China Taking on U.S. in Cyber Arms Race 262
Pabugs writes with a CNN story about an uncomfortable development in world politics and information technology. According to General Robert Elder, an Air Force military man setting up a 'cyber command' in Louisiana's Barksdale Air Force Base, the nation of China is already in the process of developing their own 'cyber warfare' techniques. While Elder described the bulk of China's operations as focusing on espionage, they and others around the world have more serious goals in mind. "The Defense Department said in its annual report on China's military power last month that China regarded computer network operations -- attacks, defense and exploitation -- as critical to achieving "electromagnetic dominance" early in a conflict. China's People's Liberation Army has established information warfare units to develop viruses to attack enemy computer systems and networks, the Pentagon said. China also was investing in electronic countermeasures and defenses against electronic attack, including infrared decoys, angle reflectors and false-target generators, it said."
No surprise to those watching China (Score:5, Informative)
After the fall of the Soviet Union, China in some ways became the de facto ideological leader of the worldwide Communist movement. China found that it could use international Communist groups and networks, just as the Soviets did, to find persons sympathetic to the causes of Communism and socialism. Indeed, China has actively interacted with and supported international Communists, even persons or organizations known to be involved in criminal activities such a counterfeiting and money laundering. Chinese government officials have been known to meet with those in Communist organizations and student groups abroad, and there are indications such resources are leveraged in a similar fashion as with Russian intelligence.
As something of a flag bearer for world Communism, Beijing has become a "second Rome for Marxism-Leninism". China's Communists, much like the former Soviet Union's, believe world socialism is inevitable and that the Americans are a symbol of what is standing in their way. With the Soviets, the watchword was American "imperialism"; with the Chinese, American "hegemony". However, the Chinese also understand that many in the United States and the West in general view Communism negatively. As such, resources are also devoted to putting forth the images of Capitalism and quasi-democratic ideals, even as the vast populace of China enjoys no such benefit therefrom.
Part of China's strategic campaign is aided by its own system of government. As a system of government with control over much its own press, and even considerable influence over foreign press, China is executing an internal propaganda campaign against the United States with China's own people. At any opportunity, US intentions are painted as at best questionable and at worst aggressive and malicious. This environment, over time, will continue to enhance any support among the general populace for anti-US policy, or actions that must be taken against the United States, possibly with respect to quasi-autonomous disputed areas, such as Taiwan. Without access to multiple viewpoints on a situation, the Chinese people are fed a picture of the world as the Communist leadership wants it seen. Today, that includes mass censorship of the internet, and any sites associated with resistance movements, reformist groups, human rights organizations, and so on.
The propaganda does not stop at China's borders. The effort extends internationally, as China labors to appear clothed in the ideals of Capitalism and free markets - which it, in turn, knows will be seen by many experts as indicative of the decline of Communism. Some propaganda operations are not so subtle, with international news organizations living under the threat of losing their Beijing presence if information that is perceived too negative is published about China.
The continuing enhancement of these ideas lead to easing of trade restrictions, which in turn increases the transfer of high technology into China, and, especially, the finances so critically needed for the silent buildup of China's strength, military and otherwise. China is diligently working to continue to build its conventional army and navy, while also growing its strategic and high technology military capabilities. Chinese military theorists have envisioned new battlefields, where conflict does not happen in open warfare but also on the Internet, via the worl
Re:No surprise to those watching China (Score:4, Insightful)
I swear, we as Americans are so freaking self-righteous! We're the ONLY ones that can protect "our" internet. We're the ONLY ones who can monetarily profit from the expansion of China. We're the ONLY ones who should own nuclear weapons & should dictate who else can & can't!
I'd give you a +1 just for the length if your long, drawn-out diatribe wasn't riddled with subtle rifts of "I'm American, Hear me Roar!" You speak of "the spread of propaganda" & the use of "deception, disinformation & influence" by the Chinese yet we, as Americans, have been doing it for MUCH longer! As Robert Burns said in a poem:
"Ah that there would be someone to give us Eyes to see ourselves as others see us"
Re:No surprise to those watching China (Score:5, Interesting)
If you believe that Communism and freedom and democracy are just two sides of the same coin, I can see your line of reasoning. Sure, Capitalism is in the mix as well, but Captialism only exists and flourishes in a manifestly free society. Some believe that neither model is "better"; just different - the old "Under Communism, man exploits man - under Capitalism, it's the other way around" bit.
Thankfully, many people don't see it that way, and have recognized the benefits of freedom, free access to information, freedom of the press, freedom of speech, and so on. Sure, freedom is tempered with the rule of law, and no system of government is perfect, but to quote Winston Churchill, "Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."
Re: (Score:2)
Many people say that China is more capitalist than the USA with their recent growth.
China is hardly a free country. (and it's certainly not communist either)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's too bad that those people don't get together and create a sovereign nation where all of the citizens could enjoy those benefits.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So why is China laughing all the way to the bank?
I agree ideology and moralising are all fine a dandy when you are sitting in a chair, but what you call "moral relativity" is what China calls "pragmatisim". And even though I wholeheartedly agree with Winston, you cannot sell democracy to people who don't want it (if that's a hard concept for you to swallow then think about why generals and CEO's are not elected by the people unde
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:No surprise to those watching China (Score:5, Insightful)
And this right here folks is why propaganda is a bad idea. Sure it can help you sway citizens to your cause, but in the end the populace is a bunch of people whose ideas are so clouded by the propaganda and emotions tied to it, they don't even understand the terms they are discussing.
Communism is an economic system akin to capitalism. It, in fact, co-exists with capitalism on some level in every nation on earth. Did you grow up in a family where your parents and the children shared resources and allocated them as a group? That is a very small communist cell operating within a larger capitalist economy. The US currently and always has been a nation of widespread communism. The term "communism" in the US, however, has been assigned a different meaning. Ironically, that meaning is "a totalitarian government that advocates extreme socialism." Socialism is also an economic system and one also in widespread use in every nation on earth. Public schools, roads, police, the military, welfare, prisons, etc. are all examples of socialism. Even more confusingly, the term "socialism" in the US has been co-opted to mean any socialist program that is new and not something we've always had and don't consider.
Every economy is a blend of capitalism, communism, and socialism. The economic system you have and how it favors those three components does not determine what type of government you have, but it does influence it. For example, economies that favor extreme socialism, like the former soviet union and current day China (although in decreasing amounts) have more consolidated decision making. That is consolidated power. The more of this that exists, the easier it is for a totalitarian regime to seize that power. For this reason, democracies that favor socialism to extreme extents, tend to fail and become totalitarian states (dictatorships and oligarchies).
You have it backwards. As I explained, moderate capitalism helps to prevent a totalitarian regime from taking over the government and it lends itself to the overthrow of those regimes, although not necessarily to democracy.
Your fallacy is in equating capitalism with democracy and in failing to see that all economies are a blend of the three economic systems. Favoring any one of those three models to an extreme leads to a breakdown of the system. Too much capitalism leads to wealth condensation, where all the money and hence power consolidates into only a few hands, thus also making it easy for a totalitarian regime to take over and motivates the people to aid in overthrowing those in power (since it is the only way to return to a more level economic playing field). The US is perilously close to that end of the spectrum right now, as wealth disparity continues to rise in this country.
Sadly, very few people in the US see much of anything clearly when the term "communist" is mentioned, even when applied to an extreme socialist state like China. How often do you see the press point out and explain the difference?
I agree with him. I just don't conflate democracy with capitalism as you seem to. One is a system of government and one is an economic system. Extreme capitalism can just as easily destroy a democracy as extreme communism or extreme socialism. The key is to have a moderate, balanced economy instead of being an extremist.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Good post! I must point out that traditional communism WILL NOT happen in a free society.
Well, traditional communism, would be communes, and they certainly do happen in a free society. There are quite a few just in this area.
You have to MAKE THEM do it. Thus Lenin, Stalin, and Mao, blood drenched butchers all.
Ahh, perhaps you're referring to the agendas of the "communist" political parties in Russia and China. Those did not advocate communism any more than the democratic party is for greater democracy. It was just a name they used. Their agenda was (ostensibly) to consolidate power so that at some point in the distant future a socialist state could be perfected. As far as I
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
No, we did not or at least not as you suggest. In my family we received only the basic items (food, clothing, shelter, and education) and items directly associated with those needs free of charge (and even then they were allocated by the parents, not the children).
Those items more than qualify your family as a communist cell. The allocation of resources within the cell may be democratic or it may be authoritarian. The method is immaterial to whether or not it is communism. One of the local housing co-ops votes on what groceries they buy. The monastery near where I used to live was authoritarian, with the highest ranking monk making all the final decisions. Both were communist cells.
If we wanted anything else then we had to save our allowance money...
On of the interesting aspect of communism is that usually, not all resources were
Re: (Score:2)
Your joke betrays the truth (Score:2)
Rather, some people are realistic: some differences are the result of legitimate cultural and philosophical differences, as opposed to "right" and "wrong" or "good" and "evil"; but at the same time, there are intrinsically better ways of doing things if you believe that freedom is a universally valuable principle.
When you d
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The fact is that china puts a lot of energy into it's relationship with the US, and vice versa.
What China is doing, rather, what was presented as what China is doing, has no bearing on how good or evil the US is. There was no insinuation of what you suggest whatsoever.
Rather, I hear a massive anti-us stance in _your_ post.
And as someone else mentioned, China is orders of ma
Re: (Score:2)
The original post was not condemning China, it was merely indicating the way things are. No one said the US was any better in their own right.
And yet unless you outright bash the US, you get modded into oblivion.
Interesting.
And I'm no american, and have very little love for the politics and position of the US within the world.
Interesting.
Sure would be nice if the world was as black and white as
Re: (Score:2)
This thread didn't start out as a 'China vs US' bashfest, it was turned into one. THAT is what irked me.
BTW, my comment on the age of China was a response to what someone else was trying to insinuate. And you presume WAY too much. What makes you assume I'm american or am waving the flag of the righteous and free or whatever you seem to think?
Sheesh. People need to sto
Re: (Score:2)
'If' was merely conditional to your wanting to have some way of weaseling out of being a dick, but as you are fully aware, changed nothing about what you fully int
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
May the Lord have the gift to give us,
to see ourselves as others see us.
Allegedly when his trousers fell down (NOT).
Right, well done. (Score:4, Insightful)
No, it doesn't. It does a bit here and there but it has no effective overall strategy.
I swear, we as Americans are so freaking self-righteous!
You misspelled either 'complacent' or 'doomed' but I don't know which; either would make sense.
You speak of "the spread of propaganda" & the use of "deception, disinformation & influence" by the Chinese yet we, as Americans, have been doing it for MUCH longer!
No, you haven't. You want to think you have, but you haven't. There has never been an American propaganda initiative that was 5% as effective as the Chinese PR machine for their attack on India. You wish you could do it (and then you'd have fun feeling all guilty about it) but you can't. Do you think the Iraq strategy would be in such a mess if you could do what the Chinese did in 1962?
I know of what I speak. So can you, if you read Xinhua every day. Just read it. After a few months, you will start to believe. It is a whole other history, a whole other way of looking at the world. America has nothing like it. That is why America is losing; that is why America is cast as the bad guy when they invade one lousy country for oil or whatever, and China gets to flatten the whole of central Asia, northeast Asia, and half Africa as far as I can see by this point, and yet remain Teh Cool.
You lost already. Going "oh but we are so bad for employing these elite evil technologies and techniques, teehee, oh wicked wicked us for being so kickass" does not help. Watch Fox, watch CNN, watch Al-Jazeera, even watch the BBC if you have to, and you will see different spins, different biases, different points of view. Watch Xinhua even in English and you will see a different reality. "Tibetan People Bask In Glow Of Rosy Future". When you can come up with a headline like that and have 1/3 of the world take it as truth, THEN you will be making progess.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The one difference, thought, is how much control the state has over the media. I know some
You talk like that in China, and you disappear.
Re: (Score:2)
You should be a script writer for GWB, that is hilarious!
Re:No surprise to those watching China (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't even know where to go with this, except to say that you are a shining example of everything I just said in the very post to which you responded.
And if you're going to get all semantic about it in the same way that some people say "the United States isn't really a 'democracy'; it's a federal republic," then go for it. But otherwise, it's perfectly acceptable and indeed correct to refer to China as Communist.
C
Re: (Score:2)
China has had a massive, documented, and concerted effort to get people of all stripes, from authors to analysts to politicians to government officials to individuals members of societies such as yourself, to believe they are no longer "Communist". Apparently it's working quite well.
Right... It's all a big conspiracy. 1000 million Chinese are all in on it!!!!!!
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/db3a3248-19be-11dc-99c5-00 0b5df10621.html [ft.com]
It's actually much worse than communism. Now, the whole world is going to have to compete with the chinese.
Re:No surprise to those watching China (Score:4, Insightful)
Yeah, China has pockets of Capitalism where it's convenient. Even to the extreme in some cases. They also leverage Hong Kong in this respect to great advantage. Capitalism where it benefits the goals of furtherance of the ideals of the Chinese leadership.
And as I just said in another post:
The United States has pockets of what could be called "socialism" in government and government programs. Does that mean the United States is socialist, or isn't Capitalist/Democratic? Of course not. To say that the existence of elements traditionally antithetical to pure "Communism" is proof that China is no longer "Communist" completely misses the larger point, and ignores the fact that China actually has significant intelligence programs dedicated to making people outside of China believe they are no longer Communist, and hint: it's not because they "really aren't any more".
It's interesting folks like yourself think it's all about "red-baiting", or artificially calling the Chinese "Communists" because it makes them a more palatable adversary. China has invested a significant amount of intelligence resources over the last twelve or so years into making people erroneously believe that they have abandoned Communism and are really now a quasi-Capitalist state, because they know that appears "friendly" to the West, and primarily to the United States. This is thoroughly and well-documented, and your refusal to believe that might actually be the case is interesting.
Re: (Score:2)
Political foes stabbing the US in the back - I'm shocked!
I'm just curious at this point.... (Score:3, Interesting)
You're *WAY* behind the times. (Score:2)
Communism is nothing but a tool for political control in the hands of the Chinese Central Authority. They realized that the consistent pur
NB... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Also, the United States has pockets of what could be called "socialism" in government and government programs. Does that mean the United States is socialist, or isn't Capitalist/Democratic? Of course not. To say that the existence of elements tra
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Like this: the inevitable result of attempting to intersect Marxism with a government is oppressive State communism.
I.e., the "communism" that we see is simply the only result one can reasonably expect of any attempt to generate the communism on paper, in the real world, on any national scale.
C//
Re:No surprise to those watching China (Score:5, Interesting)
A 'second Rome', or a 'Constantinople'?
I don't ask to be some semantical nazi or anything, but this phrase piqued my interest a bit... When Rome basically went splat and fell into the dark ages, Constantinople was basically it. There are a lot of the same parallels, too - The Eastern Roman Empire wasn't nearly as outgoing, wan't nearly as -how do I put it- 'extroverted'? Also, Rome wasn't nearly as refined. The paralels are starting to pile up at this point.
China does do one thing different, though - it welcomes outsiders and uses as much as it can from them. It also exists in a far different geopolitical environment.
I also think that China's political system is (slowly) being changed over time, and could not survive for long if a hard enough adversity hit them - either politically or economically. Something on the order of the Great Depression (a global one, like in the early 1930's) would likely foment some very bad mojo in Beijing, and traditional tolerance by the masses aside, I don't think the Chinese gov't could withstand it w/o either collapsing or going back to the iron fist.
I guess that, while it is good that the West does see them as something to be reckoned with, I believe that the Chinese political system is an increasingly fragile one, but will hold up - as long as times are good.
Re: (Score:2)
In that usage, "second Rome" refers to Constantinople [wikipedia.org].
the chinese are old school authoritarian (Score:3, Insightful)
ideologically, the chinese are severely compromised: a communist system only in name. in actuality the chinese are more capitalist than the worst excesses of the gilded age under the robber barons. witness the latest scandals just today: disgusting child labor [news.com.au] and fake and deadly products [cnn.com]
this hypercapitalism is resulting in gated communities of ultraric
Re: (Score:2)
China can be expected to increase strategic intelligence operations with respect to the United States and its other adversaries, especially as it continues its campaign for "multi-polarity"
Yes, duh - this is what nations do, even to their 'friends'. Israel spies on America, America s
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
- China is growing in power and influence in many subtle and not so subtle ways
- China is COMMUNIST, and may be DANGEROUS
Did I miss anything? And did you really need so many words for that?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:No surprise to those watching China (Score:4, Insightful)
Reasons China is not communist:
- Most of the farmers own their own land, and can sell it if they want to.
- Most of the companies are privately owned, and there is PLENTY of competition (check out this month's national geographic [nationalgeographic.com] for a clear picture of the competition.)
- The government has been selling off the businesses they do own.
- If you actually go there, you may get the feeling all anyone cares about is money.
Your issue is not that China is communist, it is that China is authoritarian. You can't even get your terms straight (communism is not necessarily authoritarian at all). No one disagrees that an authoritarian China is a bad thing, however, you cannot deny that the situation is much better than it was in 1979 (read Wild Swans [amazon.com] and you will see how much better it has gotten). The hope is that with prosperity the situation will ease, and the Chinese will become more free and less authoritarian in a peaceful manner, much like what happened in Taiwan and South Korea in the 80s.
In the end, China IS going to become an international power, that cannot be stopped anymore than a center break can be stopped in chess when it is ripe. Of course they want a strong military to match the US. No one in the world likes to be pushed around by us. But what are we going to do to stop it? Bomb them? Bad idea. Stop trading with them? That will slow them down, but they have enough other trading partners that they would still grow rapidly, and it would hurt us more than them.
The only thing we can do is accept the fact that China is going to become a world power in the next few decades, and adjust our strategy appropriately. For better or for worse China is coming, and we are much better off spending our energy preparing for it than wasting our time in a hopeless effort to try to prevent it.
A genocidal observation (Score:2)
While China is clearly a growing world power, nearly all of this power is derived from pure manpower and numbers.
Actually, their natural resources aren't too miserable. Not great, but not miserable.
Really though, stopping them shouldn't be hard, if someone is willing to be ruthless enough. Their prime blind spot is a near-complete lack of concern for environmental safety. Ergo, Evil Geniuses for a Better Tommorrow (Inc.) should set up a few shell companies to start manufacturing products for within
Re: (Score:2)
Was it not Mao Tsetung who once said, "the information that is given to the peasants must be carefully controlled so that they draw the right conclusions from it," or something to that effect. This is an old standard from the communist play book and should not be surprising in the least.
Re: (Score:2)
$3.99 CDN.
Normal price, not marked down at all.
That thing simply can NOT be made for that low a price, period. Can't be done. Let alone make a profit. Shit, I couldn't ship it to the other side of the world for that price.
Made in P.R.C.
I took it back and paid ~20 for one made closer to home. NOT because I wouldn't want my money going to China mind you, but because I
Re: (Score:2)
Ten Thousand Villages [tenthousandvillages.ca]
I know that by buying through ten thousand villages, that the people that actually made this item got paid for the work they put into it.
Re: (Score:2)
The United States government has nowhere near any level of real or incidental control over the press as in China. And any "control" exercised asserted is artificial, because we can ALWAYS find out more information from sources i
Re: (Score:2)
Chinese propaganda you say... But the reality is not that the Chinese have propaganda, it's that they have more propaganda than the west, presumably. I
And... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Probably get modded for Troll, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
I gotta say that it feels like that particular war's started already, and it's just that nobody actually told us.
Whether intentional or just a result of all those pirated copies of Winderz, the sheer number of bot-net/zombie attacks coming from China is staggering.
Too bad the "Great Firewall of China" is so concerned about information going IN to the country... I guess its perfectly fine if a citizen's computer sends thousands of emails for v1@gr@ or posts a zillion commercial messages into someone's threaded discussions... Just as long as it doesn't inform the user of how they've got very little freedom and a horrible standard of living, or say anything bad about the Chinese gub'ment!
The best way to get information into China (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Actually, the US is quite a bit ahead on the botnet/zombie attack category. China is more making up for it with other scans and attempted worm propagation from non-zombied (just infected) machines. More attacks are coming out of China than anywhere else, but the US is still hosting more botnets/zombies than China.
Black hat approach to preventing bot nets? (Score:2)
Just as long as it doesn't inform the user of how they've got very little freedom and a horrible standard of living, or say anything bad about the Chinese gub'ment!
Aha!
1) Develop one's own virus/bot package to attack vulnerable computers
2) Deploy bot net
3) Program all computers on bot net to begin spamming the world (including the Chinese Secret Police) about China's lousy human rights record, Tiananmen Square, and Falun Gong.
4) All such computers in China are taken out and shot, along with thei
Beginning... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Of course this also brings many SF scenarios closer to reality as well.
China's First Move (Score:2)
Redundant (Score:2)
Inframa-watchits?? (Score:2)
Eh?
The article doesn't seem to explain what the hell these are supposed to be - can someone enlighten me? It seems as though, by branding ICT warfare as "electromagnetic warfare", they've confused the issue somewhat. What does infrared have to do with internet tubes and a bunch of ones and zeros?
If they mean "Chaff and Mirrors", well... what the hell? Whom did they get this info from, and were they trying not to giggle when they said it? Or did I just not grasp the ar
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
"China also was investing in electronic countermeasures and defenses against electronic attack, including infrared decoys, angle reflectors and false-target generators, it said."
The article said that in addition of all of this, they also invested in ECMs and general defenses against electronic attacks.
... (chaffs are considered as ECMs because they are a counter for electronic targetting systems)
I see your point, but you could also consider that the infrared targetting systems are electronic also
China owns a lot of US debt (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Two look at the US during our depression what got us out of it. By gearing up the country for war jobs and money were produced. China would do the exact same thing. And since they have a ton of US factories well that wont be a pro
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They are selling it off though, which along with the US government borrowing like no tomorrow is why the US is already experienci
Re: (Score:2)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/2313847.stm [bbc.co.uk]
http://forex.gftforex.com/public/blog/145016 [gftforex.com]
what a surprise.. (Score:2)
If China had started first, the US would be responding, and it would be 'Right' and 'Good' that they do so.
China is doing exactly the same thing, and it's bad? Hello? Reality calling, this is not a surprise....
easy (Score:3, Funny)
Victory.
Another strange twist in our China relationship (Score:5, Insightful)
What will be even more interesting is a conflict that forces us to begin manufacturing domestically again. I wonder how long it'll take to ramp up all the factories that closed up during the last 30 years or so?
Any country on Earth with enough technological resources to protect would be stupid not to start thinking about ways to defend it in a conflict. China's no exception.
Re:Another strange twist in our China relationship (Score:4, Insightful)
I think you are a little confused (Score:2)
The question with China isn't if they could build a lot, but could they do anything with it. The first challenge they'd face is getting all that stuff across the ocean. This would not be a qui
Re: (Score:2)
Then they dump the US dollar (our economy tanks. maybe china takes a hit but at this point it is a war). Now you have a US with a weak economy, weak military, out of the middle east (wonder how much gas costs after that), etc.
Irresistible and slightly OT joke (Score:2)
The Politburo asks Chairman Mao for a statement. He says "We run out of Americans first".
Now look at the world map, preferably centred on the North Pole, think about global warming, and think _where_ an invading Chinese army would be heading.
Re: (Score:2)
Would china toss a nuke at the US....I hope not but who knows. It's one thing to strike a country you overwhelm in every way possible its another thing when the country can hit back.
But I agree with you that I hope it never comes to that. But lets be honest humans are better at
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We still output more every year than the year before. We're just so frigging productive we don't need the factory space or workers to get it done. In a true emergency, you don't think it'd take more than 6 months to crank up production, do you?
Black Lotus has trained us well ... (Score:4, Funny)
Outsourcing (Score:4, Insightful)
Defensive? (Score:2)
yea... (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Contest: Who can be the most crazy? (Score:2, Troll)
Frankly, that's what it is, a kind of socially contagious mental illness.
I work for the day when the U.S. government is able to live in the world without killing other people. The mental illness of the U.S. government encourages un
Re: (Score:2)
We got 'em beat (Score:4, Funny)
Why does anyone believe anything that comes out of the Pentagon any more?
Does the US NOT do this??? (Score:2)
Why on Earth would they be surprised that someone else would do this?
I mean, the US continues to build up its missile defense and loads of other things and saying other countries shouldn't worry about it. But, it's not really realistic to assume that everyone else will just sit by while the US ramps up their capabilities.
I don't imagine any of the supe
a load of cyber BS .. (Score:2)
Why don't they make a 'computer system' that don't get viruses. And anyone who uses a computer on a military network that is suseptable to 'viruses' needs their collective heads examined. Besides which the real US military network is isolated from the Internet. Besides which winSEC was diluted so that the security services could monitor the real enemy, their own people.
Shame on both countries (Score:2)
Inncorrect (Score:2)
What about people who have passwords to the military system on their person device?
People who are in the military but use voip for there non-military time conversations?
I could go on.
Yes, there are civilian targets. Radio stations, power grids, etc.
This is an expected development and should surprise no one.
This is not another cold war (Score:2)
So what WILL they do? Stand side by side and have a pissing contest to see which country can get the other one to spend the most on "defense".
Nothing to see now - or for the next thirty years. But this is a sign of where techs should look for new jobs.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, but you could start a nuclear crisis with our powerplants, forcing the president up into the air, then shoot down Air Force One, recover the "football", steal a nuclear missile, and then launch it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Day 1.) You, the lazy and over confident American, are preparing to release a new technology and enjoy all that profit that is bound to rain down for years, if not decades. You've been confirming patents, training vendors, stockpiling components and lining up sales channels. Some of that data has traveled public networks, but so
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Think about financial infrastruture collapsing.
If someone got into the stockmarket and made it seem like a crash was happening, it would shortly be followed by a crash.
Manipulating the financial system of a country can destroy that country. Not physically, but financially, which then would make there influance on a global scale worthless.
Then there is always the risk of exploiting human error.
say some dipshit decides he can put his laptop on a system