Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

North Korea's Twitter and Flickr Accounts Hacked By Anonymous

samzenpus posted about a year ago | from the north-korea-has-a-flickr-page? dept.

Security 212

First time accepted submitter njnnja writes "With tensions on the Korean peninsula continuing to rise, Anonymous hacked into the government-run North Korean Flickr site to post a 'wanted' poster for NK leader Kim Jong Un. It says that he is wanted for 'threatening world peace' and 'wasting money while his people starve to death.' They also hacked into NK's Twitter account and posted a link to the Flickr page."

cancel ×

212 comments

How can you tell North Korea was hacked? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43363873)

They post less crazy things!

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43363897)

Look, just because we disagree with what they do doesn't mean this is right. Also, as for the nuclear weapons it's all posturing. They are just the act of the hour. Soon it will be some other bad guy.

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked? (5, Insightful)

MightyYar (622222) | about a year ago | (#43363939)

Look, just because we disagree with what they do doesn't mean this is right.

I think this is an extreme example of political correctness gone wild.

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43365047)

whats to disagree with? They threatened us and the world with nukes while starving their own people.

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked? (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43363973)

Really? It's merely disagreement? Posturing with nuclear weapons = crazy. Being the darkest country on Earth [globalsecurity.org] = crazy. This computer setup [washingtonpost.com] = crazy. Their people are literally starving and this is how they spend what resources they have.

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked? (5, Funny)

Kaenneth (82978) | about a year ago | (#43364137)

Darkest?... or Greenest!

What's their energy use per capita? What are their greenhouse gas emission rates?

And don't forget their victory over obesity, less than .1% of the population is overweight!

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43364411)

Always look on the bright side!

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked? (1)

servognome (738846) | about a year ago | (#43364619)

... of death
Just before you draw your terminal breath

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43365035)

thats cuz only the leader has access to food and is a pig.

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked? (2)

Opportunist (166417) | about a year ago | (#43365735)

Are you the new spokesperson for the tobacco industry? If not, you should apply.

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked? (2, Insightful)

Nerdfest (867930) | about a year ago | (#43364109)

They are threatening nuclear war. They should be taken quite seriously, posturing or not. It's effectively declaring war.

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43364297)

Nothing wrong with that. Let North Korea move, counter their move, the US will then destroy everyone there. Nothing left to worry about.

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43365251)

exactly. my plan is to give them a 30 day head start. Tell them they can shoot all the nuclear weapons they want at us for 30 days. The day after that, its our turn.

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked? (1)

girlintraining (1395911) | about a year ago | (#43365247)

They are threatening nuclear war. They should be taken quite seriously, posturing or not. It's effectively declaring war.

Yeah, in the same way that when I flick someone off on the freeway, that's the same as making a terrorist threat to blow up every car on the freeway. And let's not even get started on how many times I've murdered people in my mind... I'd be a serial murderer. :P

Re:How can you tell North Korea was hacked? (1)

JBMcB (73720) | about a year ago | (#43365803)

Look, just because we disagree with what they do doesn't mean this is right.

"On March 30, 2013, the North Korean government declared it was in "a state of war" with South Korea."
"On the night of April 3, North Korean military said it had "ratified" a merciless attack against the United States, potentially involving a "cutting-edge" nuclear strike, and that war could break out "today or tomorrow".

I'd say that's a bit more than a disagreement.

I approve. (1)

Soron (2515290) | about a year ago | (#43363877)

One of the few times I approve of what anonymous is doing.

Re:I approve. (3, Insightful)

sgbett (739519) | about a year ago | (#43363951)

Antagonising a rogues state into launching a nuclear attack?

Just to be devil's advocate like.

Re:I approve. (5, Insightful)

DarkOx (621550) | about a year ago | (#43364015)

I don't think there is much to worry about. If our military flying in bomber to show off, in addition to our usual South Korea joint exercise does not do; I highly doubt abuse of their twitter account will.

Re:I approve. (1)

ohnocitizen (1951674) | about a year ago | (#43365783)

But how hilarious would it be if twitter ended up being the reason?

Re:I approve. (1)

O('_')O_Bush (1162487) | about a year ago | (#43364029)

With NK, damned if you do, damned if you don't. They are antagonizing themselves into a nuclear strike. Anonymous's hacking did not change the situation.

Re:I approve. (4, Insightful)

servognome (738846) | about a year ago | (#43364369)

Anonymous escalated the situation. You have a standoff where neither side wants to fight, nor wants to back down so they just flex and hurl words at each other. The last thing you want is somebody to come along and throw rocks setting things off.

Re:I approve. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43364437)

Random dudes on the internet being retarded in public has never, and will never, be acceptable as provocation.

Re:I approve. (3, Insightful)

servognome (738846) | about a year ago | (#43364735)

Why? Not letting inspectors examine non-existant WMD's, and imaginary ties to terrorist organizations was acceptable provocation.

Re:I approve. (2, Informative)

Quasimodem (719423) | about a year ago | (#43365201)

All-hat no-cattle cowboys in office wanting to start that war was the provocation, Not letting inspectors examine non-existent WMD was only the cover.

Re:I approve. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43365463)

60's and 70's central and S. America.

Europe is controlled. The US is controlled.

Right now the middle east...

Next, Africa...

N. Korea is only to distract you.

The bankers want their money. Don't be fooled.

Re:I approve. (2)

pspahn (1175617) | about a year ago | (#43365203)

...non-existant WMD's...

Non-existent in the same way the cat in the box with the poison is still alive... or is it dead... do the WMD's still exist... or do they not...

Unless you can provide observation, uncertainty makes both existence and non-existence true.

Re:I approve. (2)

joelito_pr (931211) | about a year ago | (#43365329)

Schrödinger was Saddam's science advisor?

Re:I approve. (2)

TapeCutter (624760) | about a year ago | (#43365563)

Sort of, he was deliberately vague about WMD's, he wanted his neighbours (ie: Iran) to think twice before opposing him. It was pretty much the same foriegn policy that Israel has had for the last 50yrs. NK is a very different beast, it has been making hollow apocalyptic threats for decades, the difference today is that China is no longer defending them at all costs and nobody is appeasing them with 'aid' money.

Re:I approve. (2)

Opportunist (166417) | about a year ago | (#43365785)

I thought it was Heisenberg. It was kinda hard to say whether it was him or not, even when you knew where he was... or was he were you thought he is when you knew it was him?

Re:I approve. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43365319)

What was 'imaginary' about his ties? Saddam was paying out funds to the families of suicide bombers in Israel. See for example: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2846365.stm

He was also not abiding by the terms of the ceasefire from the Gulf War.

Re:I approve. (5, Insightful)

v1 (525388) | about a year ago | (#43364763)

You have a standoff where neither side wants to fight, nor wants to back down so they just flex and hurl words at each other.

That's not the impression I get from all that's been happening up there in NK lately. They aren't behaving by anyone's definition of "rational". You can't negotiate or reason with someone that's living in their own self-centered world like they are. They simply don't care what the rest of the world does or thinks about them. And that makes them incredibly dangerous, regardless of what their military capabilities are. They could send a company of chickens with slow-fuse grenades across the border and start/re-ignore a war. They don't need nukes.

For all practical purpose, they are 100% unpredictable. You have no way of telling what they're going to do next. Not by looking at what they've already done, not by looking at how the world is responding to them. None of it matters.

So you can't say that any one action by any outside party is going to "be responsible for" or "will lead to." Anonymous is just another side-attraction in this entire spectacle. They won't likely accomplish anything that could be described as a "goal", but at the same time this won't change what NK does in the next 10 minutes let alone the next 10 months.

Re:I approve. (3, Insightful)

servognome (738846) | about a year ago | (#43365135)

They aren't behaving by anyone's definition of "rational".

That's the biggest danger. Because they are acting irrationally, you can't expect them to react proportionally to any provocation. Rarely is there a single reason for a war, but stupid things can escalate tense situations into outright conflict. Tensions between Honduras and El Salvador turned to war over a stupid soccer riot.
The actions of an outside party may or may not influence the ultimate outcome, but it does hurt attempts to diffuse the situation.

Re:I approve. (3, Interesting)

ladoga (931420) | about a year ago | (#43365375)

That's not the impression I get from all that's been happening up there in NK lately. They aren't behaving by anyone's definition of "rational".

Kim Jong-un trying to unite people behind him by building up imaginary foreign threat? Not exactly a novel idea or completely without rationale. He's a new leader, people are unsure of his power and some might want to take his place or get rid of him.

For all practical purpose, they are 100% unpredictable. You have no way of telling what they're going to do next.

Probably next he will just make more threaths. Threats don't kill, but they can coinvince some potential competitors in the political elite of NK that Kim Jong-un is not weak. Whatever the case the NK's dictator loves his power and using nukes would be the fastest way to throw it all away. He won't do that. As stupid as it sounds he's not crazy. It's debatable if lust for power that goes beyond the needs of your people is sane, but then many if not all(?) of our leaders would be crazy.

Re:I approve. (1)

ladoga (931420) | about a year ago | (#43365397)

That's not the impression I get from all that's been happening up there in NK lately. They aren't behaving by anyone's definition of "rational".

Kim Jong-un trying to unite people behind him by building up imaginary foreign threat? Not exactly a novel idea or completely without rationale. He's a new leader, people are unsure of his power and some might want to take his place or get rid of him.

For all practical purpose, they are 100% unpredictable. You have no way of telling what they're going to do next.

Probably next he will just make more threaths. Threats don't kill, but they can coinvince some potential competitors in the political elite of NK that Kim Jong-un is not weak. Whatever the case the NK's dictator loves his power and using nukes would be the fastest way to throw it all away. He won't do that. It might sound stupid to people who like to dehumanize their opponents, but he's not crazy (as in irrational). It's ofcourse debatable if lust for power that goes beyond the needs of the people is sane, but then many if not all of our leaders are crazy.

Unpredictable for 60 years and going... (1)

TiggertheMad (556308) | about a year ago | (#43365829)

For all practical purpose, they are 100% unpredictable. You have no way of telling what they're going to do next. Not by looking at what they've already done, not by looking at how the world is responding to them.

For 100% unpredictable, they have been pretty constant for the last 60 years. Bluster and sabre rattle, followed by small scale aggression. Yeah, they go blow some shit up every few years to show that they aren't to be trifled with, but they haven't actually tried to re-ignite the Korean conflict. They have been able to level everything within 30 mils of the DMZ with conventional artillery for decades and they have resisted the urge.

I think you can count on another 30 years of the same unless you poke them with a stick. Sane dictators aren't fond of death by nukes or SEAL teams. They like to die of old age.

Re:I approve. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43366035)

NK issues threats for various things going on on the southern side of the border, such as a giant Christmas tree and activists launching balloons filled with US-Dollar cash and SW radios. The threats do specifically mention artillery. Threats to life are probably standard procedure for NK.

Re:I approve. (4, Insightful)

ub3r n3u7r4l1st (1388939) | about a year ago | (#43365285)

A false flag attack is a great way to start a war without being look like the aggressor. Operation Himmler is one good example of such back in WWII.

Re:I approve. (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about a year ago | (#43365779)

Don't speak for me, who said I don't?

If this causes them to attack (5, Insightful)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | about a year ago | (#43364059)

Then, well, it was inevitable anyhow and we might as well get it over with and kill them. Seriously, if they are really so thin skinned, so stupid, and so insane as to launch an attack over something like this, then it would happen sooner rather than later do to something else. In that case, let's have it happen sooner and just get it over with.

Please don't mistake this for me saying "We should go to war with NK!" I'm just saying that if something like this really did spark a war, I wouldn't blame the anon 'tards because the level of insanity, stupidity, and insecurity that it would take to start a war over something so trivial means it would get started over something else anyhow.

Re:If this causes them to attack (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43364279)

I was going to post the same thing. Cunts don't need a real reason to be cunts... they make up the reasons to fit the circumstances as they go along.

Re:If this causes them to attack (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43364413)

They're salivating over what's potentially the biggest an hero in all history, and get their lulz by prodding him into action. The fact that best korea's leader is threatening with nukes only serves to make the trolling that much harder and more intense.

Mostly because when on the internet if you talk the talk, you either walk the walk or GTFO. It's what invites so much drama.

Re:If this causes them to attack (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43364471)

Not only that, but they'll have fewer nukes now than in a few years. We don't want them to fire off any, but if it is going to happen, might as well have them only get off 1-2 shots instead of 20-30

Re:If this causes them to attack (1)

LongearedBat (1665481) | about a year ago | (#43365939)

Also, the longer we wait, the more powerful weapons they have time to accumulate. If the war had been fought fifteen years ago, then they wouldn't have been a nuclear threat. Now they are. Perhaps NK now feels that it has accumumlated enough that it might actually be ready to fight the war that it has been preparing for for so long, and it's once again testing and taunting its "enemies".

Re:I approve. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43364063)

Bring it on. The sooner this farce is brought to the inevitable conclusion, the better.

It's not like NK has ever overestimated its own power before.

Re:I approve. (1)

DigiShaman (671371) | about a year ago | (#43364489)

Agreed. They have crude nukes now. Better they shoot their wad today than deal with a soviet style thermonuclear Armageddon tomorrow.

BTW, DHS will paying an extra visit to Houston. I'm guessing the fear of a shipped nuke to our port might have something to do with it. Being that I live here, I'm as ready as I can be.

Lets get this shit over with!

Re:I approve. (4, Insightful)

robthebloke (1308483) | about a year ago | (#43364773)

I'm actually inclined to agree. I'd rather NK launch an attack now, at a point in time when their previous yields have been in 1 and 7 kilotonnes, rather than later when they may in a position to deliver a 20Kt Nagasaki sized yield (which presumably, would require further R&D on their ICBMs, not to mention the bombs themselves). It's worth remembering that the first bombs tested by the US, UK, and russia were all static tests (by neccsesity), and that it was only after the first few tests that dropping a bomb from a plane was possible, and much later still that mounting them on warheads was possible.

Due to the 'work' of Dr A. Q. Khan, we have a pretty good idea of what nuclear technology they have at their disposal, as well as the exact capabilities of the missile designs he borrowed from china & the USSR. Short of some large unknown uranium deposits in North Korea itself, we also have a pretty good idea of how much fissile material they have available (One would assume we'd notice the huge scars on the landscape caused by uranium mining, so I'm assuming that they don't have significant deposits). It should therefore be possible to determine the maximum theoretical yield of a bomb in the future, and give us a pretty good idea of what they may be capable of now. I'm guessing that a nuclear attack on SK is the only realistic chance the NK has of being able to do any serious damage, since one would assume that the longer the distance the missiles travel, the more chance there is that it would be knocked out by an anti-missile missile.

This does of course raise a few questions. Firstly, what is the success rate of the ABM missiles? Have they improved since the fairly dismal (estimated) 10% success rate in the first gulf war? Would they actually be good enough to prevent an attack on SK? What would be the required density of deployment around NK to be able to provide complete safety to all surrounding countries? Secondly, if NK were going to launch a missile, is the intelligence gathering good enough to be able to identify a long range missile with enough time to make a pre-emptive strike? Going by some of the build up to NK's longer range tests, it would appear that there should be enough time. Going by there shorter range tests, the answer would appear to be no. Thirdly, if the intelligence services have been watching NK for some time, do they know where those nuclear device(s) are currently located, and is there anything they can do to knock them out now?

I was against the 'pre-emptive' rhetoric that led to the invasions of afghanistan and iraq, but frankly, if you're going to declare war, and then threaten the use of nuclear weapons, all bets are off as far as I'm concerned. If the US, china, or russia find themselves in a position to launch an effective pre-emptive strike against NK, I actually find myself leaning towards the notion that they should probably do so. It would seem to be the safer option than trying to knock a missile out of the sky.....

Re:I approve. (1)

Hentes (2461350) | about a year ago | (#43364103)

It would still hurt much less than another 60 years of them. North Korea doesn't have a sizeable nuclear stockpile, or any reliable means of delivery, and if they attacked first they could be conveniently wiped off the map without much protest from others.

Re:I approve. (1)

servognome (738846) | about a year ago | (#43364473)

Yeah, I'm sure China, Russia, and South Korea wouldn't mind dealing with nuclear fallout and mass numbers of refugees.

Re:I approve. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43364913)

America wouldn't have to resort to a nuclear strike to disable North Korea. They have enough conventional weapons and targeting systems to disable the country without creating a nuclear dead zone or fallout in other countries.

The only concern about that might come from North Korea themselves if they're faced with imminent defeat and they preform what might be called a nuclear hand grenade attack on the attacking forces. Yeah, they'd get the invaders but they'd take themselves out as well in a sort of death before dishonour sort of way.

Re:I approve. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43364113)

Antagonising a rogues state into launching a nuclear attack?

Dear NK,

Please Try it. Just try it. Take your best shot. Send up the balloon and let's settle it.

You too China. You can stick with your little puppet hellhole or you can join civilization. Do as you will; we'll handle you either way.

Re:I approve. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43365019)

You too China. You can stick with your little puppet hellhole

The real mystery is why China "sticks with its little puppet hellhole" at all. They'd be a lot better off without NK destabilizing their neck of the woods.

Re:I approve. (1)

Penguinisto (415985) | about a year ago | (#43364117)

Antagonising a rogues state into launching a nuclear attack?

This leads to a question: Does NK actually have a warhead that would 1) be small enough to fit on the top of a rocket, and 2) not be so heavy as to reduce their biggest rocket's range to a range that, say, the US couldn't care less about but Japan would still worry, etc?

It's one thing to toss around threats. It's less worrying when the threat maker has a bomb the size of a semi-trailer and a rocket that has a hard time lifting anything heavier than a large backpack, yanno?

Re:I approve. (1)

servognome (738846) | about a year ago | (#43364567)

The US has so much military and economic involvement in the region that an attack on Japan or S. Korea will be treated like an attack on the US.

Re:I approve. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43365071)

we are being real antagonistic when we feed their people while they build nukes and we dont like it. I believe we have a legitimate case for being angry,not them.

Re:I approve. (2)

24-bit Voxel (672674) | about a year ago | (#43365667)

Or...

Making the people more aware that life isn't supposed to be they way it is for them? Brainwashing is powerful and most of them were born into this, have never left, and know nothing else.

It's a powerful tactic.

Re:I approve. (1)

SeaFox (739806) | about a year ago | (#43365739)

Antagonising a rogues state into launching a nuclear attack?

If all it takes is some Internet trolling to start a thermonuclear war I hardly think we can call ourselves "safe" before this happened.

Re:I approve. (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about a year ago | (#43365771)

They may look like they're batshit crazy, but I highly doubt they are. Even if the rest of the population is kept in the dark (quite literally so), the leadership knows that they're in no position to even DREAM about surviving something like all out nuclear war against countries like the US. Hell, even delivering one single nuke somewhere where it actually could matter to the US is a wet dream at best. Unless UPS changes its policies considerably, that is...

The whole strongman show has another goal. First, of course, the own population, and to show them that all the "sacrifices" are necessary to keep North Korea free from US and SK "oppression". Then of course to put the US under pressure. It's essentially the equivalent of some schoolkid punk flipping you off and knowing exactly that you can't simply go over and beat the snot out of him because laws protect him. With NK and the US, it's basically "public outrage" that keeps the US from doing the same with NK. They actually count on us being so opposed to simply turning their beautiful pitch black night into glowing mushrooms that our governments won't do it.

Yet, the US not reacting makes the US look weak. I mean, there's some punk kid country flipping you off and you don't react? So what we do is try to "appease" them. And that's basically what they want.

Personally, I'm more and more a proponent of planting a few mushrooms across Pyongyang.

Re:I approve. (4, Insightful)

servognome (738846) | about a year ago | (#43364241)

What they've done isn't much different than the Cyber-fighters of Izz ad-Din al-Qassam, it just pisses people off.
Do you think they made the political situation better? The N. Korean government will claim that Anonymous was sponsored by the evil US and this is a precursor to a military strike on their country.

Their heart my be in the right place, but their method is childish. Real change will come about by providing the people of N. Korea alternative means to get information, not by pissing off the leadership.

Sorry, Anonymous didn't hack N. Korea's intranet (1)

daveschroeder (516195) | about a year ago | (#43364483)

In other news (aside from the Twitter and Flickr accounts):

Sorry, Anonymous probably didn't hack North Korea's intranet [washingtonpost.com]

Re:Sorry, Anonymous didn't hack N. Korea's intrane (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year ago | (#43365303)

Gotta love "Anonymous"... using the Washington Post to pick their targets.

Re:I approve. (1)

Millennium (2451) | about a year ago | (#43365139)

They should totally photoshop KJU's head onto some Chris-Chan stuff.

Re:I approve. (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year ago | (#43365325)

Yes, you can always tell a 'terrorist' by the targets they pick.

Wasn't hard to guess passwords (5, Funny)

ackthpt (218170) | about a year ago | (#43363945)

The list included:

hateamerica
nukeamerica
likerodman
rodmanbff

Re:Wasn't hard to guess passwords (1)

BenSchuarmer (922752) | about a year ago | (#43363997)

bestk0rea
l1l k1m

Re:Wasn't hard to guess passwords (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43364049)

password

They are experts you know..

Re:Wasn't hard to guess passwords (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43364131)

luntlertwoo

Re:Wasn't hard to guess passwords (0)

Penguinisto (415985) | about a year ago | (#43364141)

123456 ...doesn't anybody remember Spaceballs?

(My lawn, you, vacate it, etc.)

Re:Wasn't hard to guess passwords (5, Funny)

chromas (1085949) | about a year ago | (#43364291)

"6"? Really? Okay, grampa, back to the Alzheimer's ward with you..

Re:Wasn't hard to guess passwords (1)

Mashiki (184564) | about a year ago | (#43364649)

Really now? My password only goes "1234" jeeze you youngsters....

Re:Wasn't hard to guess passwords (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43365307)

Spaceballs was a long time ago.

Their security has been beefed up since then. Hence the "6"

Re:Wasn't hard to guess passwords (1)

Jason Levine (196982) | about a year ago | (#43364967)

That's why I set all of my passwords to "12348". Nobody will guess that.

Oh... wait...

I need to change some passwords. (Maybe "12349".)

Best tweet from PDRNK (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43363965)

#ratmeat

PLS don't waste the peoples amo on rats see local Commissar if hungry instead! KJU

Priorities (1)

Holistic Missile (976980) | about a year ago | (#43363975)

Apparently when NK was configuring their proxies and firewalls, they were so focused on keeping their citizens from getting out that they didn't pay enough attention to keeping people from getting in!

Re:Priorities (3, Interesting)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | about a year ago | (#43364053)

they didn't pay enough attention to keeping people from getting in!

. . . they just couldn't fathom the idea why anyone would want to get in . . .

The hackers involve could have ended the current escalation. All they need to do, was to post this headline:

"The fearless leader Kim Jong Un has declared victory over the US! The leader's strong courage has frightened the US! They have halted their plans to attack the Peoples' Republic! The war with the US is over! They won't attack tomorrow, or the day after, etc."

Kim Jong Un might have like the idea, and adopted it as his own dogma. Thus, giving him a way out without anyone getting hurt.

Re:Priorities (1)

DigiShaman (671371) | about a year ago | (#43365753)

That got me thinking. Whomever was responsible for maintaining their social media communications must already have been executed via firing squad. As I know, failure of any North Korean isn't let off easy. Poor SOB. Glad I'm not him/her.

Re:Priorities (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about a year ago | (#43365845)

Unlikely, then the same happens that happened over here after the cold war ended. Great, proliferation is over, time to stop wasting money on guns and military and instead finally get the social services up. Better schools, better healthcare, better everything.

Took us almost a decade to get out of that dilemma, then we finally found someone willing to play war with us again. And this time, we won't make the same mistake and rely on a single enemy that might just sulk when he feels like he's not winning and go home, that war on terror is great in this respect. You can let it go on forever. If some country doesn't wanna play anymore, just pick another one at random and call it the new enemy.

Kimmie would probably just turn around and say the US broke their promise and now it's personal because the US aren't just an evil country, it's also a lying country and they dared to lie to the great beloved leader. They don't WANT to get out of this "dilemma", it's what gives them an excuse to keep those in power in power and happy.

Re:Priorities (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about a year ago | (#43365821)

You have to excuse them, they don't really have any experience with anyone wanting IN, you know?

Bonus points (1)

sc0ob5 (836562) | about a year ago | (#43363995)

to anonymous for the Monkey Magic reference. :)

You.. You..You've done it now.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43364065)

How are we going to avoid global thermal nuclear war now?

You anonymous have really screwed up this time..

Re:You.. You..You've done it now.... (1)

chromas (1085949) | about a year ago | (#43364305)

That's easy: Don't press the Lockout Changes button this time.

Re:You.. You..You've done it now.... (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about a year ago | (#43365869)

Global? Overdramatization much?

I don't even believe NK has any kind of system that could deliver a warhead reliably anywhere close to Seoul, let alone the US. And I kinda doubt that any country, not even China, is stupid enough to tie themselves to them and side with them. There are just far too many who wouldn't and would be more than happy to plaster the countryside with glowing mushrooms instead. Nothing's financially more attractive than to pay your national debt with ammo.

Rogue state's reaction (2)

GoodNewsJimDotCom (2244874) | about a year ago | (#43364083)

Guess we're right on censoring Internet.

I believe the real reason these places censor internet isn't that they're worried of offensive things being said. I think the real reason they censor Internet is if we all hang out together in positive communities, the hate against us starts to fall apart.

One lousy million? (1)

Arancaytar (966377) | about a year ago | (#43364099)

The US military spends more than that every day just on dealing with his antics. Any enterprising bounty hunter should hold out for a lot more. :P

Re:One lousy million? (1)

servognome (738846) | about a year ago | (#43364427)

Dr. Evil licensed bounty hunter

Anyone could be "Anonymous" (2)

coffee-breaks (2867847) | about a year ago | (#43364143)

because in Reality, "Anonymous" doesn't really exist. It was started by the b/tards on 4chan. Therefore, the term itself is meaningless. "Anonymous" has become the latest useful catch phrase used by the Corporate Owned Media spreading FUD. I wouldn't be terribly surprised if this so called "Anonymous" isn't some gov USA organization. Nobody is that dumb(except maybe the usual American moron) to actually believe NK is any kind of a real threat; the Real goal here is to try to involve China into some kinda regional war.

Re:Anyone could be "Anonymous" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43364317)

North Korean is a real threat. Just not a persistent one and not to the United States. No one thinks that the NPRK could hold out in a real war especially if they actually use a nuke on South Korea and assure their own destruction, but they could do some damage during one of their tantrums before being wiped out.

Re:Anyone could be "Anonymous" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43364449)

I wouldn't be terribly surprised if this so called "Anonymous" isn't some gov USA organization.

You wouldn't be surprised if it isn't?

And besides that...Duh! Of course anybody can be Anonymous; that's the entire premise.

Re:Anyone could be "Anonymous" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43364551)

I don't agree with this action so it must have been done by [disliked_group] shills

okay

morons (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43364235)

they should stick to their intellectual capabilities

they've far overstepped what they're able to process and predict

their cultural centrism in this case has only served to make all our of lives worse, not better

Haters gonna Hate (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43364271)

Anon is just jealous that Pongo gets more tail than they do.

Bomb NK back to the Stone Age: Problem solved! (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43364301)

..and while we're at it, send an assassination team for al-Assad, I think we've all had more than enough of his particular brand of bullshit, too.

Seriously, I'm sick and fucking tired of this North Korea batshit insane crap. Even the Chinese government, whom I have no great love for, is backing away from NK (Hey, we don't even know these assholes!).

hm (2)

fazey (2806709) | about a year ago | (#43364443)

Oh you mean something else that can be used to keep the US public pumping money into this giant military beast? Then they can turn around and provide all the technology they use over seas to our local law enforcement and use it against us? Like... say... drones?

Snotty nosed brat (1)

englishstudent (1638477) | about a year ago | (#43364465)

If you think back to the school yard, if some snotty nosed brat kept shooting off his mouth he would eventually get some sense knocked into him. In this case, the snotty nosed brat is Nth Korea. The softer approach (sanctions) clearly isn't working. Is there any other way to knock some sense into them without going to war? I'd personally like there to be no war, but I'd also like the bs to stop.

Re:Snotty nosed brat (1)

Overzeetop (214511) | about a year ago | (#43364679)

No, there's always one asshat who just never gets it until he's pummeled. After that he goes quiet until he's 35 and then takes out a school or a movie theater with an assault rifle.

NK = Hell on Earth (0)

allcoolnameswheretak (1102727) | about a year ago | (#43364475)

Life in North Korea is worse than 1984. Entire families of people in North Korean concentration camps are living through hell on earth. The treatment of prisoners there sounds worse than what the Nazis did. I wonder if we should take North Korea's war mongering as a pretext to launch a massive, pre-emptive attack and finally free the North Korean population from their oppressors.

I know that it's not going to happen. But if you read up on Wikipedia and other sources of witness accounts of NK concentration camps, it kind of makes you wish that it would.

Re:NK = Hell on Earth (4, Insightful)

preaction (1526109) | about a year ago | (#43364585)

And what happened last time we used a pretext to launch a preemptive attack on an oppressive government? How did that go, both at home and abroad? We don't know, because it isn't done yet...

Re:NK = Hell on Earth (1)

Velex (120469) | about a year ago | (#43364801)

Damn it. My mod points expired yesterday. Will somebody else do the +1 honors, please?

Re:NK = Hell on Earth (1)

Charliemopps (1157495) | about a year ago | (#43365119)

Yes, someone should attack North Korean and put that shit to rest for good. But it shouldn't be us. This is a South Korea, Chinese and Japanese problem. If they do not care to get involved, we certainly should not. The North Koreans have no capability of attacking us except the assets we foolishly have in the area. We're creating our own problem here and should back the fuck off and let the people that live their take care of themselves. Next thing to happen is they nuke a carrier group and we pretend to act all surprised?

When you're at a party and some crazy asshole shows up... go home. It's not your house. Let the owners be owners.

Re:NK = Hell on Earth (4, Insightful)

Jason Levine (196982) | about a year ago | (#43365137)

North Korea (and their leader) are like one of those small, annoying dogs that yaps incessantly to prove it is big and tough. Only in this case, the small dog has sharp teeth and rabies. Sure we can still beat it up, but in the process we'll get bitten quite a bit and it'll hurt a lot. Any war between us and North Korea will be messy on a level that would make Iraq look like a clean war.

Remember, those people might be living through hell on Earth, but thanks to the North Korea government's total control of the media, the people think that the US is to blame. They really think that their benevolent government officials would love to improve the conditions, but that evil United States keeps flexing their evil muscles to keep them down. This level of brainwashing has been going on for generations and will be difficult to undo.

USA is the real threat (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43365053)

The biggest threat to world peace is USA.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...