[ExI] calling for our exi computer security hipsters, was: RE: Donald Trump
spike66 at att.net
Sun May 8 01:37:22 UTC 2016
From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark
Sent: Saturday, May 07, 2016 5:57 PM
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Subject: Re: [ExI] calling for our exi computer security hipsters, was: RE: Donald Trump
On Sat, May 7, 2016 at 6:31 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net <mailto:spike66 at att.net> > wrote:
> >…That Clinton Foundation drips with suspicion. It enables anyone to “donate” while removing their identity.
>…Does the Libertarian Party refuse to accept anonymous donations? What law would it violate if they did? And if they've removed their identity how would the Clintons know who to bestow these unspecified "favors" to?
The Clintons do know: it’s in the yoga routines. The problem is we don’t know. So we don’t know who our presumptive president owes. We suspect the Saudis, but who knows who else. That’s what campaign gift law is for. It limits foreign influence on US elections.
> >… Any judge could see that was destruction of evidence and obstruction of justice.
>…Then why hasn't some judge done so?
Heh. The Clintons are immune from law. What would happen if you and I had our home servers subpoenaed and we just said no? What would happen if we were ordered to hand it over, and we did so after erasing over half of the contents? What if we tried to say any attempt to prosecute us was all a down-wing conspiracy? Shall we ask Jeffrey Sterling?
> >…On the contrary sir. That information on the government secret email server is carefully archived and can be accessed by the government.
>…Who cares if it's archived if its sealed until the 23'rd century?
It comes out of the archive in the early 21st if you are found doing anything suspicious. Reference former CIA officer Sterling. That secured server would have been very convenient for those who had to communicate with the Secretary of State. They could have just mailed her material, rather than trying to figure out how to get it across the gap to the unsecured server (which requires someone to commit a felony.) But it would have been useless for yoga routines, because the security team would have caught it. So… Mrs. Clinton couldn’t use it. She never did. Never even activated the account.
>…The government has documents from the first world war that can't be seen because they're still Top Secret…
People with top secret clearances catch you.
>…And when Hillary wanted to give instructions to her drug mules or sell organs from aborted fetuses to ISIS why did she go through all this mail server stuff, why didn't she just open a Gmail account with a phony name?
Because the Feds watch foreign suspects?
>…Why did she use an account that was clearly marked as coming from the Secretary Of State of the United States?
She thought she was immune to hacking. She thought the hackers would need to physically access the server. She was the one who said in a rare moment of honesty “…I don’t know how it works digitally at all…” I guess she assumed it was safe. She assumed wrong.
>…I think Hillary was guilty of security laziness…
This I agree with, however, when you have those clearances working with that level of information, security laziness is a felony. They remind you of that fact every day, every time you long on.
>… that's not a insignificant oversight and she deserves criticism for it…
I see. Would you and I deserve criticism if we committed a felony? Perhaps by our cellmate Bubba, the lonely car thief who carried away a Volkswagen on his back? Ja.
>…but with Dumb Donald on the rampage we need to get a little perspective…
Indeed sir. This is all I am offering: there are more than two choices.
>…Can you prove you didn't murder somebody last year? I can't prove I didn't...
You don’t need to, nor do I. When you destroy evidence which is under subpoena however, a judge is going to conclude you did it, or you are trying to cover for whoever did.
> We have now very plausible reasons to doubt her word that none of it leaked.
>…None of what leaked?
The 30,000 yoga routines John! We don’t even know what that was! Mrs. Clinton broke the law to get rid of it, and convinced staffers to risk prison to aid and abet that action.
>… Who was it leaked to?
We don’t know. That’s the point of all this.
>… Exactly what information are we talking about?
We who are being asked to vote for this person are not allowed to have that info. But the bad guys might already have it. But we don’t know which bad guys, or what they intend to do with it.
>>… Selling State Department favors is the people’s business.
>…What favors were sold?
We don’t know. That’s the point. The information was destroyed.
>… Who were they sold to?
We don’t know.
>… How much did they cost?
Yoga routines John. We don’t know any of this stuff. We are told to shut up and vote.
>…Look Spike I'm not the world's biggest Clinton family fan either and I don't want to come off sounding like a apologist for Hillary, but when were faced with Donald babbling about building a wall, deporting 11 million people, encouraging Saudi Arabia to develop Nuclear Weapons and defaulting on the national debt I just can't get outraged over a blowjob and some silly mail server…
Ja me too man, ja to all. I am still in utter shock that we ended up with these two as our major party choices. I am stunned. I just wasn’t paying attention, and had one of those reverse nightmare experiences. Sometimes you wake up with a jolt from a really scary dream, and oh, OK no problem. This time there was nothing wrong with the dream, but I woke up to a really terrifying reality.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat