What evidence do you have to say it wasn't north Korea?
(Actually curious not trying to be a dick)
It's not that I have evidence it was someone else.
My understanding is that agencies try to identify hackers through signatures and style. However hackers spend just as much time disguising what they do. The article below cites this. If a hacker is sophisticated enough to hack Sony they are sophisticated enough to make it look like North Korea did it.
One of the evidence items is that some files were compiled on a computer using the korean language. So what?
Or the FBI could simply be lying . The FBI is sometimes like the local police sheriff who would rather string up an innocent guy than admit he doesn't know who did it. North Korea is an easy target as everyone just shakes fist and says...yeah evil! And then the media repeats North Korea 1,000,000 times and nobody thinks to actually ask how they came to that conclusion.
And what does "North Korea" mean? The government? A group in North Korea? A group sponsored by North Korea sitting in Iran?
I always laugh at how we fall for the same lines every time. Could have been Canada for all we know.
interesting read… though if the wiki article is correct, it wasn't really meant to provide simulated religious experience, only test hypotheses about brain functions. unless brain functions can be measured during religious experiences i don't see how you can draw any kind of correlation; but then, i don't know the first thing about neuroscience and very little about psychology, so i could be wrong
Yeah the documentary I watched was exemplifying the religious experience. I think the point is everything is chemical/electrical etc when it comes to brain experiences. Doesn't mean God doesn't somehow cause those electrical impulses.
I just think he's making a big mistake. He's just going to become another late night talk show host. I have no doubt that he'll be funny. But he's going to do the same tired late night format that Steve Allen started. Monologue, comedy bit, 1st guest, 2nd guest, musical act, end show. He was doing something really special and ORIGINAL with the Colbert Report. Now he's just another funny guy on late night. That's too bad.
I get what you are saying.
He has essentially maxed out what he can do in the space that he essentially invented. There is no way to improve his product even though it is a great product. Even when you are the CEO you look for ways to grow.
I'm guessing people just grow tired of doing what they do. And he is going to make bank and get whatever guests he wants.
Besides the tonight show this is the most prestigious spot for a comedian. And he may have the opportunity to build the viewership.