Because there is a high chance they're right.

What do you think would happen if you did the same to a chess player and took away his/her brain power in the same way? Personally, I suspect that such a player would instead go to slashdot and start posting mindless, bio-chauvinistic drivel.

Agreed, I have to check the list for false positives.

Good thing /. has editors, otherwise every shmuck could post anything he wants, without regard to basics like complete sentences.

Scientific language has its own vacoabulary, and in an ideal world, words like the ones the study investigates should never show up, no matter how long the text is. As a scientist, you should leave it to your peers to decide what is novel, amazing, etc., but apparently, pure content is no longer sufficient to get published.

Unrestricted free speech in the US? SInce when? Seems worth checking out. Regressive govt's in Europe always get on my case when I tweet stuff like "going to shoot up work tomorrow", "going to teach these refugees a lesson - get your bomb dogs!", or something. The USA would never send a SWAT team to me for that. It's only speech, after all!

They know exactly who the real culprits are, and they have zero interest in prosecuting them. The federal prosecutors ARE under direct control of the government. If the government wants to or does not want to prosecute someone, the prosecutors cannot go against that will.

The USA would most likely not allow any of their spies to be questioned, much less extradited for prosecution, because they don't give a damn about international law like that. Whoever from the BND cooperated with the NSA would be liable as well, and at least here, Range could use the full power of the law to go after them. He could determine foreign suspects from documents and order them brought in for questioning the moment they enter Germany. He could at least apply pressure.

However, considering that federal prosecutors, including Range, are bound by instructions from the ministry of justice (i.e. the government), neither the NSA nor, by extension, the BND or any other of the foreign NSA appendages have to worry about anything in that regard. If that ever changes, it's because the then-current government changes their mind, not because of laws or any nonsense like that.

http://bash.org/?835030 is what you're looking for.

NSA not content with Earth, extends spying to exoplanets.

Self-reply: Or just use hunter2 for everything, it will show up as ******* for everyone that isn't you.

It is possible to remember an arbitrary number of different, safe passwords. My method is to have one password that is short, but hard, in the meaning of impossible to crack by dictionary attack. Think random letters, numbers, the stuff that is hard to memorize. But it's always the same base password, so you will know it by heart eventually. Assuming the website you use the password on hashes the password, that leaves you vulnerable to lookup/rainbow tables, because the base password should be fairly short, below 10 chars.

To defeat rainbow tables, I salt that password in a way I don't have to memorize but can easily deduce, for example with the site I'm using the password on. Examples: ReallyHardPasswordSlashdot, ReallyHardPasswordGoogle, ReallyHardPasswordSteam, etc. They all are different and not reusable, their hashes are different, they are (hopefully) long enough to be too long for rainbow tables

They did.

Furthermore, those two stories might well be connected. Why not shift the blame of losing those sensitive data in a hack over to Snowden?