Pentagon paying China for data band width.

[jhungary]

The US is so f-king stupid. By allowing the Chinese to have close access to such sensitive communication via Sat's, we have just allowed them to up their game and pick up what stage we are at. We have single handedly, allowed China to know where we stand and this will push them to steer their research and capabilities towards this way.

Actually contrast to many people think here, the "secret" the Chinese is going to know about us is neglectable

First of all, we are using their SAT to piggyback our incoming and outgoing message and our internal communication in Africa. All those message is encrypted. Of Course they can intercept those message, but without the key they will not be useful to anyone.

And by leasing their SAT, we don't give them more chance for them to figure out the key as much as we allow any Chinese with a laptop to come to the United States. Pentagon uses the same SSI Key for encrypting and decrypting ANY SATCOMM message. Using their satellite is the same is as allowing a Chinese Citizens accessing Internet in the US. You can log in the Pentagon network via internet connection and hack or decrypt the key there as much the same as you can intercept the message fresh out of the Satellite.

Since we allow Chinese Citizen with Computer access in the US, we are taking virtually the same risk with our COMM in Africa.

 

[Nisha]

Actually contrast to many people think here, the "secret" the Chinese is going to know about us is neglectable

First of all, we are using their SAT to piggyback our incoming and outgoing message and our internal communication in Africa. All those message is encrypted. Of Course they can intercept those message, but without the key they will not be useful to anyone.

And by leasing their SAT, we don't give them more chance for them to figure out the key as much as we allow any Chinese with a laptop to come to the United States. Pentagon uses the same SSI Key for encrypting and decrypting ANY SATCOMM message. Using their satellite is the same is as allowing a Chinese Citizens accessing Internet in the US. You can log in the Pentagon network via internet connection and hack or decrypt the key there as much the same as you can intercept the message fresh out of the Satellite.

Since we allow Chinese Citizen with Computer access in the US, we are taking virtually the same risk with our COMM in Africa.

I just read your replies. Thanks for informative posts! But let me pose a question? You stated that the CHinese intercept the encrypted msgs, but given the resources they have, could it be possible to eventually crack the code? Also, you stated a Chinese person working in the US is more of a threat but I noticed many of these hackings linked to China originate from Mainland China, unless they are using some device planted on US Soil to facilitate such hackings? Another question but off topic, Im interested in working in computers seeing the role they play in the world is more and more important as time goes by. Is there any suggestions you can make as to what to focus on? I know its broad but comp sci, computer engineer, etc? Any specific programs that are great for the field like possibly Unix or such? Any info would be appreciated?

Thanks Nish

 

[jhungary]

I just read your replies. Thanks for informative posts! But let me pose a question? You stated that the CHinese intercept the encrypted msgs, but given the resources they have, could it be possible to eventually crack the code? Also, you stated a Chinese person working in the US is more of a threat but I noticed many of these hackings linked to China originate from Mainland China, unless they are using some device planted on US Soil to facilitate such hackings? Another question but off topic, Im interested in working in computers seeing the role they play in the world is more and more important as time goes by. Is there any suggestions you can make as to what to focus on? I know its broad but comp sci, computer engineer, etc? Any specific programs that are great for the field like possibly Unix or such? Any info would be appreciated?

Thanks Nish

You stated that the CHinese intercept the encrypted msgs, but given the resources they have, could it be possible to eventually crack the code?

The answer in short is, they could

But the chance of them cracking the code from US using their Satellite is the same as Chinese in US trying to gain unauthorised entry to DOD webpage....Us renting their satellite does not increase their ability cracking our code, it's totally depending on them, not how much message we pipe down to the Chinese.

They only need 1 encrypted message for them to study our code, us renting their equipment does not give them any edge on cracking our code......

Also, you stated a Chinese person working in the US is more of a threat but I noticed many of these hackings linked to China originate from Mainland China, unless they are using some device planted on US Soil to facilitate such hackings?

I think you mixed up the idea of hacking and stealing information (Otherwise known as Information Espionage)

They can hack you anywhere they want, as long as your target have an open network/gateway (ie a network that connected to a internet)
However, some sensitive information (Like Federal Financal data, like interest rate, exchange rate, or some super-duper Military secret) are store under departmental Intranet or even close circuit network. Which you do not have open connection. Then you have to be inside US soil if you want to hack those information.

Our government is not stupid, they KNOW no matter how well your encryption/decryption technology is/are, there will always be risk if you put them over the open network. So some information cannot literally be hack unless you control the US Communication Infrastructure. That's why you see ZTW or Huiwei was forbidden to bid the US communication infrastructure.

Is there any suggestions you can make as to what to focus on? I know its broad but comp sci, computer engineer, etc? Any specific programs that are great for the field like possibly Unix or such? Any info would be appreciated?

I actually don't know much about computer science, I was enrolled in a CompSci Course in University, but I change my course after 1 year. But this is what I know

Computer Science - A bit of everything, programming, software construction, hardware
Computer Engineering - Heavy on hardware
Software Engineering - Heavy on programming

Depend on what you want to do with Unix, if you want beta testing, then no doubt you need to get into Software Eng. Otherwise Computer Science is what you need.

Hope it helps

 

[Nisha]

The answer in short is, they could

But the chance of them cracking the code from US using their Satellite is the same as Chinese in US trying to gain unauthorised entry to DOD webpage....Us renting their satellite does not increase their ability cracking our code, it's totally depending on them, not how much message we pipe down to the Chinese.

They only need 1 encrypted message for them to study our code, us renting their equipment does not give them any edge on cracking our code......



I think you mixed up the idea of hacking and stealing information (Otherwise known as Information Espionage)

They can hack you anywhere they want, as long as your target have an open network/gateway (ie a network that connected to a internet)
However, some sensitive information (Like Federal Financal data, like interest rate, exchange rate, or some super-duper Military secret) are store under departmental Intranet or even close circuit network. Which you do not have open connection. Then you have to be inside US soil if you want to hack those information.

Our government is not stupid, they KNOW no matter how well your encryption/decryption technology is/are, there will always be risk if you put them over the open network. So some information cannot literally be hack unless you control the US Communication Infrastructure. That's why you see ZTW or Huiwei was forbidden to bid the US communication infrastructure.



I actually don't know much about computer science, I was enrolled in a CompSci Course in University, but I change my course after 1 year. But this is what I know

Computer Science - A bit of everything, programming, software construction, hardware
Computer Engineering - Heavy on hardware
Software Engineering - Heavy on programming

Depend on what you want to do with Unix, if you want beta testing, then no doubt you need to get into Software Eng. Otherwise Computer Science is what you need.

Hope it helps

Thanks very informative and to the point. Btw what made you change your major and what did you settle on?

 

[jhungary]

Thanks very informative and to the point. Btw what made you change your major and what did you settle on?

Long Story Short, I changed to International Politics after year one, because of my ROTC commitment........

 

[ephone]

You do not feel shameful to say that?

U.S. used to be such an innovative country. Now you use this type of excuses to say this sh!t stuff to other people's advancement???

You know we have ways to establish the existence of demand. The demand isn't there, we don't build ghost cities and bridges to no where. Our investors insist on a bullet proof business justification before putting cash into a project.

 

[jhungary]

You do not feel shameful to say that?

U.S. used to be such an innovative country. Now you use this type of excuses to say this sh!t stuff to other people's advancement???

Who say China are more innovative now?

Look at Patent Granted by country in 2011

Japan - 238323
USA - 224505
China - 172113

List of countries by patents - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

China apply for more patent does not mean they got the original innovation as Application can be refused

 

[ephone]

You cannot simply put the patent # there to demonstrate anything. For example, just like we cannot show the # articles published in international journals to prove which country is the most scientific advanced, otherwise, China will be #1 since China does have the most # article published in international journals.

Let's just look at several frontier developments: transportation, telecommunication, wireless, robotics, bio/gene development and etc... which ones U.S. dare to say it is the No. 1 now???

There are many more frontiers that U.S. has lacked behind already.

Who say China are more innovative now?

Look at Patent Granted by country in 2011

Japan - 238323
USA - 224505
China - 172113

List of countries by patents - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

China apply for more patent does not mean they got the original innovation as Application can be refused

 

[jhungary]

You cannot simply put the patent # there to demonstrate anything. For example, just like we cannot show the # articles published in international journals to prove which country is the most scientific advanced, otherwise, China will be #1 since China does have the most # article published in international journals.

Let's just look at several frontier developments: transportation, telecommunication, wireless, robotics, bio/gene development and etc... which ones U.S. dare to say it is the No. 1 now???

There are many more frontiers that U.S. has lacked behind already.

Not being number 1 does not equal to not being innovative. Those two are different concept.

Also you can publish as many Scientific Journal as you want, but at the same time, the more you publish does not mean you are number 1 in the spot. People can discredit any scientific journal, infact, many successful scientist hava had many journal entry discredited until the one that make him into the spot light.

I am merely refer to the fact you say US "Used" to be innovative. I did not say US is "Number 1" innovative country. If I do mean it, I would not have include Japan in the patent number

And patent is indeed a measurement on how innovative a country can get. You cannot call yourselves innovative when all you do is improve the existing invention.

 

[dbc]

You do not feel shameful to say that?

U.S. used to be such an innovative country. Now you use this type of excuses to say this sh!t stuff to other people's advancement???

What's wrong with what I said? In the US capital investment is governed by commercial considerations. In China, from what we seen since 2008 it is dictated by political considerations. This makes the Chinese economy inefficient, take excess capacity in steel production as an example. Currently China can produce 900 million tonnes of steel, 200 million tonnes in excess of market demand. Post 2008, excess capacity was built by taking advantage of the state stimulus package. State run steel companies financed excess capacity by adding fixed assets with state funds. FA depreciates over time impacting profitability of the business in addition profits from sales go to paying the bank which financed the capacity expansion. Chinese State run steel companies now averages 80 percent debt as a percentage of equity.

The Chinese goal of capacity expansion is to provide employment for political stability. But if the industry is producing steel at a rate that exceeds demand then it leads to excess supply which results in lower prices impacting the profitability of the business. The industry is unable to pay the bank and worse it has to take more loans to cover operating costs producing more steel it cannot sell. Since the state can't afford to lay off workers the bank continues to fund the enterprise losing more money - a vicious circle.

So again, what is 'shameful' in what I said? Unless you deny the above is true.

 

[Developereo]

The Chinese goal of capacity expansion is to provide employment for political stability.

This is not just a Chinese phenomenon.

Most Western countries, including the US, have been pumping out big stimulus packages to spur economic activity, especially since the GFC.

Also, governments are not constrained by next-quarter earnings statements and share price fluctuations. One expects the government to have a long term vision and plan things with future decades, not months, in mind.

 

[dbc]

This is not just a Chinese phenomenon.

Most Western countries, including the US, have been pumping out big stimulus packages to spur economic activity, especially since the GFC.

Also, governments are not constrained by next-quarter earnings statements and share price fluctuations. One expects the government to have a long term vision and plan things with future decades, not months, in mind.

291 B$ of 840 B$ of the US stimulus package was disbursed as tax credits, the issue here is not the stimulus itself but how the stimulus is used. Not saying that the US approach is better, but it did fund some very smart research programs such as TFE, ADVENT and BOTJ all funded by the Energy Efficient and Renewable Energy portion of the stimulus package. These programs have already paid for itself in fuel savings and engine hot section replacement cost.

Breakdown of Funding


I don't see how funding capacity increase now to cater to demand that is expected to materialize in a decade is smart.

 

[Developereo]

291 B$ of 840 B$ of the US stimulus package was disbursed as tax credits, the issue here is not the stimulus itself but how the stimulus is used. Not saying that the US approach is better, but it did fund some very smart research programs such as TFE, ADVENT and BOTJ all funded by the Energy Efficient and Renewable Energy portion of the stimulus package. These programs have already paid for itself in fuel savings and engine hot section replacement cost.

Breakdown of Funding

Haven't followed the money trail to see where the money actually ended up in the US case.

The Australian government also had a "stimulus package". They sent out checks to people -- who promptly went out and bought TVs, stereos, computers and foreign vacations. All in all, the stimulus package turned out very good for foreign businesses.

The best part was a Fiji tourism ad which actually encouraged people to use the stimulus package for a vacation to Fiji!

I don't see how funding capacity increase now to cater to demand that is expected to materialize in a decade is smart.

Because some technologies and basic sciences need long incubation periods, free from market pressures. Only entities with deep pockets, like governments and huge multinationals, can afford to take these risks.

One of the reasons for the US's technical predominance is precisely the fact of recognizing this reality and investing heavily in R&D. In general, heavy investment in R&D is what separates technical leaders from the wannabes.

 

[dbc]

Haven't followed the money trail to see where the money actually ended up in the US case.

The Australian government also had a "stimulus package". They sent out checks to people -- who promptly went out and bought TVs, stereos, computers and foreign vacations. All in all, the stimulus package turned out very good for foreign businesses.

The link I provided earlier gives a detailed account where the US stimulus went. Breakdown of Funding

You mean the money went to China? Hardly, the factory in China makes 20 cents in profit for every pair of a famous brand of hiking footwear sold in the United States. The bulk of the profits go to the brand and the retailer, the retailer has overheads such as store rental,utilities, advertising and personnel cost. The spend benefits the local economy more than the outsourced factory.

The same is true for electronics and white appliances.

 

[ephone]

Joker like you put things into extreme which is totally false.

U.S. capital investment only governed by commercial considerations, nothing for political stability???

China capital investment only for providing employment for political stability, not for commercial considerations??? Then China must be such a great example to achieve such achievement by political stability considerations only.


Seriously, do you have any common sense at all???

What's wrong with what I said? In the US capital investment is governed by commercial considerations. In China, from what we seen since 2008 it is dictated by political considerations. This makes the Chinese economy inefficient, take excess capacity in steel production as an example. Currently China can produce 900 million tonnes of steel, 200 million tonnes in excess of market demand. Post 2008, excess capacity was built by taking advantage of the state stimulus package. State run steel companies financed excess capacity by adding fixed assets with state funds. FA depreciates over time impacting profitability of the business in addition profits from sales go to paying the bank which financed the capacity expansion. Chinese State run steel companies now averages 80 percent debt as a percentage of equity.

The Chinese goal of capacity expansion is to provide employment for political stability. But if the industry is producing steel at a rate that exceeds demand then it leads to excess supply which results in lower prices impacting the profitability of the business. The industry is unable to pay the bank and worse it has to take more loans to cover operating costs producing more steel it cannot sell. Since the state can't afford to lay off workers the bank continues to fund the enterprise losing more money - a vicious circle.

So again, what is 'shameful' in what I said? Unless you deny the above is true.