4 ms·
(Replying here because your other comment is too deep) I believe you have it right. The NSA document gets it wrong by one digit (page 6): http://i2.cdn.turner
by cscheid 13y ago
(Replying here because your other comment is too deep)
I believe you have it right. The NSA document gets it wrong by one digit (page 6):
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2013/images/08/09/2013_08_09_the_nsa_story1.pdf http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2013/images/08/09/2013_08_09_th...
(0.025/100) * (1.6/100) = 0.0004%, and not 0.00004% as claimed in the PDF.
- samstave 13y agoHow convenient that the actual NSA PDF makes an error in THEIR PR favor. Meaning that the NSA makes it look like they monitor even less than they do! Who would have thought they would have made THAT convenient mistake.
- cscheid 13y agoWell, you don't know that. It could have been 0.16% instead of 1.6%. All we know is the math doesn't work.