Raiders Game Net

Bad News Did Senior DOS Officials Commit Perjury?

Mike Nomad — Wed, 19 Jun 2013 11:00:38 GMT

Did senior State Department
security officials commit perjury?

By James Rosen - Published June 18, 2013 - FoxNews.com

Two top officials at the State Department's Diplomatic Security Service (DS) -- the federal law enforcement agency that protects American diplomats and investigates allegations of criminal misconduct by State Department employees -- gave sworn testimony earlier this year that appears to be evasive at best, and untrue at worst, according to evidence obtained by Fox News.

The officials are Scott Bultrowicz, who until Feb. 1 served as director of DS, and Tracy H. Mahaffey, who remains the executive director of DS. In videotaped depositions conducted this past February, Bultrowicz claimed not to know about any claims by a federal agency that DS officials have failed to follow proper procedures; and Mahaffey claimed not to know about any pending investigations into DS.

Yet Fox News has obtained meeting notes, draft reports and other evidence that suggest both officials were aware, at the time they were deposed, of a pending investigation into DS and its operations by the State Department's Office of Inspector General (OIG). What's more, both officials had been apprised of the OIG's preliminary finding that DS did indeed fail to follow proper procedures in at least eight cases, and possibly more, because of "undue influence" and "pressure" brought to bear by senior State Department officials to halt internal investigations.

The evidence indicates the two officials were presented with those conclusions approximately 60 days before they testified in their depositions.

Lawyers and experts contacted by Fox News said the implications could be staggering for a federal law enforcement agency whose officers frequently testify in criminal prosecutions if two of its top officials were deemed to have testified untruthfully in sworn proceedings.

The two officials' testimony was taken as part of discovery proceedings in a little-known lawsuit that has been snaking its way through the courts and various administrative venues for several years. DS agent Rick Higbie, a 15-year veteran of the force presently detailed to the U.S. attorney's office in Dallas, is suing Hillary Clinton in her official capacity as former secretary of state, on the grounds that DS sought to demote Higbie after he declined -- citing the chronic and terminal illness of his daughter -- to serve in overseas assignments. The State Department rejects Higbie's claims and the trial is slated to commence in Texas in October.

Bultrowicz and Mahaffey were deposed on Feb. 21 in Arlington, Va. Gregory B. Starr, a former director of DS who returned to the job on Feb. 1, succeeding Bultrowicz, was also deposed on Feb. 21, at the State Department's main office building in Washington. All three depositions were videotaped.

During the proceedings, Higbie's lawyer, Cary Schulman of Dallas, engaged in the following colloquy with Bultrowicz:

SCHULMAN: Are you aware of any governmental agency, the United States Congress, or any other governmental investigative body that has similar criticisms of Diplomatic Security's failure to have or follow through proper administrative policy or procedures?

BULTROWICZ: None that come to my mind right now.

Earlier, Schulman had engaged in a similar exchange with Mahaffey:

SCHULMAN: Are you aware of any investigations by any agency, federal government or otherwise, into Diplomatic Security, into whether they uniformly or properly administer their policies in connection with employees or the administration of diplomatic security?

MAHAFFEY: I'm not aware of any.

Yet Fox News has obtained contemporaneous notes taken at a meeting that was held on Dec. 14, 2012 -- at which both Bultrowicz and Mahaffey were present -- that was convened to review the draft OIG report on DS operations dated Dec. 10. Also present was then-Assistant Secretary of State Eric Boswell and representatives from the OIG team that had spent several months scrutinizing DS' operations before preparing the draft report.

At the Dec. 14 session, the meeting notes make clear, the attendees discussed the preliminary findings of the OIG investigation into the practices and conduct of DS. These findings included the very first of the "key judgments" presented: "The Bureau of Diplomatic Security (DS) Special Investigations Division (SID), which investigates allegations of criminal and administrative misconduct, lacks a firewall to preclude the DS and Department of State (Department) hierarchies from exercising undue influence in particular cases."

The draft also stated, as its third "key judgment": "DS does not have adequate quality assurance measures to be able to ascertain on a regular basis that adequate internal safeguards and management procedures exist to ensure investigations comport with law enforcement standards."

Finally, in the body of the draft, OIG stated: "The OIG team heard of instances where senior DS officials may have improperly influenced investigations. The team was also advised that high-level Department officials may have once or twice a year brought pressure to bear to improperly halt or influence investigations, including into allegations of serious criminal conduct."

The meeting notes -- taken by a member of the OIG investigation team -- state that "nobody in the room actually said the report language is not accurate." However, Boswell, whose bureau oversees DS, reacted forcefully to the draft, telling the OIG team that the finding about the lack of a "firewall" would "damage DS" and be used by "every defense lawyer around."

In the end, the judgments about the lack of a "firewall" and "quality assurance measures" stayed in the OIG's final report, issued in March of this year -- but the finding that high-level State Department officials may have interfered with DS cases "once or twice a year" was stricken from it.

Since Bultrowicz and Mahaffey were both present for the contentious Dec. 14 meeting -- approximately 60 days prior to their depositions -- Higbie's lawyer has questioned how Bultrowicz could maintain in the sworn proceeding that he was unaware of any "governmental agency" or "governmental investigative body" having lodged criticism of DS for failure to follow proper procedure.

Likewise, Higbie's lawyer has questioned Mahaffey's testimony that she was "not aware" of any investigations into DS by "any agency, federal government of otherwise." State Department officials, speaking on background, told Fox News that Mahaffey was making a distinction between an "investigation" and an "inspection," which is the technical term of art applied to OIG's scrutiny of DS operations.

Former U.N. ambassador John Bolton, whose professional experience includes the practice of law and a stint as an under secretary of state, said the testimony appeared designed not to acknowledge the existence of the problems cited by the OIG investigating team.

"I think perjury is certainly one explanation," he told Fox News. "It undercuts the credibility of the entire agency, in this case the Diplomatic Security Bureau. And it undercuts the testimony of other DS agents that they might have to provide, in other law enforcement matters. ... It really goes to the legitimacy of the entire bureau and unfortunately calls into question the investigations that it's undertaking."

In the landmark ruling Giglio v. United States (1972), the U.S. Supreme Court held that among the potentially exculpatory material prosecutors are required to turn over to defendants and their lawyers is information affecting the credibility of government witnesses. Attorneys contacted by Fox News suggested that the DS disclosures could prompt defense attorneys to challenge prosecutions launched, and convictions already obtained, on the strength of DS agents' testimony.

That DS itself, as an agency, could wind up "Giglio-impaired" -- the term used to describe testimony by a law enforcement officer that is ruled inadmissible because prosecutors have not shared with the defense relevant information damaging to the officer's credibility -- would appear to be precisely the concern that Boswell raised in the December meeting, when he fretted that the OIG findings would be used by "every defense lawyer around."

Apprised of Fox News' reporting, State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki declined to address the testimony by Bultrowicz and Mahaffey in detail, citing the pending Higbie case.

"If there is an allegation of misconduct, of which I'm not aware of for those two individuals, we would certainly take a look at that, as we would in any case," she told reporters. "But you're also referring to a few lines, as I understand it, from a multi-hour closed door deposition, which I have -- is likely taken out of context."

The formal name of the Texas case is Richard Higbie v. Hillary Rodham Clinton (acting in her official capacity as Secretary of State) [Civil Action No. 3-11-CV-2636-L].

Fox News' Jake Gibson contributed to this report.

SOURCE

News Afghanistan suspends security talks with US

Mike Nomad — Wed, 19 Jun 2013 10:24:45 GMT

Afghanistan suspends security talks with US

President's office announces suspension, saying the US has been
"inconsistent in statement and action" over Taliban.

Last Modified: 19 Jun 2013 09:16

The Taliban opened a political office in the Qatari capital on Tuesday to facilitate peace talks [AFP]

The Afghan government has announced that it is suspending security negotiations with Washington because of the United States' "inconsistent statement and action" over the Taliban peace process.

The move on Wednesday came a day after the US said that it would engage in direct negotiations with the Taliban, who officially opened a political office in Doha, Qatar, a day earlier.

"The president suspended the BSA [Bilateral Security Agreement] talks with the US this morning," Aimal Faizi, President Hamid Karzai's spokesman, said.

"There is a contradiction between what the US government says and what it does regarding Afghanistan peace talks," Faizi told AFP.

The BSA is meant to provide a strategic framework for US troops to remain in the country after its troops formally exit Afghanistan by the end of 2014. It will finalise issues such as the number of troops to remain, where they will be based and under what terms they will operate.

Faizi said that Karzai particularly objected to "the name of the [Taliban's] office" in the Qatari capital.

Al Jazeera speaks to Shukria Barakzai, an Afghan MP, about the suspension of talks with the US

"The president is not happy with the name of the office. We oppose the title the 'Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan' because such a thing doesn't exist," Faizi said. "The US was aware of the president's stance."

Meanwhile, the Taliban said it would continue to target the US military in Afghanistan, undeterred by US moves to hold direct negotiations with it .

Speaking to Al Jazeera, Zabihullah Mujahid, a Taliban spokesperson, said his group will not change their tactics or objectives.

The Taliban threat rang true as the armed group claimed responsibility for an attack on the Bagram air base, that killed four US soldiers on Tuesday.

The air base, a sprawling centre about 47km north of Kabul, serves as a major hub for US aircraft.

'Two-pronged approach'

Al Jazeera's Jane Feguson said the Taliban threat to continue with its attacks reflected that the armed group had been emboldened by its perceived successes on the battlefield.

"Zabihullah said it was those attacks in the first place that forced parties on the ground to the negotiation table. It shows a real confidence on the side of the Taliban when they say that," she said.

"They see themselves in the driving seat of these peace negotiations rather than having to make any military concessions on the ground," she said.

"It seems that the Taliban are trying to push for a two-pronged approach to what they would see as a victory: The diplomatic approach in Doha as well as the military approach."

The US military presence in Afghanistan is roughly 66,000 troops, after having reached a peak of about 100,000 forces.

US officials cautioned that the peace process would likely be messy and has no guarantee of success.

"It's going to be a long, hard process if indeed it advances significantly at all," a senior US official said.

Meanwhile, the NATO command in Kabul on Tuesday completed handing over lead security responsibility to Afghan government forces across the country.

NATO plans to end all combat operations in Afghanistan by December 2014.

SOURCE

Ed Note: Afghan President Hamid Karzai is the world's biggest drug czar... his country exports more opium than any other country in the world. He is no friend of the USA.
(Afghanistan has been the greatest illicit opium producer in the entire world, ahead of Burma (Myanmar), the "Golden Triangle", and Latin America since 1992, excluding the year 2001. Afghanistan is the main producer of opium in the "Golden Crescent".)

RS Custom Map Hanto Night

Mike Nomad — Tue, 18 Jun 2013 10:28:55 GMT

Hanto Nighttime

Rising Storm Hanto Nighttime Territory, Countdown and Firefight Maps
Author: oldbrokenlink

REMOVED FROM ROTATION UNTIL
MAP FILES ARE MANAGEABLE

Screenshot:

Steam Workshop:

Rising Storm Hanto Nighttime Shared Files

Rising Storm Hanto Nighttime Base Maps

Client Files:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...0_06182013.zip

Server Files:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...0_06182013.zip

History:

1.0.0.0 06/18/2013
Initial Release

Notes:
I could not release these maps as a single Steam Workshop entry because it was just too large. So I had to spit it into two parts. You will need to subscribe to both parts before playing the maps!

News MS Anti Trust Judge Penfield Jackson Dies at 76

Mike Nomad — Mon, 17 Jun 2013 11:51:15 GMT

Thomas Penfield Jackson, judge in DOJ-Microsoft case, dies at 76

by Steven Musil - June 16, 2013 3:16 PM PDT

Judge Jackson ruled in 2000 that the tech titan was a monopoly that should be split in two before his removal from the case for "seriously tainting" proceedings.

Thomas Penfield Jackson
(Credit: Beverly Rezneck/U.S. Disrict courts)

Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson, the former U.S. District court judge who ruled in 2000 that Microsoft was a monopoly that should be broken up before his decision was overruled, died Saturday at age 76.

Jackson died at his home in Compton, Md., from complications of transitional cell cancer, his wife, Patricia King Jackson, told The New York Times.

Unusually vocal in his public and private criticisms of Microsoft, Jackson ruled in June 2000 that tech titan should be split into two companies: one that would sell office software and the browser, and another that would be responsible for everything else. Jackson likened Microsoft executives to gangland killers and stubborn mules who should be walloped with a 2-by-4.

Mindful that the government's antitrust case against IBM took 13 years, Jackson limited each side to 12 witnesses and two surprise rebuttal witnesses. Testimony in the case concluded after 76 days.

However, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit was most concerned by Jackson's habit of inviting reporters into his chambers for private conversations that involved criticizing the world's most famous antitrust defendant while court proceedings were under way. "The system would be a sham if all judges went around doing this," Chief Judge Harry Edwards warned at the time.

As a result, Jackson was removed from the case. The D.C. Circuit Court ruled unanimously that Jackson "seriously tainted the proceedings," and a new judge, Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, was appointed. The appeals court also overruled Jackson's decision to divide Microsoft, which led to the case being settled in November 2001.

A graduate of Harvard Law School, Jackson saw a fair share of controversy since his first appointment to the bench in 1982 by President Ronald Reagan. He fined former Reagan aide Michael Deaver $100,000 in 1988 for lying under oath about lobbying activities.

In 1990, he sentenced District of Columbia Mayor Marion Barry to a maximum sentence of six months for a misdemeanor drug conviction. After Jackson commented that he had "never seen a stronger government" criminal case, Barry's attorneys filed motions to have Jackson removed from the case, which was on appeal.

In 2000, he found Iran liable for $300 million in punitive damage over the kidnapping of reporter Terry Anderson, who was held captive from 1985 to 1991.

In later years, he still defended his decision to break up the software behemoth as the right thing to do.

"Windows is an operating system monopoly, and the company's business strategy was to leverage Windows to achieve a comparable dominion of all software markets," Jackson said in a speech in 2005. "Nothing has changed, to my observation, in the five years that have elapsed since my decision...Microsoft has won the browser war in the United States."

SOURCE

Interview Is cable holding back superfast broadband

Mike Nomad — Mon, 17 Jun 2013 11:36:05 GMT

Is cable holding back superfast broadband adoption on purpose?

Comcast CEO Brian Roberts talks with CNBC's Becky Quick at the 2013 Cable Show.

by Marguerite Reardon - June 17, 2013 12:00 AM PDT

The cable industry says it is more than ready to compete with Google Fiber, but adds that consumers are nowhere near ready for gigabit speeds. Is it cable's pricing schemes that are holding back adoption?

The cable industry insists that it's ready and able to compete with Google Fiber when it comes to delivering ultra high-speed broadband.

Indeed, Comcast CEO Brian Roberts last week showed off a 3Gbps cable broadband connection at the industry's annual trade show in Washington, D.C. That's three times faster than Google Fiber, which itself is nearly 150 times faster than the current average broadband connection in the U.S. Armed with that capability, he confidently welcomed Google's challenge to deliver ultra high-speed broadband to consumers.

"I hope there's a demand for (Google Fiber)," he said during a keynote session at the Cable Show. "The more customers crave speed, the more the kids in the garage and the geniuses around the world can invent applications that require speed. That's the best thing that can happen to our industry. We have to embrace that competition."

But Roberts' words and one demo don't match up with the actions of his industry. The cable providers have been slow to make its speedier options broadly available, and when they do, they charge significantly higher prices that escalate as you move to faster tiers. Based on how the industry has chosen to price its service, it's clear that cable operators are not exactly encouraging adoption of ultra high-speed broadband. In comparison, Google is expanding Google Fiber to more markets, and offers a much faster connection at reasonable rates.

It's not a surprise that Google Fiber came up at the cable show. The service, which has generated a lot of buzz and piqued the interest of communities across the country, threatens to upend the cable Internet model, which has only needed to compete against one other competitor for home broadband, the similarly regulated telecom industry. The fact that Google is offering a 1Gbps connection for only $70 a month, while competitors are offering service with 20 times less capacity for roughly the same price, has spurred discussion among policy makers and consumers.

For now, Google Fiber remains more a curiosity than a legitimate threat. After Google announced plans to build its own gigabit-speed broadband network in 2010, it was seen more as a science experiment than a true challenge to the cable industry. But in recent months, it looks like Google plans to turn Google Fiber into a money-making business. It first launched in Kansas City, Mo., and Kansas City, Kan., last summer. And this spring the company announced plans to deploy in Austin, Texas, and Provo, Utah.

Roberts made sure to note during a speech at the Cable Show that cable is up to the task of matching and even exceeding Google's offering. He emphasized that gigabit-speed downloads are already possible today using current cable technology.

Higher speeds don't come cheap on cable broadband

While Roberts is talking about hypothetical speeds, Comcast's actual -- much slower -- service is still pretty pricey.

Comcast, the nation's largest cable provider, offers its 50Mbps service at a promotional price of $60 a month for the first six months. After that, depending on the market, prices range between $59 and $75 a month. The company's 105Mbps service, which is only available in some markets and is roughly 10 times slower than Google's 1Gbps service, costs $90 a month for the first six months of service. After that the price goes up to $115 a month.

Its fastest option is a 305Mbps service, but it's limited to only a few markets and is a hefty $320 a month.

Comcast also charges a one-time $500 installation fee for this service. For Google customers subscribing to the 1Gbps service for $70 a month, installation is free.

Time Warner Cable, the only cable operator currently competing against a Google Fiber market, not-so-coincidentally offers 100Mbps service in Kansas City. Time Warner's top speed elsewhere in its territory is 50Mbps. Pricing for the 50Mbps service starts at $75 per month with an introductory 12-month offer for new customers only. The company doesn't publish on its Web site what the rate is for that service after the introductory period is over.

NCTA President and former FCC Chairman Michael Powell recently wrote in an editorial for The Hill that cable companies now offer 100Mbps broadband service to 85 percent of all American homes.

This may be true, but getting access to those higher tiers of service is expensive. For instance, where a 100Mbps service might cost a cable broadband customer $115 a month, a 20Mbps service could cost half that. Slower speeds cost even less. And in an economic environment where many consumers can barely afford cable TV service, the pricing of these services encourages consumers to buy packages with slower network connections and less capacity.

In comparison to cable, Google's pricing for its 1Gbps (1,000Mbps) service is dirt cheap, considering the capacity it offers customers. For the 1Gbps broadband service, Google charges $70 a month. This pricing is comparable to 50Mbps services offered by many cable providers.

A speed test of the 1Gbps Google Fiber service in Kansas City shows blindingly fast uploads and downloads.

And for customers who can't afford or do not see the value in a 1Gbps service, the company is offering a 5Mbps service for the first seven years for free. The only thing customers must pay for is a $300 network installation fee, which can be paid off on a monthly basis.

Phil McKinney, CEO of CableLabs, a not-for-profit research consortium funded by cable companies throughout the world, argued that it's easy for Google to build such a robust network and offer service at low prices because it's "cherry picking" the segment of the population it wishes to serve. Meanwhile, cable operators cover more than 90 percent of homes in the U.S. and because their networks are bigger, it is more expensive to serve their customers.

He has a point. Google has made it clear that when it chooses a city for its Google Fiber projects, it only picks places where local governments are willing to make deployment easy and cost-effective. The company also will only deploy the network in communities where a certain percentage of the households have committed to signing up for the service.

McKinney also said that much of the cost for delivering very high-speed service is in the fiber that must be laid to deliver the service. While cable operators haven't deployed fiber directly to individual homes, which is the most expensive, but effective, way to build a network, they have installed significant amounts of fiber in other portions of their networks.

In theory, because they already have the fiber and other infrastructure in place, increasing speeds for cable operators should only be incrementally more expensive. This is especially true when compared to Google, which is still literally in the trenches deploying fiber directly to individual homes.

But McKinney argues that because of the large scale of cable networks, it's actually more expensive to increase speeds.

Cable's big plans for the future

Regardless, the cable industry is pushing for faster service. CableLabs is already working to standardize the next evolution of technology, DOCSIS 3.1, which makes more efficient use of the network and can deliver download speeds up to 6Gbps.

"All the innovation that is happening right now plays to our strengths," Roberts said. "We think we are in a wonderful position. But we need apps that can take advantage of these speeds."

DOCSIS 3.1, which uses a different modulation technology to transmit signals over a hybrid fiber and coaxial network, is still in development. McKinney said it should be commercially available in 2015 or 2016.

While there is no question there is plenty of life and innovation left in the infrastructure that cable operators have spent more than $200 billion building since 1996, the industry has hesitated in pushing ultra high-speed services to consumers.

Even though 1Gbps or even 4Gbps service is possible today, none of the big cable operators are offering anywhere close to these speeds to consumers.

In fact, the average American broadband customer is only getting about 7.4Mbps download speeds in terms of broadband, according to a report published this spring by Akamai, which analyzed data from the last quarter of 2012. Remember that Roberts was demonstrating 10Mbps downloads as cutting-edge technology in 1996.

Still, this average speed is an improvement of about 28 percent compared with the same time a year ago. And it was good enough to help the U.S. break into the top 10 in terms of network speeds, by moving up from 12th place in terms of average speed to 8th.

Akamai's report suggests that speeds are improving for two reasons. Broadband providers have replaced old technology with newer tech, which has meant a move to DOCSIS 3.0 for cable operators. Consumers are also beginning to express a preference for higher-speed services, most likely driven by more usage of streaming video.

Do consumers even need a Gig?

But even though customers are starting to upgrade to higher tiers of service, they still aren't clamoring for superfast speeds of 100Mbps or even 1Gbps. In fact, even Google Fiber users in Kansas City say that 1Gbps is overkill. Entrepreneurs in Kansas City, who flocked to Google's first "fiberhood" and set up shop there for access to Google Fiber, say they can't use all the available bandwidth.

"We could easily do what we need to do on a day-to-day basis with a 100Mbps connection," said Tyler Van Winkle, director of product development and marketing for Internet search startup Leap 2.

But he admitted that having the extra bandwidth in both directions is nice to have.

"It's a real glimpse of the future," he said. "We can do batch uploads much faster. With this kind of bandwidth, we're able to support four startups in the same building with a single connection. And we're paying a lot less than what we'd pay if we got a much slower service."

On the cable side, even customers subscribing to 100Mbps services aren't using all the capacity that's available to them, McKinney said.

"There's only a small percentage of customers who come even close to making extensive use of a 100Mbps service today," he said.

With this in mind, he said he could imagine that few people would actually need 1Gbps of data capacity.

"With 1Gbps of data you could watch 400 HD movies simultaneously," he said. "Or you could stream 100 4K Ultra HD videos at the same time. There is nothing out there today that could manufacture that kind of bandwidth."

Google is building for the future

So why then is Google even offering that much capacity to consumers? Milo Medin, head of the Google Fiber project and a former executive and co-founder of @Home, a company that pioneered broadband in its early days, said recently at the FTTH Council meeting in Kansas City that such speeds are about encouraging development for the future.

"We're trying to build a business for the next 10 years, not the last 10 years," he said. "I remember a time when people thought that they'd never use 5Mbps of service. Now you do that streaming a couple of movies."

When pushed on this point, Medin told me on the sidelines of the conference in Kansas City that it costs Google the same amount of money to offer a 1Gbps service as it does a 100Mbps or 50Mbps service. With this in mind, he wondered, "Why not give consumers more capacity than they could dream of using and see what happens?"

For Google, it's not just about offering consumers access to faster broadband speeds. It's also about offering those services at an affordable price.

And here is where the cable industry and Google differ most dramatically, said Blair Levin, executive director of Gig.U, a coalition of universities looking to bring gigabit-speed broadband to college towns across the U.S. Levin, who also led the development of the Federal Communications Commission's National Broadband Plan, said that the cable industry's business model, like most business models, was built to deliver the minimum amount of a resource, in this case bandwidth, at the maximum price for consumers. And as a result, it makes sense for cable companies to segment customers based on bandwidth needs, he explained.

In contrast, Google's business model is about how to deliver essentially unlimited data for an affordable cost. This makes sense given Google's core business. Google provides Internet services that rely on fast networks to connect millions of users to its services. The faster the networks, the more eyeballs the company attracts to its services and the longer those customers spend online, which generates higher advertising revenue for Google.

Levin says he doesn't fault the cable companies and phone companies for sticking to their traditional business models. But he argues that the model that will deliver the most benefit to the U.S. economy in terms of innovation is a business model, like Google's, which is based on abundance rather than one based on a resource scarcity.

"If America wants to lead in the bandwidth delivered economy, consumers need to enjoy a psychology of bandwidth abundance," he said. "That psychology encourages innovation on both the supply and demand side. We should want to make sure that bandwidth availability and price is not a constraint on innovation."

In other words, Levin says that cable's argument boils down to accepting that it is sufficient to follow consumer demand for bandwidth. But what the National Broadband Plan called for, and what communities offering gigabit-speed services have so far shown, is that there are great benefits to society when consumers have access to more bandwidth than they could ever imagine needing.

As Levin put it in a recent speech he gave: "Consumers never ask for products they don't know about; innovation comes from the unknown. No consumer in 1900 asked for a radio, a television, or a personal computer. And as Henry Ford noted, if he had asked consumers what they wanted, they would have said faster horses."

So even though Comcast's Roberts says he wants his industry to encourage innovation, unless his company and others in the industry make their super-fast services more affordable, as Google has done, that innovation is likely to happen at a much slower pace.

We'll see if Roberts follows through with his bold claims. One thing is certain: Google Fiber isn't going away.

SOURCE

Info Xoddox the Communist

Clodius Pulcher — Mon, 17 Jun 2013 02:52:30 GMT

Was playing on the Death before Dishonor server and came across this guy Xoddox the Communist. Had a total of 84 kills with the closest second being 24. He was not commander. Be on the look out for this blatant hack in the future.

Cheers! Father's Day

Mike Nomad — Sun, 16 Jun 2013 13:17:15 GMT

HAPPY FATHER'S DAY!

News Law enforcement demands smartphone 'kill switch'

Mike Nomad — Fri, 14 Jun 2013 12:26:30 GMT

Law enforcement demands
smartphone 'kill switch'

By Herb Weisbaum NBC News contributor

Bebeto Matthews / AP

Annie Palazzolo, second from right, joins San Francisco District Attorney George Gascon, far left, and New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, far right at a press conference on Thursday in New York. Palazzolo, 29, who told of her sister's killing in a cellphone robbery, helps launch the "Secure Our Smartphones Initiative," aimed at encouraging the cell phone industry to adapt technology to deter cellphone theft.

Police and prosecutors from across the country told smartphone manufacturers on Thursday that they must take steps to solve the “epidemic “of thefts involving mobile devices – and they need to do it right away.

A coalition of law enforcement officials, political leaders and consumer groups, called the Secure Our Smartphones (S.O.S) Initiative, wants a “kill switch” installed on all new smartphones that would make them useless anywhere in the world if they are reported stolen.

They want all smartphones equipped with a kill switch by early next year and they don’t want customers to foot the bill for this security technology.

“The industry has a moral and social obligation to fix this problem,” said San Francisco District Attorney George Gascon.

The S.O.S. Initiative is spearheaded by Gascon and New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman. The two prosecutors hosted a “Smartphone Summit” in New York City on Thursday with the major mobile device manufacturers: Apple, Google/Motorola, Microsoft and Samsung.

The coalition made it clear is it demanding action and will not back down until the problem is solved.

The theft of mobile devices – smartphones and tablets – is now called “the fastest-growing street crime” in America. People across the country have been stabbed and mugged at gunpoint for their electronic devices, which are easy to resell. A stolen iPhone can fetch $300 or more on the black market.

The numbers are staggering:

1.6 million Americans had a handheld device stolen last year.
One in every three robberies nationwide involves a stolen cell phone.
Approximately half of all robberies in San Francisco involved a mobile communications device.
In New York City, cell phone robberies increased 40 percent in the past year. In 2012, a 26-year old chef at the Museum of Modern Art was killed for his iPhone. Police there now use the term “apple-picking” to refer to the theft of iPhones and other mobile products, like iPads.

At the closed-door summit, Apple and Samsung outlined the improved security software they are developing to tackle the problem. Apple’s new i OS 7 operating system will include an “activation lock” when it’s released this fall.

While acknowledging that Apple and Samsung have taken steps in the right direction, S.O.S. wants a hardware solution that cannot be circumvented by hackers.

A.G. Schneiderman told NBC News he felt the meeting was positive and will result in a way to dry up the market for stolen mobile devices.

“The manufacturers conceded that a hardware-based kill switch was technologically feasible,” he said. “Once they conceded that, there’s really no reason not to immediately start working on installing that on all of their hardware.”

The companies said they were worried this technology would eliminate consumer choice, Schneiderman told me. But he doesn’t see it that way, since it’s the owner of the device who decides whether to have the kill switch activated. He compared it to cancelling a credit card.

NICOLAS ASFOURI / AFP - Getty Images

The theft of mobile devices – smartphones and tablets – is now called “the fastest-growing street crime” in America.

“If someone hits me and takes my smartphone, I’m not interested in trying to track them and hope I get my phone back,” Schneiderman said. I want to kill that phone.”

How a kill switch would work
The technology, as envisioned by S.O.S., would make stolen devices permanently inoperable on any network, anywhere in the world, if they are reported stolen. It would disable the device even if it’s turned off, the SIM card is removed or the phone is modified to avoid detection.

The thinking is: block the ability to reactivate the mobile device, the ability to resell it would disappear and the incentive to steal it would be eliminated.

Many smartphones can now be disabled if they are lost or stolen. More than a year ago, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the CTIA – The Wireless Association created a database to prevent the use of stolen digital devices.

Police chiefs across the country are happy this was done, but they say it has not solved the problem.

In a recent letter to the FCC, Philadelphia Police Commissioner Charles Ramey wrote, “Many smartphones that are ‘disabled’ still have the capacity to access WiFi networks or may be operable with carriers not in the database.” That’s why police chiefs across the country support kill-switch technology.

Footnote: In the time it took you to read this story, more than 300 smartphones were lost or stolen in this country.

The Associated Press Contributed to this story

SOURCE

Ed Note: A noble and worthwhile effort provided the KILL SWITCH is solely used for Theft Prevention and NOT for unilateral cellular shutdown.

Bad News BF4 Mod Support Ruled OUT by DICE

Mike Nomad — Fri, 14 Jun 2013 11:46:49 GMT

Battlefield 4 mod support ruled out by DICE

By Evan Lahti at 09:10pm June 13 2013

DICE general manager Karl-Magnus Troedsson confirmed to PC Gamer at E3 that Battlefield 4 will not support mods. Troedsson caveated that user-generated content is something that DICE finds �very interesting,� and that it�s something the studio has been talking about at a high level.

PCG: Is there any chance of Battlefield 4 being moddable?

Karl-Magnus Troedsson, DICE GM: We get that question a lot. I always answer the same thing, and then the community calls me bad names. We get the feedback, we understand it. We also would like to see more player-created content, but we would never do something like this if we feel we couldn�t do this 100 percent. That means we need to have the right tools available, we need to have the right security around this regarding what parts of the engine we let loose, so to say. So for BF4 we don�t have any planned mod support, I have to be blunt about saying that. We don�t.

But it is something that we are thinking about for the future, where we are going with the product, et cetera. So user-created content is something that�s very interesting to us, but I�m sorry to say that we will not have mod support in BF4.

PCG: When you say you�re thinking about it for the future, what do you mean?

Troedsson: When we think about Battlefield as a franchise, moving forward, it�s a big franchise. And we�re talking about this, almost as strategies for the company�where are we going, what are we trying to do with the franchise, et cetera. And this is definitely one of the areas that we have been discussing quite a bit.

SOURCE

Clip/Trailer Arma III E3

Mike Nomad — Thu, 13 Jun 2013 11:57:54 GMT

:rolleyes: There might still be hope ..

News Next Gen AAA Games Starting at $60.00

Mike Nomad — Thu, 13 Jun 2013 11:53:48 GMT

The $60 price tag is just a starting
point for next-gen AAA games

By Kris Ligman - June 12, 2013

Coming away from the first official day of E3, Sterne Agee & Leach Inc market analysts forecast average revenue per user on triple-A titles to reach $80 to $90 U.S. in the next console cycle.

"Our sense is next-gen games will launch at the same $60 retail price point as the current-gen games," says Sterne Agee & Leach. "However, increasingly, publishers are striving to enhance the ARPU [average revenue per user] closer to $80 or $90 for their triple-A titles through greater focus on DLC and in-game micro-transactions, etc."

Digital distribution including full downloads of triple-A games will contribute to this take, but not without facing significant technological challenges, analysts say. Inconsistent bandwidth availability across the market mean that full downloads of some of the larger titles could take as much as 24 hours, meaning that boxed retail is not likely to go away this console cycle.

"While the switch to digital is inevitable, it seems the conditions are not quite ripe for that yet and discs will likely dominate in the foreseeable future," says Sterne Agee & Leach. "This should benefit GME [GameStop], at least in the early part of the next cycle."

SOURCE

News Day/Nite Custom RS Maps REMOVED

Mike Nomad — Thu, 13 Jun 2013 09:35:12 GMT

Regrettably, due to circumstances beyond our control, the customized Day/Nite maps of the stock Rising Storm maps have been temporarily removed from our Custom Server's rotation.

The reason being;

RGN will no longer force our users to jump through flaming hoops to download, setup and play these maps.

We have repeatedly requested the maps be COOKED into the conventional file format to ease the use of said maps to no avail. All we got was finger pointing and excuses.

While offering thanks to the mapper for the effort we must, at the same time regrettably and temporarily, remove those maps from our rotation.

Hopefully in the future, we will once again be able to offer those customized maps but only when the users are able to conveniently obtain and play them.

Thank you for understanding......

RS Custom Map Peleliu Night

Mike Nomad — Wed, 12 Jun 2013 12:24:44 GMT

Peleliu Night

Rising Storm Peleliu Nighttime Territory, Countdown and Firefight Maps
Author: oldbrokenlink

REMOVED FROM ROTATION UNTIL
MAP FILES ARE MANAGEABLE

Screenshot:

Client Files:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...0_06112013.zip

Server Files:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...0_06112013.zip

History:

1.0.0.0 06/11/2013
Initial Release

Notes:
I could not release these maps as a single Steam Workshop entry because it was just too large. So I had to spit it into two parts. You will need to subscribe to both parts before playing the maps!

Interview WWII story - photo recon story

richman — Wed, 12 Jun 2013 10:52:44 GMT

I knew the guys here would appreciate this. A wonderful story, enjoy.

http://www.wimp.com/warfootage/

News EA wants to stop being 'hated'

Mike Nomad — Tue, 11 Jun 2013 10:49:21 GMT

Electronic Arts:

Video games firm wants to stop being 'hated'

EA says its next-generation video games engines will offer a new level of realism

By Leo Kelion - Technology reporter

"Can a computer make you cry?" It's 30 years since video games giant Electronic Arts ran an advert asking that question, adding that it believed the medium had the potential to "bring people's thoughts and feelings closer together".

Three decades on, if its audience is indeed weeping in unison, it may be in frustration.

EA has been voted the "worst company in America" two years running in an online poll by Consumerist magazine, and comments posted by gamers to other sites - complaining of "price gouging" and "arrogance" - confirm many dislike it.

Speaking to the BBC, Frank Gibeau, EA's president of labels, acknowledges his firm has an image problem.

"That type of feedback is disappointing personally for people inside of EA because we love our company and the games that we make," he says.

Worst company?

Consumerist magazine highlighted three "failings" when it reported EA had been voted the "worst company in America":

It fails to provide products people want and like.

Examples given included Sim City 5's online-only requirement and an unpopular ending to Mass Effect 3. It also suggested titles such as Dead Space 3 and Dragon Age 2 would have benefited from a longer development schedule.

It doesn't sell its products at a reasonable price.

The magazine said part of the reason the firm's sports titles were expensive was that it had signed deals with organisations, such as the National Football League, that prevented others releasing competing products. It also complained about the firm's desire to promote micro-transactions, which it described as "consumer chiselling".

It doesn't properly support the products it sells.

The magazine said players continued to complain about customer-service support despite a previous pledge by EA to improve its response process.

Consumerist magazine

"We're in the business of entertaining and exciting people, and when our business policies get in the way of that and we hear this reaction and see this feedback we have to take note of it. We're not tone deaf."

'Generic games' Criticism of big business is nothing new, and Electronic Arts's status as the world's second biggest games publisher puts it firmly in the firing line. But the editor-in-chief of news site Game Front suggests in this case real change - rather than lip service to the idea - is required.

"EA might be a scapegoat for larger industry trends beyond its control, but a big part of the hatred has to be an image of not caring what players think or want," says Mark Burnham.

"Practices like charging for DLC [downloadable content] on day one of a title's release and online passes [requiring buyers of used games to pay extra for access to online content and services] aren't loved, and you can couple that with what many players see as a tendency to try make games more saleable to wider audiences - and therefore, much more generic and homogenised."

Mr Gibeau notes that EA has already ditched charges for online passes, ending a policy which meant second-hand game buyers needed to pay the publisher if they wanted to unlock bonus online content already bought by the original owners.

EA was criticised after problems with its servers meant
gamers who bought Sim City were unable to play it

But he defends other controversial strategies, such adding micro-transactions to premium games.

The idea of giving away software for free but charging for virtual goods was popularised in Asia as a way to combat piracy. Some gamers are uncomfortable with its extension to console titles, which cost up to �50.

A decision to charge between �2.39 and �11.99 for suit and weapon upgrades in EA's sci-fi horror sequel Dead Space 3 proved particularly controversial.
Mr Gibeau acknowledges the move damaged perceptions of the title, but suggests that was because the optional nature of the feature was misunderstood.

"We never think of micro-transactions as a gate or a place you have to pay to win," he says.

"If a micro-transaction exists in an online service - which is usually where we place it, like in Fifa Ultimate Team - it's tied to an experience and a price-value proposition that you either feel good about or you don't.

Frank Gibeau says EA is making
changes to address complaints

"When we get it right it feels great and people are really happy about it. When we don't get it right or it's misunderstood, like in the case of Dead Space, that's not good and we make changes accordingly."

New ideas When it comes to the type of games EA makes, Mr Gibeau makes no apology for a "fewer, bigger, better" strategy, even when that involves job cuts.

"In the console business there frankly isn't much of a business for games outside of the top 20," he says.

"You have to really get into the charts to make the initial investment in these games work. We're really trying to create epic products that have a chance to reach the widest possible audience."

As a result EA is willing to keep pumping out sequels to successful franchises such as its Need for Speed racing games, Battlefield war series, Tiger Woods golf simulations and Dragon Age role-playing titles.

But when sales sputter - as was the case for its most recent Medal of Honor and Army of Two shooter franchises - the series are promptly "rested".

EA made a splash in 1983 when it asked whether a computer could make you cry

But, Mr Gibeau adds, EA is also willing to invest in fresh ideas, such as Titanfall - a futuristic first-person shooter developed by independent studio Respawn Entertainment.

Moreover, he stresses that EA has learned from past mistakes to ensure its customers get the most out of the new Xbox One and PlayStation 4 consoles, whichever games they buy.

"The last console generation, we frankly didn't make the investment in engine technology that we did this time," he says.

"It left us in a position where our launch wasn't as smooth or a breakthrough as we wanted."

EA charges �11.99 for Dead Space 3's Tau Volantis Survival
kit, which upgrades in-game equipment

This time, he says, EA has poured money into two next-generation games engines well in advance: EA Sports Ignite and Frostbite 3.

"It's not just about [better] graphics, it's content and online features too," he says.

"If you can support just two engines instead of the 13 to 14 we were supporting over the last cycle... you can focus on making great games."

Options open EA's stance on Nintendo's Wii U - which went on sale in November - is less clear.

When the Japanese firm unveiled the console at the E3 games expo in 2011, EA's chief executive John Riccitiello took to the stage to announce an "unprecedented partnership" between the two firms.

Two years on, Mr Riccitiello has stepped down after missing financial targets, and other EA executives have made conflicting statements about their commitment to the platform.

"We didn't make it easy for the market to figure out our stance on the Wii U, that's for sure," says Mr Gibeau.

"We're not announcing any new Wii U titles at E3, but that doesn't preclude us making games for it going forward."

When pushed to clarify whether EA has any Wii U titles in the works he is deliberately vague.

"Do we have developers inside Electronic Arts that are watching the Wii U and understanding how it's developing? Yes, we're absolutely doing that. Do we have active development of Wii U titles that we're ready to publicly announce right now. No we do not."

EA released Mass Effect 3 for the Wii U but has not announced
new games for the console at the E3 games expo

Despite his enthusiasm for Sony and Microsoft's new machines, Mr Gibeau says that he believes sales of smartphone and tablet games will be the fastest growing segment of the industry for the foreseeable future.

And when asked if the new consoles could be the last of their kind, he says gaming on a big screen will likely prove "resilient" but notes that in its time EA has outlived several platforms "from the Amiga to the Sega Genesis".

As the interview ends, there's time for one last question: Will EA deliver on its promise and make us sob for the right reasons?

"I think we're right about there," he says.

"Certainly the Mass Effect 3 ending caused a few people to cry, so I think we achieved some level of emotional impact towards the end of the last cycle. And as you look at the fidelity of experience on generation four, 'Can a console make you cry?' is going to be possible over the next several years."

SOURCE