Skip to comments.Internet Traffic from U.S. Government Websites Was Redirected Via Chinese Networks
Posted on 11/17/2010 9:32:12 AM PST by Enchante
According to the draft report, a state-owned Chinese telecommunications firm, China Telecom, "hijacked" massive volumes of Internet traffic during the 18-minute incident. It affected traffic to and from .gov and .mil websites in the United States, as well as websites for the Senate, all four military services, the office of the Secretary of Defense, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and "many others," including websites for firms like Dell, Yahoo, IBM and Microsoft.
"Although the Commission has no way to determine what, if anything, Chinese telecommunications firms did to the hijacked data, incidents of this nature could have a number of serious implications," the report reads. "This level of access could enable surveillance of specific users or sites."
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
One-worlder morons may think there’s nothing creepy or dangerous about enabling the PRC’s surveillance of massive amounts of US internet traffic.....
I have to admit that in my (relative) naivete I’m still stunned that this is even possible, i.e., that the geniuses developing telecomm and the internet over the years didn’t keep our traffic out of routers and servers run by repressive commie regimes..... guess that’s what happens when UN-style organizations and international bureaucrats combine with gullible tech whiz kids who assume everyone’s good intentions??
its just unreal what has happened.....
none of them care about perserving OUR way of life....we'll be stone age rabble if this keeps up....
if someone told liberals and RINOs that all internet traffic was to be run through NSA servers then of course there would be meltdowns of outrage about “govt surveillance” etc.
but run tons of sensitive traffic (including much .mil and .gov traffic from key US offices) through the PRC’s telecom empire and there is nary a peep
Things like this have happened before, and the unfortunate network usually collapses under the load, causing Internet disruptions. The scary part is that the Chinese networks could handle the volume without flinching. That shows how far the Chinese have come — do not underestimate them.
Just another contrail folks....
Where’s that F-22?
I've been wondering the same thing about Geithner, Bernanke, et a. These egg heads are mega-quants. So attached to their mathematical models that they can't see the reality of human nature. They live in a linear and exponential delusion. And... they are destroying our economy and currency. Keep in mind, economies have been around a lot longer than electronic spreadsheets...
Could you show me any of the Bernanke's papers that would qualify him as a quant, let alone a "mega-quant?" Have you read any of them? There is no evidence that I am aware of that Geithner is quantitative at all.
You appear to be "have been wondering" about a nonexistent world.
"So attached to their mathematical models that they can't see the reality of human nature."
Does it bother you that you make strong conclusions, which typically call for a great deal of justification, without any justification at all? Does it bother you that, however different your starting point may be, you have arrived at Marxist conclusions?
But, at least you have the strength of numbers. This crowd of supposed conservatives will accept any nonsense as long as it is directed against the Fed, the "CEOs," the "bankers," the "rich." It has taken over a century, but the commies are winning: they have converted even people like you, who think of themselves as conservative.
Sounds like those knock-off Cisco routers China was selling are starting to pay off. There’s no telling what kind of code they inserted into the IOS.
Thank you for your concern for my supposedly misspent youth.
You've posted a particular statement. I've inquired, honestly and open-mindedly, after the basis for that statement. An intellectually honest person would answer -- at least something. But not you: what in your entire post even concerned with the issue? Nothing at all; dealing solely with me as a person, it is a pure ad hominem attack. And even here just pure nonsense that, just like the original post, has nothing to do with the real world: my supposed gullibility (as if you of all people can really judge that), references to flatulation (a symptom of a narcissist, by the way), my supposed young age. The last defense of a scoundrel.
You can try to insult me all you want but, at some point, you'll not be able to run away from the fact you know today -- namely, that you are a fraud and lack basic intellectual honesty. You've been betrayed by your parents and teachers: saving face is not the most important thing in the world. But, please do, by all means, continue to admire yourself in the mirror.
Have a good Thanksgiving, April.
November 8, 2010 Sprint Nextel (News - Alert) has rejected bids from two of the largest telecom equipment manufacturers in China primarily due to U.S. national security fears, according to a recent Wall Street Journal report.
Over the past few months, Sprint has been taking bids from global suppliers to modernize its cellular network. Two leading Chinese telecommunication equipment makers, Huawei Technologies Ltd. and ZTE Corp., each submitted bids that were lower than their competitors, including Alcatel-Lucent, Ericsson (News - Alert) and Samsung. However, the U.S-based telecom operator passed on the bids and chose to negotiate with other manufacturers.
According to “people familiar with the matter,” lawmakers in Washington have become increasingly alarmed over the companies’ ties to the Chinese government and its military. Allowing Chinese equipment to be integrated into critical U.S. infrastructure could compromise the security of the network, suggested the unidentified officials.
I am sorry you've had some bad experiences with people that look like those whom you call "quants." Being scientific is not the same as being quantitative. And, any scientist (actually even an orator in Ancient Rome) knows that theories are based on axioms, hence relevant to the real world no more than those axioms (garbage in, garbage out). Since the axioms are usually the weakest point of a (competently built) theory, a scientist expects and prepars for being question on foundations. I do not question your personal experiences, but you erroneously generalize from them to all "quants" (apparently those that know calculus or some such thing).
Try it yourself. Attack any quants theories"
I have tried that many times. For a while, it's even been a part of my job description. I've never had an experience you describe. Any person who cannot answer your question is him- or herself unprepared (in which case the answer should be "I'll think about that and get back to you"), intellectually weak (and does not therefore appreciate the importance of your questioning), and possibly intellectually dishonest. But all questions, especially nontechnical, deserve an answer.
"within minutes, personal attacks insulting intellect, reason, method, personality, gender, and on and on."
I am sorry that you've been surrounded by such unscrupulous people. They have the right to attack your own behavior and your own statements (and then, perhaps, conclude something about you) but not your questioning them. To do so is contrary to the scientific method, which the "quants" apparently trying to uphold. I hope life will place you into a better crowd of people.
"They cannot live or fight in the world of ideas."
Again, if you yourself are so sufficiently logical, honest and scientific as to question others ("quants"), you should've stopped upon rereading your that sentence. Does it not sound like "Women can't kook and think" from someone who met one stupid woman who cannot kook? You should at least be able to catch yourself when you make overreaching statements (most unqualified statements are suspect, since they are almost invariably false as stated).
It's all downhill from here:
"They cannot cope with human challenge."
What do these words even mean? They can cope with an attack by a dog or tiger but not a human?
"All 1 or 0."
And you think that this is quantitative? You should inquire after the subject matter before you pass a judgment on it. Looks like you've utterly failed to do so, I am sorry to say.
"No gray zones, no nuance, no subjectivism."
Well, here too you should be a bit more precise -- at least more than those whom you criticize: what's "subjectivism? All too often people hide ignorance under subjectivism. As in, "Gravitation should be outlawed -- at least it's my subjective opinion." People have the right to their own opinions but not their own facts.
Again, I do not question your personal experiences: they are what you say they are. You are the best judge of those. But you are not entitled to false generalizations from those, clearly very limited, experiences (if you are interested, you can look it up under "(threats to) external validity").