Then again, honeypot sites attract the bees, don't they?

Here is my question.  If you or I wrote the same little code that launched through javascript to all computers accessing a website, such code constructed to report back to us the surfing behavior of ALL VISITORS TO THAT WEBSITE , we would have done something illegal.

Did the FBI do something illegal here?  If yes, why and in what circumstances would that hold?  If no, why?

For example, would they be justified in tracking all users to the "AQ BMB MAEKIN SIT"?

How about a virus to track all users to "Reddit"?

Remember, we are discussing tracking through a downloaded virus.  And this is done in an attempt to negate the design goals of the Tor browser.

Going a step further.  Would it have been legal for the NSA to target US citizens with this virus?  What about local police?  How about the Dept. of Agriculture?  The IRS?

And so the cancer metastasizes....

Be interesting to know what they reap, for what they sow.  What if convictions was 2000, and admitted and allowed crimes were 5600?

I think, like we should get them for free.  We deserve them because they have them and we don't.  Like, free, man.  Free stuff is so fine!  Look, if we all just took a vote, then we could decide about this in a civilized manner.  We'd just vote ourselves free USB Erupters, and then well, we could designate someone to take them all.  Then we could hand them out to the people who need them the most.

<<....yea I kidding....>>

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/08/04/Violent-Crime-Drops-As-Gun-Sales-Rise-In-Virginia

...."an interesting trend given the current rhetoric about strengthening our gun laws and the presumed effect it would have on violent crime." And although he stressed that this increase in gun ownership and the corresponding decrease in violent crime do not necessarily prove people ought to reject future gun control laws, he said that the drop in violent crime "really makes you question if making it harder for law-abiding people to buy guns would have any effect on crime."

Read exactly what I said again and do not rephrase it, mis frame or mis interpret it.

Terrorism in the form of civilian murder is quite popular with the people of whom I addressed such attributes to.  There's no reason to shrug this off, and no reason EITHER to ignore it or exaggerate it.

The bolded part above is an obvious rephrasing and misrepresentation of the issues I stated.  They might have some general relevance, but not in this context.  Similarly, whether "terror" serves the interests of US government agencies is not relevant.

I agree with you but it's not an assertion that is provable or actionable.

Pretty sad, though...

more importantly, do not fall for the red herring that we should all focus on the NSA.  Think in broad terms.  The FBI, the DEA, the IRS, Dept of Agriculture (not kidding), city police departments, commercial companies.

Your data is nothing but a ripe peach on the vine to be plucked.  Here is the general attitude of government employees for any alphabet agency regarding you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvcohzJvviQ

By the way, I apologize for putting a great song in this context.  But couldn't resist.

Here's YET ANOTHER....

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSBRE97409R20130805?feedType=RSS&irpc=932

Don't go to a dictionary, go to Wikipedia.  You'll see the entire group of definitions discussed in length. 

takings - money the government takes from me for whatever it does
givings - money the government spends on whatever it chooses to

I'm just saying that as a way around discussing the meaning of a word, which is sort of not productive, if you look at the 'givings' and/or proposed extensions or reductions of them, you can get somewhere.

I see your points but do not believe they are inconsistent or contradict what I noted.   There has of course never been any organized group dedicated to meeting out death to providers of abortion clinics.  A comparison cannot be made between isolated cases of abortion clinic bombings, and radical Muslim bombings.

First, the current American propaganda is quite diffuse and confused.  It does not and has never indicated the Qutb spinoffs as problematic as I have done.   Even strict Wahhibi Muslims will agree with what I have said, because the Qutb teaches violence and death to Westerners.  They are your enemies by their own proclamation, whatever your opinion may be.

If some sect believes not in Islam but in Islam plus a group of 30 extensions which preach killing, this should be acknowledged for what it is.  

Clearly this is not the same subject as rationale private or public for Iraq 1/Iraq 2 etc.

My comments were and are directed more at the issue of "why did Muslim bombings/hijacking/killing of Westerners begin 30-40 years ago and why has it continued to the present day virtually unchanged."  At the same time, the risk of you or I being the victim of such terrorism is ridiculously small.

The purpose of terrorist actions is not to target you or I, but to target the world wide media system for maximum exposure by way of random brutality.

Just a quick clarification on the terms.  Ownership by the people of the means of production does not work for purposes of discussion as a definition.  The simple reason is that today we have many political parties who advocate something other than that under the umbrella of socialism.  For example, the broad trends in "Social democrats".

Take Australia.  Definitely socialistic, but ownership of the means of production for the most part is in the hands of the people.  You see, taxes average 60%, and by varying the tax percentage you can effectively own that fraction of the "means of production" while leaving the ego of the business owner intact that he "owns it".

By your definition, title would have to pass to the government before "socialism" existed.  In fact, many businesses are essentially controlled and operated by the government even though they are private businesses.  They are simply hired by the government to do jobs for it.

Thus, it might be better to view socialism not as the takings, but as the givings.  There it is much cleaner.  The givings include both those to individuals, as in welfare, and to companies, which in that role are just an extension of the state.  By looking at the outflows, we see the scope of interventions in the free society of the state, and can critically judge them.

By contrast, were one to look just at 'ownership', what we don't know is what the evil state did with the money....if there was any, in reality after inefficient collectivist management, the net is likely a loss.  Which leads one to ponder whether the truly clever and most evil socialist would prefer the capitalist state, from which he could suck the most blood, between his retiring to the crypt before the sun rose.

Pretty much just like I said.

Qutb has no exact English spelling by the way, and when I posted the diatribe on the radical religious underpinnings, that does not mean there are no political currents.  No, I wasn't referring to the doc, although he essentially does have the same roots.

The disciples of Qutb are our enemies, no if ands buts.  That means Al Queda, the Muslim Brotherhood.

So yeah, Obama and cronies is with our enemies.

In saying this I realize that no doubt in some complex regional conflict some local Al Queda or M. Brotherhood group might find themselves on our side temporarily under shifting conditions, that is largely irrelevant except to third rate policy hacks.

I am no expert on Middle East, but I do know the antics of amateurs and that's what I'm seeing in our flailing actions for the last several years.

No, it would be nice if it was that simple.  But Muslims will not tell you that. 

Al Queda's leader was OBL, disciple of Sayyed Qutbe.  He was head of the Muslim Brotherhood under Nassir and was executed for treason.  Qutbe wrote a series of pamplets or "books", essentially extensions to the Koran.  Believers in that crap are the radical Muslims who started attacking the west, and it continues today.

 

Oh come on.  If they make use all beggers then we are easier to please.

Long forgotten would be that good life you mention, just little trinkets, cigarettes, maybe a free Obama phone would do the trick.

I'll go for that.

Stop Obama supporting Al Queda, sending them weapons under the table.

The 4 port PCI card does not look like the spacing between the ports is enough to fit the USB erupter. 

RE the 10 port thing, a better deal is the DUB7 which reliably runs six erupter plus a fan, total of seven.  (and it is much cheaper like $27 each) The 10 port unit could work nicely with the right power supply but you know they don't have it.

Plus, hey, you know you can trust all your elected officials and regulatory and administrative people.  You know they need access to everyone's emails and personal data just in case some rightwing or leftwing nutcase accused them of some totally bizarre thing like theft or corruption.

Look, the little people need some laws to protect them, sure.  So we probably need a bunch of PR and noise and some nice sounding legislative package and then a campaign to tell them over and over how it protects them.  But <<wink wink>> you know we need to have a group of exclusions in their for the duties of our government agencies and law enforcement personnel.

What I'm indicating is that legal code is not going to really help us.  Just like with the "Can Spam" act supposedly to prevent spam, it allows it.  Just like the US Post office is your junk mail provider.  Just like the HEPA privacy act codified all the exceptions to your privacy.

You need to do it yourself.

The OP's claim is an increase in rapes, but unstated is whether this follows a corresponding increase in sexual activity.  It is thus flawed in it's scientific technique, since we do not know if sexual activity increase by a factor of four, and rape by a factor of 1.5.

http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/173156/

Obviously, more direct study of the matter is required.

Done.

But are you asserting that under the VPN/Tor Evil Twins, the question of locus outside or inside the US does not exist?

And also, I think my prior question remains as valid, for those modes of use that can't allow the sllllooooooowwwww down that seems to plague Tor.

Unfortunately for them, the added publicity is a positive for bitcoin.

Bitcoin is big in China, I wonder if there are similar resistance and critiques there.

What's your opinion of tor vs vpn?  And of vpn with the terminal node in the US, for a US user, versus choosing one overseas?

I don't think the major players in the Atlas Society have actually thought this matter through at present.  That may be due to their being in large part the scholarly types.  It is inevitable that they realize this and once they get it, all hell breaks loose.  I suspect they'll grasp it faster than, say, the hard money/gold bug Austrian economist types.

It'll be fun.