That's not really a defence. They could easily be that stupid, bureaucracies tend to do extremely stupid stuff when looked at from the outside but every cog on the inside thinks that its action makes perfect sense.
> This Github DDoS has got to be the work of someone trying to frame the Chinese government.
Evidence?
> Has anyone considered that angle ?
Sure, but so far the evidence is that that is not the case.
If it is someone trying to frame the Chinese government I'm sure they'll tell us all about it soon.
If this is Chinese doing, the likely ones responsible are the Chinese Intelligence, not their bureaucracy.
> Evidence?
Occam's Razor. I find it hard to believe that a society with sufficient level of sophistication to obtain $9 trillion GDP[1] would 'accidentally' go on to declare cyber war on US. Especially considering the fact that the attack itself was pretty sophisticated.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28nom...
1) the attack is perpetrated by the entity the evidence suggests and
2) the attack was prepetrated by another entity who cleverly used infrastructure of the first entity to frame them for it,
applying Occam's Razor would suggest situation #1 in lieu of evidence to the contrary.
Intelligence agencies are bureaucracies. Some are more efficient (less wasteful) than others, but in the end, intelligence work is seldom about secret agents driving Aston Martins. Most of it has always been paperwork. Paperwork is nowadays in electronic format. I don't think the Chinese intelligence agencies are an exception.
We could also speculate from the angle that the officers in charge of making these decisions are not tech-savvy themselves (or at least not to the level that they might realise just how traceable these attacks), which isn't a huge assumption to make when you look at how incompetent many government officials are who have serious influence over technology policies (eg http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23437473)
So anyway, my point is it's better to look for a little evidence to support a hypothesis rather than blindly speculate.
On the other hand, why would anybody go to this length to frame to Chinese government? What would they try to accomplish? Obama sending a strongly worded letter to the Chinese government?
This GitHub business looks more and more like a false flag operation.
The more that comes out and the more silence there is from the Chinese government the less it looks like a false flag operation. Usually the victim of a false flag operation (China in this case, not github) would be very adamant about its non-involvement and would work very hard to expose the originator.
A parody is just that, we're talking about a several day long real attack here.
And if you read that article you'll see Beck sued to get the domain. So it's not like he ignored it, and besides it was obvious from the beginning that he wasn't the one that registered the domain.
I mean they've Tibet for the trump card after all; Cyber-attacks are kid-stuff.
(P.S: I sympathize with the Tibetans; but there is really no political will to resolve this, not in the US, not in EU, not in India).