US May Prevent Chinese Hackers From Attending Def Con, Black Hat 193
Taco Cowboy (5327) links to a report from Reuters that says "Washington is considering using visa restrictions to prevent Chinese nationals from attending popular summer hacking conferences in Las Vegas as part of a broader effort to curb Chinese cyber espionage, a senior administration official said Saturday. The official said that Washington could use such visa restrictions and other measures to keep Chinese from attending the August Def Con and Black Hat events to maintain pressure on China after the United States this week charged five Chinese military officers with hacking into U.S. companies to steal trade secrets."
Isolation (Score:2, Informative)
Good move US, isolate yourself from the rest of the world, so we don't have to do it.
See how that goes for you. Moves like this will only make the next Con's happen in a non totalitarian country, your loss.
PS: Isn't the 2nd amendment's sole purpose to prevent your government from acting against the people? Can you tell me what the f* you're waiting for?
Re: Isolation (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Dude, it's not about helping the Chinese.
It's about your government turning the country into a giant jail and you all are the inmates. Keeping Chinese nationals from Def Con, really? REALLY? Like that will achieve anything, so desperate for a new cold war to cover up their own shit and distract from their own illegal activites.
It would be hilarious if it wasn't so sad.
Call me Snake (Score:1)
It's about your government turning the country into a giant jail and you all are the inmates.
I thought I was dead...
Re: (Score:3)
so desperate for a new cold war
Wot are you on about? A "new" cold war? Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think you know
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, but his summation seems about right to me. Not that I have any belief that you COULD have done anything except make things worse.
As for publicly complaining, yes, various people did that from all sides. And it was totally ignored, whenever the govt. felt like ignoring it, and without any consequence to the govt. folk either actual in the present or plausible in the future.
At one point the "right to bear arms" was an important defense against the power of the government. It hasn't been for over a c
Re: (Score:2)
lol.. You say he is right then go right into countering him. You also go into how the government ignored everyone so it is likely that NOTHING could have happened that would have made it better.
Re: (Score:2)
And the oppressive government of the USSR is gone while the oppressive government of the US remains. See: Guns work.
Re: (Score:2)
Welllll... I wasn't aware of private gun ownership having anything to do with the collapse of the USSR, but I can't prove that it didn't. I can't validly argue against your point, but I also can't accept it without either more evidence, or a consistent causative model that would predict that rather then use it as post hoc justification. As far as I recall, nobody predicted that the USSR would collapse because of private gun ownership, and no one used that argument as an explanation at the time.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Bearing arms is a last resort, we prefer to exercise the 1st amendment to resolve disputes.
You mean this 1st amendment?
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
I actually lol'ed, are we even talking about the same United States? Because the United States I am talking about has neither freedom of speech, nor a free press. And the right to "peaceably assemble", really?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
PS: Isn't the 2nd amendment's sole purpose to prevent your government from acting against the people? Can you tell me what the f* you're waiting for?
2017.
No one wants to martyr the first black president.
After he leaves office, if the next guy doesn't actually reduce the entire federal government, we won't last a decade without a new American civil war.
Re:How now, 50 Mao? (Score:5, Interesting)
Then I guess all the corporations who let China build cheap crap for the US are traitors? And everyone buying something "Made in China" is as well?
Re: (Score:2)
As to the first part, if they are incorporated in the US there's an arguable case for that. As for the second, I'd instead target those who wrote the import/export laws, rather than those who, in obeying them, purchase legally imported goods.
OTOH, given that treason is defined quite specifically in the constitution, they may be traitors, but they haven't committed treason.
better idea (Score:5, Insightful)
Bar members of the Chinese military from attending. Even that is purely symbolic.
Someone should tell Obama that in American we don't bar people based on race or nationality alone.
Keep in mind. The US sets the standard. If we start doing things like this, don't whine when the China does the same thing. They could make the same case for any conference on any topic. If Americans come, they will steal XYZ.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
If we start doing things like this, don't whine when the China does the same thing.
can't tell if serious
Re:better idea (Score:5, Insightful)
Someone should tell Obama that in American we don't bar people based on race or nationality alone.
No, but there's nothing wrong with barring people based on political or military affiliation. China is not the US. They carefully control who they allow to leave China for the US, and so the Chinese citizens attending Def Con are doing so with the implicit permissions of the Chinese government.
They could make the same case for any conference on any topic.
Yeah, next time there is a hacker conference like Def Con based on complete freedom of expression and anarchy in China let us know. I won't hold my breath. And if China starts banning all US citizens from attending conferences, said conferences will no longer be held in China. But they won't, because the majority of China's economy currently revolves around placating American investors.
You can trash the US all you want, but there are a limited number of countries in the world that would even allow a conference like Def Con or Black Hat.
Re: (Score:3)
You can trash the US all you want, but there are a limited number of countries in the world that would even allow a conference like Def Con or Black Hat.
Many totalitarian governments like to get all the dissidents together in one easy to manage group. Show up and get entered into the database for extra scrutiny plus having all those dissidents in one group makes doing intelligence on them much easier. Always a good chance of hiring some too.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, totalitarian. Clearly the US government is totalitarian. Or maybe you should go look up that definition before you use it again.
Show up and get entered into the database for extra scrutiny plus having all those dissidents in one group makes doing intelligence on them much easier.
What you have described is exactly the Chinese government model. Except for the hiring part - the US clearly does that at Def Con, but instead of threatening to jail people they threaten to pay them 6 figures.
Re:better idea (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, America has inverted the normal definition of totalitarian to pretend they're the opposite. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re:better idea (Score:5, Informative)
How soon we forget. The FBI arrested Dmitri Sklyarov at DefCon.
Re: (Score:2)
That whole situation sucked and should never have happened. Though the result was he was released on bail, charges were eventually dropped, and after a jury trial Elcomsoft was found not guilty as well. Checks and balances... executive branch overreached and abused their power, judicial smacked them down.
Compared to recent events in Russia where a couple of musicians were arrested, held without bail for over 6 months, convicted in a kangaroo court, and sentenced to 2 years in prison for singing an "offens
Re: (Score:2)
Move the conference to Europe, which already has many similar ones.
Re: (Score:2)
Move the conference to Europe, which already has many similar ones.
But then most of the employees and contractors of the NSA won't be able to attend!!!
That's not a bug in your plan, of course...
Except for past/curr. Chinese history and practice (Score:1)
The Chinese don't have solid proof to the level that the US has on the Chinese. The Chinese only can cite a person that handed over US secrets, while the US can cite private and public sector examples (much less Chinese history of stealing from their own).
That, and it doesn't look like the US wants much from the US aside from a compliant labor pool.
Correction: (Score:1)
That, and it doesn't look like the US wants much from the Chinese aside from a compliant labor pool.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:better idea (Score:4, Interesting)
Bar members of the Chinese military from attending. Now how exactly does the NSA know it was members of the Chinese military. Let me guess after initiating proper diplomatic relations the NSA approached China's computer crime task force and initiated a legal joint investigation in the hacking and after proper legal investigation discovered the perpetrators. What, don't tell me this didn't happen, not even fucking close.
So the NSA hacked computers in China, proving beyond a shadow of a doubt those computer could be hacked and placed 'er' discovered proof of network hacking in the US, conducted by the NSA 'er' government of China and now the NSA 'er' government of China seeks to cover it up.
You can see the real problem here. The NSA blatantly and publicly lied repeatedly to it's own government, the NSA now has publicly declared it is hacking government computers in China based upon the evidence they are attempting to submit. Now we know how naughty the NSA has been, the question is would they, hack computers in the US and then falsify evidence and plant it on computers in China that it has now publicly admitted to hacking, in order to deflect attention away from it's own criminal activities.
Surely those idiots can see the problem they have created for themselves in combining network defence and network assault in the one unit. They are an offensive computer network organisation, their role is to destroy and break the security of other countries networks. Which now they are publicly admitting to via this flawed investigation, all based around hacking networks and breaking security and publicly proved only thing, is did hack government computers and networks in China. As to the validity of the evidence, they utterly tainted it to the point that only corrupt courts within the US would accept it and the rest of the world and the international courts would have to reject due to that extreme contamination.
Re: (Score:1)
Bar members of the Chinese military from attending.
The problem is that it's more than just the military, it's practically everyone there with any competency in computers. The rest are accessories.
Oh, and it doesn't take cheap shots at the NSA to know that.
Re: (Score:3)
You really don't get it at all. It is the sheer mitigated arrogance of the US government and claims that it's laws apply to every other country including the laws that the US government does not have to obey others countries laws in those countries. The total in you face arrogance of it all. For a start the NSA should have been told to STFU and everything should have been handed over to the FBI and the FBI should be pursuing the prosecution. This because they are a policing organisation that acts legally a
Re: (Score:2)
You really don't get it at all. It is the sheer mitigated arrogance of the US government...
How exactly is the US government's arrogance being mitigated [reference.com]? Based on the context, I'm guessing you meant 'unmitigated [merriam-webster.com]'.
And we wonder why folks outside the US think we're all morons. Sigh!
Re: (Score:2)
FBI... Policing.... That's good, tell me another. J. Edgar Hoover pretty much set the tone for the FBI. Which organization do you think is actually prosecuting most whisleblowers and anyone the gov doesn't like?
Re: (Score:3)
Bar members of the Chinese military from attending. Even that is purely symbolic. Someone should tell Obama that in American we don't bar people based on race or nationality alone.
This is all highly unconstitutional. If they are allowed to enter the united states, AND they are not being arrested or detained, then they have the rights and privileges that those present in the US have...
Including the right to freedom of speech, which includes the right to organize and assemble.
The Defcon. and Blackh
Re: (Score:3)
Bar members of the Chinese military from attending. Even that is purely symbolic. Someone should tell Obama that in American we don't bar people based on race or nationality alone.
This is all highly unconstitutional. If they are allowed to enter the united states, AND they are not being arrested or detained, then they have the rights and privileges that those present in the US have...
Including the right to freedom of speech, which includes the right to organize and assemble.
The Defcon. and Blackhat conferences are an exercise of free speech rights. The government cannot lawfully prohibit those conferences or prevent anyone from attending; doing so is in direct violation of the bill of rights due to interference with and abridgement constitutionally protected activities and rights and privileges.
I didn't even need to read TFA to know that this will be accomplished by denying visas to those folks, not by posting law enforcement personnel at the doors to the conference and checking IDs. The US can (and does) deny visas to all sorts of people, and for many reasons, including this kind of thing. As do most other countries.
Perhaps you should think about what you say before you say it? That's not meant to be an insult, just a suggestion.
Re: (Score:3)
Bar members of the Chinese military from attending. Even that is purely symbolic.
Someone should tell Obama that in American we don't bar people based on race or nationality alone.
This is all highly unconstitutional. If they are allowed to enter the united states, AND they are not being
arrested or detained, then they have the rights and privileges that those present in the US have...
Including the right to freedom of speech, which includes the right to organize and assemble.
The Defcon. and Blackhat conferences are an exercise of free speech rights.
The government cannot lawfully prohibit those conferences or prevent anyone from attending;
doing so is in direct violation of the bill of rights due to interference with and abridgement constitutionally protected activities
and rights and privileges.
I didn't even need to read TFA to know that this will be accomplished by denying visas to those folks, not by posting law enforcement personnel at the doors to the conference and checking IDs. The US can (and does) deny visas to all sorts of people, and for many reasons, including this kind of thing. As do most other countries.
Perhaps you should think about what you say before you say it? That's not meant to be an insult, just a suggestion.
I don't need to RTFA or read your prior comment to understand that barring Visas for this sort of thing is STUPID. They'll just pay some white guy to give them the data while a few hundred thousand Chinese who MIGHT have learned we are a great nation will become annoyed and say; "Well, I guess they saved me from visiting a ridiculous police state."
Making America act like the old USSR or some banana Republic isn't the way to win anything. By the time you protect virginity of your daughters, they've been walk
Re: (Score:2)
The US can (and does) deny visas to all sorts of people, and for many reasons, including this kind of thing. As do most other countries.
They can... but once someone gets a valid visitor's Visa and comes into the US -- they can't turn around and say you are not allowed to attend any security-related conferences.
The article headline didn't say US to deny Visitors' Visas to Chinese.
Re: (Score:2)
The article headline didn't say US to deny Visitors' Visas to Chinese.
That's true. I guess it's too difficult to read the first sentence of the summary. tl;dr, huh?
Re: (Score:2)
An interesting take. I addressed this further elsewhere [slashdot.org]. You might like to take a gander.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Doesn't say anything in there about helping anybody but us. Doesn't say our rules apply (or should be applied) to anybody but us either.
Hi, to be clear. That is a statement ONLY about the people establishing the constitution. When the PEOPLE established the constitution, we created a government of enumerated powers.
The first amendment doesn't say that it applies to citizens only, AND it does not apply to citizens only.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting
Re: (Score:2)
> we don't bar people based on race or nationality alone.
You don't? That does not align with my experience. How about Syria or Cuba?
Re: (Score:2)
Keep in mind. The US sets the standard.
I will agree with that. In the sense that any nation whose performance is lower than the US definitely deserves an "F".
Re: (Score:3)
I agree with this.
If we believe in "America" and Democracy -- we should stick with treating people equally. Back when this was something we did with pride -- we had a lot of people defect. Now we've got Americans selling out for a buck and a lot of "espionage" is done by buying databases from contractors with the US Gov -- go check out a wikileaks document dump sometime and get back with me if you doubt this.
By using drones instead of diplomacy. By cracking down on "Arab looking" rather than bad acting. By
Re: (Score:2)
It's considerably worse than that, it's stupidly counterproductive. If DefCon is held somewhere else next year, it will just put the US to a lot more trouble.
Better than arresting people at random (Score:1)
Since the US is under such an oppressive regime, it's better to be denied entry than the other thing that usually happens over there: detention with no accusation.
Re: (Score:2)
In Soviet 'merica, the crooks jail you!
Next defcon (Score:1)
yeah this is the way to do it. Look forward to going to defcon 2015, Beijing, China
Re: (Score:3)
Why china? you still need a visa, why not taiwan which is next door, or hong kong or somewhere else thats reasonably easy to get into.
Limit CS classroom education of Chinese students (Score:1)
If the government wants to stop Chinese from hacking US companies, it should limit the number of Chinese students studying Computer Science in American universities. That would cut the number of skilled Chinese hackers, and would increase the number of places in American universities for American students. ( See the article [cnn.com] "Chinese flock to elite U.S. schools". ) Of course there are worldwide MOOC classes, but limiting access to classroom Computer Science education would help.
Re: (Score:2)
If the government wants to stop Chinese from hacking US companies, it should limit the number of Chinese students studying Computer Science in American universities. That would cut the number of skilled Chinese hackers, and would increase the number of places in American universities for American students. ( See the article [cnn.com] "Chinese flock to elite U.S. schools". ) Of course there are worldwide MOOC classes, but limiting access to classroom Computer Science education would help.
Of course. Because no one else, anywhere in the world, knows how to hack. Or understands computer science.
Pro Tip: Get a passport and travel around a bit. You'll find that there are bright people everywhere, and often they have indoor plumbing and stuff.
Heck, in some places they even have universities (even in China). What a shocker!
Re: (Score:3)
Pro Tip: Get a passport and travel around a bit. You'll find that there are bright people everywhere, and often they have indoor plumbing and stuff.
If you're telling an American to go travel, you'll first have to explain that there is part of the planet that is outside of US, Canada and Mexico . .. .. .. ..
- Then you should explain the concept that people outside of those 3 countries do not always speak English
- and that they have sovereign countries with laws differing from those of the US (1)
- and that getting there likely requires more than a car
- and that people outside of those 3 countries might not be Christian, or Muslims (2)
- and that Americans
Re: (Score:2)
He didn't talk about Han, and given that there are 292 languages in China it is pretty obvious that the 56 ethnic groups you mention and who are officially recognized by China do not represent the whole of China. And yes, someone who wants to deny education solely based on nationality, when it was previously possible, is a racist asshole. Besides all that, science is universal. Once you start limiting and nationalizing it, your research will go down the gutter within a decade or so. With a "reverse brain dr
Re: (Score:2)
well it could be just about racism against people who look chinese you nitpicker you.
you would be hard pressed to find anyone who would consider those 56 groups as different races. not that it matters since that's not what racism means nowadays(get over it).
A little late isn't it? (Score:2)
Good. (Score:1)
Given how much they've already stolen from us and other First World countries, it would be a good thing.
Prevents a Security Threat (Score:1)
They're probably all running XP on their laptops, so keeping them out would significantly cut down on the number of vulnerabilities floating around the con WiFi.
Report from NIOC Hawaii (Score:1)
Recently finished up my 8 years in in Navy, last for were spent working alongside NSA, when you say "China's in every nook and crany" i't for the most part just bs malware...China is actually the #1 intruder we CATCH...it's the ones that we dont know about that to be worried about. Also, Defcon is all about freedom of information, i find it rather counter-productive to limit what it stands for...espeically comming form US with our "freedom of speech"
Time to move the conferences (Score:5, Informative)
When the US govt starts dictating who is allowed to come to your conferences you need to move the conference. Same as the AIDS research conferences have been held anywhere except the US since the 80s because from 1987 to 2009 the US govt banned people with AIDS from traveling to the US.
Re:Time to move the conferences (Score:5, Informative)
It isn't the only one. Quite a few conferences dedicated to cryptography and security have been held outside the US because of the ITAR controls [wikipedia.org] and other regulations that treat encryption as weapons and security systems as terrorist devices.
Cryptographic systems were listed as arms until about a decade ago, and even today some security technologies are potentially on the list. Even if they aren't on ITAR any more, attending the conference is certain to get your name entered to all kinds of US-based lists. Rather than risk being considered for international arms dealing and international terrorism, quite a few conferences take place anywhere but the US. The risk both to the conference itself and to those who might attend the conferences are just too great.
Austria, Switzerland, France, Malaysia, ... many countries are still more popular for security conferences than the US.
Re: (Score:2)
Great point.
Reagan showed the World what America was all about; "provincial prejudice and backwater pride."
They'll move the venue and some other nation will become a beacon of enlightenment.
Now there are people who say we can't tax wealthy people because they will all move -- and somehow they understand THAT concept but not this one. I'd rather have a lot of enlightened smart people, than people with money. The one makes the other regardless of who is talented with money.
Obama is a jerk (Score:1, Troll)
Ping ping (Score:1)
It's already been hacked. They offered me cash to go there in their stead.
Why doesn't the U.S. STRIKE BACK?!!! (Score:2)
Ok, the U.S. (through the NSA) has been revealed (through Snowden) to be able to:
1) record and retain EVERY phone call made in an ENTIRE country (actually two, the Bahamas and Afghanistan I think)
2) hack into the e-mail of at least some world leaders (for example: Germany, not exactly weak in the technology department)
3) subvert (and exploit?) the standards for some of the world's most widely used security protocols
4) hack into the networks of Huawei to view source code (and change it?), one of the largest
Re: (Score:2)
Both of them.
Not that I'd mind, being European... but while the Chinese may be much, they're hardly dumb.
Xenophobia (Score:2)
These Are Standard Tactics (Score:2)
Used by countries the world over. "No, your people can't come to our country for this or that conference/function/speech, etc. You guys piss us off about something or other, so we're going to make a stink about it.
This is nothing new, nor is it especially interesting. It's just a (not so) friendly reminder to the Chinese that we don't like their attempts (both successful and unsuccessful) at espionage (both industrial and political). That we do it to them and others is irrelevant. This is a political p
Pot, meet kettle (Score:1)
The US has been guilty of pervasive industrial espionage for a very long time. The whole US regime is just an extension of corporate power. It always disgusts when, when I hear Americans talk of democracy. At least in China the opposite is true, corporate power is largely an extension of the regime, and however opressive, there appears to be a genuine attempt to improve social conditions instead of just boosting shareholder profit.
All these accusations levelled at China, seem merely to be a distraction from
Why not ban the NSA? (Score:3)
I mean those people create _actual_ harm.
China cannot harm people outside China in any significant way, and should they ever do, your local government would at least protest. However no western government ever protests against the US... even when they abduct people.
China doesn't even run large sigint installations in Germany the way the US does.
It all makes sense (Score:2)
Don't you ever learn? (Score:2)
What do you think will the net effect be? It might work this year, and next year you'll see the conference move abroad, costing you not only income from tourism but also the ability to sneak your spooks easily into the con.
I sometimes really wonder if the responsible parties in the US are acting dumb or whether they are.
Oh the Irony. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Pretty much. I'm sure people are going to froth at the mouth and all the rest until you [usatoday.com] post [ap.org] stories [breitbart.com] like [thehill.com] this. [judicialwatch.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
you had me until breitbart
That's nice, now go read the article and what will you see? Oh that's right, an actual ICE report(including metrics) that lists what they've been doing. That was later picked up by some other news services, damn that reality check.
Re: (Score:2)
you had me until breitbart
That's nice, now go read the article and what will you see?
Yeah...uh, by the time I closed the annoying pop-ups and stopped the auto-playing video commercial that was loaded, I decided NOT to read the article. Chew on that reality.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah...uh, by the time I closed the annoying pop-ups and stopped the auto-playing video commercial that was loaded, I decided NOT to read the article. Chew on that reality.
That's nice. After all, what does it take to pause something, and close a popup these days? 8 seconds, 10 seconds? Apparently that's too much effort. Why are you using the internet without an adblocker anyway? Besides pure laziness.
Re: (Score:2)
That's nice. After all, what does it take to pause something, and close a popup these days? 8 seconds, 10 seconds? Apparently that's too much effort.
That is nice, isn't it? But you're repeating yourself.
I've long been in the habit of quickly bouncing off sites that use annoying advertising tactics like breitbart.com. Personally, I wouldn't link to such a site in this or any other forum. But that's just me. You obviously feel differently.
In any case, the FACT that Andrew Breitbart was an ideological blowhard had nothing to do with my comment to your post. I just don't like douchey sites that pull that kind of cheap advertising crap.
Why are you using the internet without an adblocker anyway? Besides pure laziness.
Not that it's any
Re: (Score:2)
I thought it was via H1-B.
Re: (Score:2)
"Under the Obama administration"
You say that as if anything would have been different 14 years ago. Obama and ICE are still deporting lots of people. We still have a border with Mexico so it's a good way to sneak in.
The comment you made is lazy and stupid and has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently, he hit a nerve.
And why would Clinton have banned the Chinese from DefCon? They were helping get Al Gore elected that year.
Re: (Score:2)
Had she came through the Mexican border and dropped an anchor baby, she would be set to a path of citizenship no doubt.
Or, she could've come through before that Reagen policy thingy. What was that called back then? Oh yeah, AMNESTY.
(the chance of R hero being elected today, ZERO)
Re: (Score:2)
(the chance of R hero being elected today, ZERO)
Very insightful. He's dead.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What's funny is I had a green card when I was doing some work in the US back 12-15 years ago, and considered seriously becoming a US citizen(from Canada). What burns my ass, is that if I follow the rules I could be waiting upwards of a decade. While people who enter illegally can skip the entire process, get a pat on the head, and basically gloat in the face of the rule of law. What the purpose of even having the rule of law, if no one is going to enforce it? And at the very worst, actively work again
Re: (Score:2)
King Canute used the tide as an example of something he couldn't stop. Similarly illegal imigrants are so much of a part of the US economy that there is not seen to be a hope or point in stopping them, hence the "pat on the head, and basically gloat in the face of the rule of law".
Re: (Score:2)
King Canute used the tide as an example of something he couldn't stop. Similarly illegal imigrants are so much of a part of the US economy that there is not seen to be a hope or point in stopping them, hence the "pat on the head, and basically gloat in the face of the rule of law".
Oh please. The only people making an excuse that immigrants are a "part of the economy" are people who don't want to enforce the law. I remember here in Ontario when they changed the law to allow crop pickers in, and basically forced out everyone who'd been doing it for years. Now we've got a temporary foreign workers(TFW) program, and people have had enough.
If Canada's population can figure it out and pressure politicians, can't figure out why Americans can't.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Immigration status doesn't really have much to do with basic human rights.
At least, not in civilized countries.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Then we could stop buying goods from China and watch them collapse.
Re: (Score:2)
Then China wouldn't have any dollars to roll into Treasury Bonds and we'd collapse.
Globalization is a bitch.
Not if they just repudiate the debt. (Score:1)
There's always the rest of the world(read: countries within the NATO-defined First World) that doesn't want the US's head on a plate.
Re:Not if they just repudiate the debt. (Score:5, Insightful)
There's always the rest of the world(read: countries within the NATO-defined First World) that doesn't want the US's head on a plate.
Dude, I hate to disillusion you, but we ALL want your head on a plate. If you meet someone and they lead you to believe otherwise, you should try to recognize that he's talking out of both corners of his mouth in an effort to get something out of you. None of us like you. I was half tempted to say that, maybe, the Israeli's, but honestly, I'm confident they think of you as a self-absorbed pack of idiots whose only role is to be exploited.
This is not a troll. At least, it's not intended to be a troll. I genuinely am trying to set you straight, help bring your perspective a little closer to the realities that exist outside your borders.
The shit you guys are responsible for as a nation is not a joke. No one is laughing along with you.
Inside your country, you can divide things up into "The CIA did this, the NSA did that, I didn't do shit, I was just here minding my own business and paying my taxes.", and that flies with the people you meet on the street.
But then when Chinese hackers do something, you say "China did it."
That's how it is for the rest of us too. Without open warfare, you can't intrude into the inner workings of China and hold individual citizens accountable, you need to deal with the entire state, hold them accountable, and leave it to them to hold the individual citizens accountable, or not.
We can't intrude into the inner workings of America and hold individual citizens accountable, we need to deal with your entire state, hold you accountable, and leave it to you to hold the NSA accountable.
So, basically, everything your government does to the rest of us, you have done to the rest of us. You can argue about fairness and prejudice till you're blue in the face, but these are the power dynamics, and that's just how it is.
You seriously need to clean your house before the rest of the world is forced to come do it for you. If you don't realize just how precarious a position your government has put you in, you really need to wake up.
Re: (Score:2)
You seriously need to clean your house before the rest of the world is forced to come do it for you. If you don't realize just how precarious a position your government has put you in, you really need to wake up.
You and which army? Seriously, grow up. Read some history. Right now we are in a 'Pax Americana' bit of time (for various values of 'pax'). This will ebb and flow and it may be that China becomes ascendent in the next couple of decades. Or not. These changes often take hundreds of years to play out and what appears to be a certainty one year may seem like a distant dream (or nightmare) the next. Maybe Europe will become a dominant force although history tells us that if you want to go that route, you
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately the US would also collapse, so it would be cutting off your nose to spite your face. The US economy needs cheap Chinese goods to make those extremely low paid service jobs it is based on viable. What do you think would happen if two thirds of Walmart's shelves were empty?
No, the US hasn't been proven to anything. (Score:2)
The only solid (and court-tested) proof exists on the Chinese against the US (and about every First World country).
Snowden will only count when he and his case comes before a US court. Until then, any statements, materials, or positions held by him / his supporters are only conjecture.
Re: (Score:1)