oh how classic.. WD40 anyone?

Being the master criminals, I suppose they wore form fitting black clothes with matching black balaclavas and double latex gloves (or nitril, in case they were allergic to latex).

I'm also sure that the camera was of such great resolution and the zoom capabilities of the CSIs were so strong that the know the brand of pants they were wearing.

Or have I been watching too much TV?

Spielberg directing (unless he's making the video game ;) )

going into every intricate detail and telling everyone else how to do it...

Ahh the smell... aaah the memories.. don't you just want to go get your bike out?

Somehow I missed this story in the local media. I ought to pay more attention...

As an alternate tech connection, the facility used to be a Quantum hard disk plant, and despite some paint the exterior retains all the charm. When I worked at HP (it's just down the street and around the corner from a former DEC/Compaq site) we checked the place out as a possible location for a staff party.

We were not impressed with their facility or their rates.

I'm surprised the crooks were able to get away with $12k. Between the general dullness of the place and the interstate highway project that closed the nearest exit, it's amazing that they had that much money to be stolen!

Not knowing what that is, I google it and what do I find ? It's a lubricant. These idiots actually PLANNED to spray a known camera with . . lubricant. They could have eventually chosen . . paint, or even Silly Putty. But no, they chose lubricant.

It's a wonder they were able to read a page on a computer, not to mention searching for one.

I hope they get caught - the trial's going to be a riot.

I did a bit of googling for safe cracking advice, and unless the safe was one of those 300$ Chinese hardware store safe looalikes. There is no way that google could have provided then with anything useful.

Unless they hit a vital clue like search for keys or code.

And for those hardware store safes, you don't need Google you need 5 minutes and sense of touch in your fingers.

Of those these clowns needed on hour and 15 minutes :)

Also interesting question is that did not the company have alarms and contract at local security company. 75 minutes is a lot of time for a burglar.

You miss the point that the burglars already had been given the codes (inside job, yes). It's just that this didn't suffice those hardened problem solvers.

So they probably went to the homepage of the safe's company and dug up a pdf manual: think "e.g. if the code is 3-7-2, first rotate dial clockwise to 3, then anticlockwise to 7, and finally clockwise until 2. The safe should now open."

A colleague of mine felt unsafe when his GP fired up a search engine during a consultation [medline obviously], while to me that's more a sign of staying up-to-date. So I have no problem with professionals, be they safecrackers, to consult the latest.

Marvin:

If they already had the codes, then it is not safe cracking.

More a case of RTFM.

If a GP would use Google, Yahoo or some other general purpose search engine I would definitely be worried.

There are a lot of medical information resources in the web, some of them are open to public, most require user account.

I personally would prefer a doctor that already knows about what resources there are, and how trustworthy they are.

If you blindly use Google, you may end up to correct information. Or then to one of the 'alternative medicide' or scam sites.

My thought, after the general ineptitude, is that they thought the camera was disabled, and thought that by googling safecracking from the office, that they might confuse the issue. If they had the combination, perhaps some equally inept police might think it was not an inside job.

Not exactly Ocean's Eleven, to be honest...

HMMM.... Who should Bigg City sue, Google or the ISP? Best bring a liability suit against both to ensure maximum returns.

Oh, and maybe sue the criminals too for giving WD-40 a bad name. (DUH: Next time, use a can of compressed air to take out those pesky cameras!)

Maybe they could get the perps under the DMCA for circumventing the safe's security mechanism and unauthorized computer access. That would guarantee harsher fines and prison terms than prosecuting the robbery.

HMMM.... Who should Bigg City sue, Google or the ISP? Best bring a liability suit against both to ensure maximum returns.

Oh, and maybe sue the criminals too for giving WD-40 a bad name. (DUH: Next time, use a can of compressed air to take out those pesky cameras!)

Maybe they could get the perps under the DMCA for circumventing the safe's security mechanism and unauthorized computer access. That would guarantee harsher fines and prison terms than prosecuting the robbery.