|
On December 23 2014 08:06 Aveng3r wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2014 04:17 Sub40APM wrote: I dont like this move by the US at all. The North Koreans got the Americans to reveal their cyber attack capabilities, helping China prepare further for the inevitable Cyber Great War while the Interview is still not going to be shown. Doesn't sound like this move did anything to reveal us capabilities if a "cyber war" ever broke out Isn't ddosing the same thing that sc2 players do to cause their opponent to lag out (destiny did this to deezer once iirc)? Doesn't seem complex at all, but I'm no expert here
DDoS'ing a person's personal home router is something completely different from DDoS'ing a big ISP and most likely some kind of server park which can and should be prepared against Denial of Service attacks
|
The State Department should offer help back to North Korea in finding the perpetrators of such injustice!
|
On December 23 2014 08:24 Duval wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2014 08:06 Aveng3r wrote:On December 23 2014 04:17 Sub40APM wrote: I dont like this move by the US at all. The North Koreans got the Americans to reveal their cyber attack capabilities, helping China prepare further for the inevitable Cyber Great War while the Interview is still not going to be shown. Doesn't sound like this move did anything to reveal us capabilities if a "cyber war" ever broke out Isn't ddosing the same thing that sc2 players do to cause their opponent to lag out (destiny did this to deezer once iirc)? Doesn't seem complex at all, but I'm no expert here DDoS'ing a person's personal home router is something completely different from DDoS'ing a big ISP and most likely some kind of server park which can and should be prepared against Denial of Service attacks So how much firepower are we talking about here? I assume your average hacker couldn't pull this off on his own
|
On December 24 2014 01:19 Aveng3r wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2014 08:24 Duval wrote:On December 23 2014 08:06 Aveng3r wrote:On December 23 2014 04:17 Sub40APM wrote: I dont like this move by the US at all. The North Koreans got the Americans to reveal their cyber attack capabilities, helping China prepare further for the inevitable Cyber Great War while the Interview is still not going to be shown. Doesn't sound like this move did anything to reveal us capabilities if a "cyber war" ever broke out Isn't ddosing the same thing that sc2 players do to cause their opponent to lag out (destiny did this to deezer once iirc)? Doesn't seem complex at all, but I'm no expert here DDoS'ing a person's personal home router is something completely different from DDoS'ing a big ISP and most likely some kind of server park which can and should be prepared against Denial of Service attacks So how much firepower are we talking about here? I assume your average hacker couldn't pull this off on his own It could only be one...+ Show Spoiler +
|
Haha, I just watched GoldenEye for the first time recently. Alan Cumming's accent was horrible. >_<
|
So "The Interview" movie will be released... No response from Fox and New Regency about whether they have found their balls yet.
|
On December 24 2014 10:07 GreenHorizons wrote: So "The Interview" movie will be released... No response from Fox and New Regency about whether they have found their balls yet.
You can also rent it only for $5.99 from three different sources if you can't or don't want to watch at the theater. I'm not sure how I feel about the hole situation. I get that it's extremely rude and I understand why North Korea is upset. I'd be upset if someone made a movie defaming me (regardless of if I was a good or bad person). However, in the end people have the right, in my opinion, to say what ever they want as long as they aren't physically harming someone. But eh, here's the link of the page.
+ Show Spoiler +http://www.theinterview-movie.com/
|
On December 25 2014 06:41 Mandalor28 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 24 2014 10:07 GreenHorizons wrote: So "The Interview" movie will be released... No response from Fox and New Regency about whether they have found their balls yet. You can also rent it only for $5.99 from three different sources if you can't or don't want to watch at the theater. I'm not sure how I feel about the hole situation. I get that it's extremely rude and I understand why North Korea is upset. I'd be upset if someone made a movie defaming me (regardless of if I was a good or bad person). However, in the end people have the right, in my opinion, to say what ever they want as long as they aren't physically harming someone. But eh, here's the link of the page. + Show Spoiler +http://www.theinterview-movie.com/
Well, I mean, he's the leader of a country where people don't have that right. Naturally he'd be against it.
|
|
China enlists citizens to patrol border with North Korea - state media(Reuters) - China is sending civilian militias to help secure the border it shares with North Korea, state media said, in the wake of two reported killings of Chinese citizens by North Koreans that could strain ties between Pyongyang and its sole major ally. The China Defence News said on Wednesday the government had established a civilian-military defense system in the Yanbian prefecture of Jilin province. Yanbian shares a border of about 500 km (310 miles) with North Korea. "China and North Korea are both keeping guard on the border ...," the newspaper said. "The situation is more complicated and relying on just one party would make it difficult to achieve effective control." The government has also "guided the establishment of militia patrols" to guard border villages. Every 10 neighboring households would have their own border security group and there would be 24-hour video surveillance, the newspaper said...... The issue of border security has become "very serious", said Zhang Liangui, a North Korea expert at China's Central Party School. "The fact that North Koreans are running over the border to China shows that North Korea's regulation of the border is seriously problematic," he said. "They have neglected it." While it is too early to determine if there will be a longterm impact on diplomatic ties, the situation raised tension near the border, he added. "For those Chinese citizens living near the border, there is widespread anxiety right now, the impact of the situation is very serious," he said. "To say that this will have no impact on relations with North Korea just doesn't match with reality." ..... Source Background info on the cross-border incident is here.
Pretty big step up considering how lax security (on the Mainland side) has always been. Remains to be seen how NK will react to this somewhat unilateral move though; don't forget that they did move those tanks into the region a while back.
|
It's kind of scary that you would have border control from both sides. NK doesn't want people coming out, China doesn't want people coming in.
People are treated like malnourished livestock it's kind of crazy.
|
there's more people traveling the boarders to trade than to defect. i assume nk is pro-border control since it can stop illegal contents. it sucks for the people since smuggling things from china is a way of survival for many.
|
Mandatory Military Service Extends to Women
Beginning this year, North Korea is to execute a new directive, set to make military service mandatory for eligible women between the ages of 17 and 20, as a bid to strengthen the nation's defense forces.
“Late last year, we received orders for all women who have graduated from middle and high school to undergo mandatory military service,” a source based in North Hamkyung Province told Daily NK on Tuesday.
This measure has been handed down to army mobilization offices in each province, city, and county, with implementation reportedly already underway. “The preliminary screening and physicals related to enlistment, which begins in April, are all complete and duty sectors have been organized," he said.
Most candidates pass these screenings barring any outstanding physical problems or contagious diseases such as tuberculosis and/or hepatitis. The minimum height requirement for women to serve was lowered to 142cm in 2012, but this standard is not strictly enforced, according to the source.
Customarily, enlistment in North Korea occurs twice a year in April and August, and up until now, women served only voluntarily, while men invariably underwent mandatory service. School graduates aged 17-18 years enlist in April, while the enlistment period for workers at or under the age of 20 takes place in August.
This new policy, however, will not apply equal serving period requirements to both men and women. “Unlike men, who have to serve for ten years, mandatory service for women is only up to the age of 23,” the source said. “A 17-year-old who enlists in April will serve until she is 23, but a 20-year-old worker who enlists in August will only serve three years," adding that a rumor of men's service being extended by a year has been swirling around recently, but cannot yet be confirmed.
As reason for the new mandate, he cited the high child mortality rate and low birth rate stemming from the Arduous March [the North Korean famine of 1994-1998], speculating that the military is hoping to make up for the shortfall in viable troops by drafting more women.
He also explained that this year, admission quotas for female applicants to universities and technical schools have yet to be announced, presumably “to only recommend those who have completed their military service or exceptionally gifted students from special schools who may be exempt from service altogether.”
Naturally, the new directive has stirred up concern among the public, who question how families are supposed to get by if the women, who normally provide for the family by engaging in various types of business, are drafted into the military. Unsurprisingly, many female residents have begun to look into bribing officials in order to keep their daughters out of the draft.
Back in March 2003, at the sixth session of the 10th Supreme People’s Assembly, it was announced that military service was to be reduced to 10 years from 13 for men, and to seven from 10 for women. Only women signing up voluntarily were to serve, while men in some extremely specialized units would still be required to fulfill 13 years of service.
Source (DAILY NK)
|
United States24345 Posts
To be honest, that is neither alarming or surprising to me. It just seems like a fairly standard action that has been taken by some other countries as well.
|
isnt it the same in israel?
|
I hope same happens in Finland. It's unfair that females doesn't need to go army.
|
The thing you should be hoping for is that noone has to waste a year of his live in useless compulsory military service that is a waste of everyones time. It's not like the people in compulsory service actually do anything, ever. In modern militaries, the people who get send into fights or dangerous areas are the real soldiers who are actually doing that as a career, not the people who just sit around for a year because they have to.
Obviously in NK that is apparently a bit different. 10 years compulsory military service. No wonder their economy sucks donkey balls (This is probably not the prime factor, but if you waste ~1/4 of every mans productive lifetime, and even more to produce the things they need to waste their time, that is obviously incredibly bad from an economics POV)
|
On February 01 2015 02:37 Simberto wrote: The thing you should be hoping for is that noone has to waste a year of his live in useless compulsory military service that is a waste of everyones time. It's not like the people in compulsory service actually do anything, ever. In modern militaries, the people who get send into fights or dangerous areas are the real soldiers who are actually doing that as a career, not the people who just sit around for a year because they have to. I never went to the army or the mandatory service, but I think it could be a good thing actually for the youth in general. Would help learning some values, can't be bad for the health either.
|
Well, from my experience with mandatory military service, if you are in bad health (or too fat, or too thin, or too large, or too small, or you know a doctor who can give you some other BS excuse) you don't have to do it. (I didn't end up doing it either, because i chose the civil alternative, which interestingly enough also means that a lot of these excuses are a lot harder to get through, because people in compulsory civil service were actually a highly sought-after commodity because they were exceedingly cheap and actually did useful things)
If you want something like that, instead of having everyone waste their time, make them do something useful like helping at hospitals or with old people, or other social services. They can always use badly paid workers in those areas, you would still "learn some values" just as much as in the military, and actually do something worthwhile instead of wasting everyones time.
Compulsory military service is a relic of a time when number of bodies were actually the most relevant thing in a military, and it thus makes sense to have everyone serve for some time to have a standing army ready in case of emergency, and a large amount of people who can hold a gun and have some training to call in from the reserves.
In todays world, unless you want to occupy some other country for prolonged periods of time, what you need is a much smaller amount of highly trained specialists and very expensive equipment. And your compulsory military guys who are just there because they have to for a year are neither trained enough nor would you give them the expensive shit, so they are utterly useless.
|
On February 01 2015 02:52 Simberto wrote:
Compulsory military service is a relic of a time when number of bodies were actually the most relevant thing in a military, and it thus makes sense to have everyone serve for some time to have a standing army ready in case of emergency, and a large amount of people who can hold a gun and have some training to call in from the reserves.
In todays world, unless you want to occupy some other country for prolonged periods of time, what you need is a much smaller amount of highly trained specialists and very expensive equipment. And your compulsory military guys who are just there because they have to for a year are neither trained enough nor would you give them the expensive shit, so they are utterly useless.
I think there are still arguments for both.
Your argument, and I don't entirely disagree with it, certainly has some truth. The increasing amounts of technology is warfare is certainly making manpower less needed for normal military operations. Offensively, you need boots on the ground to occupy territory, and for smaller countries, compulsory conscription is certainly a way to make sure they maximize this advantage. However, as you alluded, given Luxembourg isn't invading Belgium anytime soon, the need for these boots is dramatically decreased. Robots are coming to a battlefield near you, and in very large quantities. In the not so distant future, wars are going to be fought by kids who think they are playing an advance version of Call of Duty, all while sitting in a well provisioned bunker some 1000ft underground.
However, I think there is an equally valid counter argument to this. Compulsory conscription and the training, sets the ground work for a functioning resistance should a country be invaded. Recent examples are all too numerous of well functioning underground resistances defeating or, at a minimum, outlasting the willpower for war of foreign powers. Without a trained army, especially in countries that are very restrictive of private gun ownership, the ability to fight back against an occupying power, post-invasion, is significantly compromised.
|
|
|
|