoo wrote:
I wish more than anything I could have a career in military intelligence doing wargames. It is honestly my dream job. Given this is a starcraft forum, I find this wholly unsurprising. the first job requirement is that you’ve actually been a soldier in a war It''ll suprise you to know that isn't the case. I'll leave it at that.
No don't leave it at that, as that would be a crappy argument. please elaborate.
|
On March 13 2019 00:30 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2019 23:51 Vivax wrote:I've spotted a really weird article today. Weird as in, worrisome. It is subscription locked, but I'll put the source here for the sake of having one. + Show Spoiler +https://www.wsj.com/articles/drop-huawei-or-see-intelligence-sharing-pared-back-u-s-tells-germany-11552314827
What is it about the clinch US&Canada with Huawei? Why is the US blackmailing Germany to work against Chinese internet like this? The basic idea is that whoever supplies the infrastructure to build the 5G cellular networks probably has the ability to spy on a lot of things, and could even build in the possibility to just shut the system down. It is kinda scary to give a chinese company that ability, as they are very, very linked with the chinese government. However, Huawei offers (by far) the cheapest deal on this stuff. The nightmare scenario is the chinese government being able to listen in into everything happening via those networks (which will probably be most of the communication within the country in a bit), and to be able to threaten to shut the system down remotely. It seems to be very hard to proof that a 5G infrastructure device that you built can not be used to spy. The US obviously wants other countries to let (US-based) Cisco build that infrastructure. On the surface, because they don't want the chinese being able to spy on everyone, but i think the ability to use that infrastructure to spy on everyone themselves might also be on the US governments mind. In my opinion, the best solution for europe would be to use european companies to build this stuff, but that is sadly a lot more expensive. But building up that competence in the EU seems very valuable. And while i am a bit more comfortable to have the US spy on us rather than China, i would still prefer if none of them did.
Doesn't Ericsson (Swedish company) have that competence? They used to be dominating in that area until China took over. Though since the argument hinges on producing all hardware locally as well that might need some new competence.
https://www.ericsson.com/en/5g
|
On March 13 2019 03:26 Aveng3r wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2019 03:23 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On March 13 2019 00:45 IgnE wrote:On March 12 2019 23:27 ticklishmusic wrote:On March 12 2019 12:59 Mohdoo wrote:
I wish more than anything I could have a career in military intelligence doing wargames. It is honestly my dream job. Given this is a starcraft forum, I find this wholly unsurprising. the first job requirement is that you’ve actually been a soldier in a war It''ll suprise you to know that isn't the case. I'll leave it at that. No don't leave it at that, as that would be a crappy argument. please elaborate.
There is no argument. There's nothing to elaborate. There simply is no requirement for actually been a soldier in a war. It's just how it is.
|
On March 13 2019 02:33 CorsairHero wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2019 02:09 Amui wrote:On March 13 2019 01:20 CorsairHero wrote:On March 13 2019 00:30 Simberto wrote:On March 12 2019 23:51 Vivax wrote:I've spotted a really weird article today. Weird as in, worrisome. It is subscription locked, but I'll put the source here for the sake of having one. + Show Spoiler +https://www.wsj.com/articles/drop-huawei-or-see-intelligence-sharing-pared-back-u-s-tells-germany-11552314827
What is it about the clinch US&Canada with Huawei? Why is the US blackmailing Germany to work against Chinese internet like this? It seems to be very hard to proof that a 5G infrastructure device that you built can not be used to spy. its pretty easy to prove if they provide the source code and compiler tools what methods of spying are you referring to here? Source code isn't enough. Huawei can and does(and I'm sure other companies do as well) have spying modules inside the microprocessors themselves that do absolutely nothing 99.999% of the time, but 0.001% of the time will send data to somewhere. Non-programmable and non-readable. you have a link for this?
I would assume it operates somewhat similiar to this.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-10-04/the-big-hack-how-china-used-a-tiny-chip-to-infiltrate-america-s-top-companies
|
didn't basically every company named in that article say that the article was wrong?
|
On March 13 2019 03:50 ticklishmusic wrote:
didn't basically every company named in that article say that the article was wrong?
If you were one of those companies, would you rather lie about it and then fix the issue behind closed doors or admit it?
|
|
|
On March 13 2019 03:26 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2019 03:12 Excludos wrote:On March 13 2019 00:55 JimmiC wrote:
But should it be? Many of the best coaches and GM's in sports have never played the sport at the highest or even a high level. (Bill Belichick is a perfect example) Perhaps they should look else where than just soldiers for who might be the best strategist. I would think the skill set that it requires to be a great soldier and a great strategist might be very different. An important aspect of war is the human/emotional aspect, which is very difficult to know unless you've been in the situation yourself. It's easy to send 4 marines on a suicide mission to kill drones, but it isn't, and shouldn't be, as easy to just send 4 people to murder civilians in an enemy city. It's effective for sure, but not exactly ethical, and it will lower the morale of all your other soldiers (if they don't just straight up refuse the order, as they should). Another example is longevity. Is it really a good idea to use the squad who's been in the field for a month on low rations? Etc etc All are good points, and why soldiers should be involved. But it doesn't mean that everyone involved needs to a soldier.
I don't think they need to either? I could be completely mistaken, I don't know how it works today. But during ww2 when they started taking it seriously in the US, they brought in people from a lot of different places; some admirals, some civilians, some soldiers, etc. They did a lot of competitions, and one of the people who kept winning was not only a civilian, she was a girl (Which really didn't sit well with a lot of the higher uppers who kept losing to her). I apologise that names slip me atm. I only remember it from a documentary I saw a few years back.
|
On March 13 2019 03:55 Gahlo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2019 03:50 ticklishmusic wrote:
didn't basically every company named in that article say that the article was wrong? If you were one of those companies, would you rather lie about it and then fix the issue behind closed doors or admit it?
It seems like something that would be reasonably easy to verify by, you know, just cracking open a piece of equipment and looking at it.
The story comes off as way too conspiracy-ish.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
