After seeing Gábor’s performance, many participants commented that they would be taking a new look at the 1000 year old country. "Bocsimako is the proof that Hungary is best for AI algorithms", quipped one player.
They /can/ shoot him though. All it takes is an angry war widow who feels their life is forfeit without their partner. A little encouragement and the means to enact the murder and you have an assassin who cannot be traced back to you. But, he's simply not important enough to be assassinated. While the media coverage of him may make it seem like he is the bane of the American government, they have much more important things to worry about. This approach was perfected by the CIA during the cold war, but it has been a long time since someone in the public eye was important or dangerous enough to warrant an assassination.
The other problem I have with this is that rape is an awful way to frame someone. You need to condition someone to stand up to extreme amounts of interrogation and cross-examination. A single slip-up in memorization of facts can cost the entire case. It is not nearly as simple as "pay someone 10 million and have them say he raped them", we're talking about world class psychiatrists and world class lawyers, the victim needs an incredible amount of practice to be able to convince them that they are telling the truth. The American government has the NSA at their disposal, they could frame him a million ways and make it stick, they would not use a random swedish woman.
That is not to say that the American government isn't happy about it, nor that they aren't encouraging this story, nor that Assange did it, but this certainly isn't the work of the American government.
A "US spook" is not a "mid-level person". Nor does a "US spook" have the authority to make the swedish government issue a warrant. Nor is a "US spook" above the law. It is within the means of an American intelligence agency, or military, of course, but the decision would come from and be authorized from the highest levels of command.
That being said, it would be an idiotic way of dealing with this situation. It smacks of amateurism, and while I may have qualms with what american intelligence agencies do, they are very good at what they do, and certainly not amateurs.
"This is bigotry, plain and simple. Its taking sterotypical prejudices based on what may be real-life encounters with a relatively small sample group, and applying them to a wide class of people. It’s gross and it needs to end."
this could be equally as well applied to dilbert comics.
seriously, some random guy calls programmers autistic and this somehow deserves a blog post breaking down the argument? give me a break.
does anyone else not find the it crowd funny at all?
i have had it recommended to me over and over, but i simply do not find it funny at all. yes, it has geeky jokes, but as a comedy and an overall tv show is utterly appalling imo.
compared to something like black books, which is just brilliant