Holy crap, I'm surprised anyone put up with as much as you did for as long as you did. That's really above and beyond what anyone should have to deal with. Have you considered looking into an open source OS like Linux Mint or Ubuntu? You can install it side by side with Windows or run it in a virtual machine without negatively affecting your existing Windows installation. That will give you the control over your media collection that you really need. You have more than paid dearly for those files, you should be able to use them the way you want.
It's not that far-fetched. Cryptography was on the U.S. Munitions List as an Auxiliary Military Equipment up until 1992 or so. There are still restrictions of the export of encryption technology.
But the director of the FBI, would must know what he is talking about, and must know that its just completely wrong.
Of course he knows. He knows better than most people do. When he talks of breaking encryption, he's talking about weakening your encryption, not his. He's going continue to use the most robust tools at his disposal to protect his privacy. But he's the good guy, at least in his mind. You, he's not so sure about.
In the end it doesn't matter what he wants. It's a foolish request that can't be implemented. The tools to communicate securely over unsecure channels are freely available to everyone at no cost. More importantly, we have the math. You can't outlaw math.
In the current environment, the more money you have the more access you have to influence political discussion. Money has quite effectively replaced speech. If you eliminate the role of large money "contributions" from politics, representatives will have to act in the best interest of all their constituents, not just the wealthiest, to get reelected. It's a start, anyway.
Actually, it's classic doublespeak, designed to shut down any debate or dissension. To oppose The USA Freedom act is to publicly come out against the USA and Freedom. Just like opposition to the PATRIOT act branded you an unpatriotic apple-pie-hating flag-burning radical.
It also speaks volumes about how brazen our so-called representatives have become. They don't even try hide it - It's right there in your face, and if you don't like it, too bad. There's nothing you can do about it.
I would think you'd tone it down a bit at least while there is another prominent story on the front page about professional internet trolling. It would be less transparent and maybe you could dupe a few more people that way. Not that I'm one to criticize.You have a job to do, probably one you hate and don't care if it's done well or not. Still, trolling is a art, and if you're going to do it, why not do it well?
Let's also not forget that Obama ran for office on a platform that included "I will stop domestic spying."... And as soon as he got into office, he did the opposite.
I think he's wrong on this issue and can't help but wonder what his advisors are telling him to make him change his view so dramatically. My guess is they know more about the disposition of "missing" nuclear materials from the former Soviet Union than they are telling the public. It's the only thing I can think of that would explain it.
The the most important issue of today will not be appearing on the front page and that is very sad. This used to be the place where we could come together and share a common bond. Those days are gone.
That wasn't their argument. Their claim was that the web page should not be altered before it is rendered in the browser.
And that's a terrible argument made by clueless people. I'm surprised the court let them get away with wasting their time. No one could or should expect to control exactly how a web page is shown to the end user because you don't know their presentation requirements. I probably need new glasses and turn my browser's font size up to what is probably an absurd degree. If the day comes when I'm totally blind I'll use text-to-speech or some other accessibility tool according to my needs. And I'll stop using Adblock Edge when they pry it from my cold, dead hands.
They will, likely to an exorbitant extent once he gets a good attorney and sues. The cops are going to have a lot of fun explaining to a judge and jury why they broke into the guys car and blew his stuff up. Especially in view of the fact that they were dead wrong to do so.
This shows the next stage have a total capital expenditure of 8 dollars per device and after that near 0 CapEx.
8 dollars per device assuming it is in every net-enabled device. No capital expenditure assuming chip manufacturers decide to embed this in their products. Those seem like rather large assumptions to me.
"The concept is interesting, but every time you are doing an activity, even bitcoin mining, you are consuming power, even if it uses an ASIC," said industry analyst Patrick Moorhead of Moor Insights & Strategy, referring to the type of chip 21 has developed, an application-specific integrated circuit.
Sounds like they are trying to build a distributed network of them. How well it will work remains to be seen.
Planes typically yaw in flight all the time, it's called dog tailing.
You mean there is a plausible explanation that doesn't involve elite hackers controlling a plane fly-by-wire from the entertainment system? I wonder why the FBI never considered that.
Remember, the fundamental purpose of the American legal system to keep lawyers wealthy, and judges are nothing but lawyers in robes. Just as dishonest.
My personal experience with lawyers is almost universally bad*, and with judges it's been universally good.
Usually when I talk to lawyers I have to speak slowly, because I can see them crunching the numbers trying to calculate how much money they can make off either me or the case. Amusingly, on a particularly sensitive issue, I received the exact opposite legal advice from two lawyers who happened to be husband and wife (one referred me to the other.) I thought "of course they can't agree on anything, they're married" and went with someone else.
Judges on the other hand have gotten things right, at least in the few instances I've dealt with them. Lawyers, I find, lie for a living, and judges are used to being lied to for a living so they're pretty good at dismissing bullshit.
* The lone exception is the real estate lawyer that helped me buy my home. He was over 80 years old, a friend of the family, and charged ridiculously low fees for the service he performed. Sadly, he passed a few years ago. May he rest in peace.
...it's not about safety, it's about making people feel like they are safe.
I'd feel safer if security professionals vetted the system, and verified that it was safe from hacking. Precisely what the FBI is actively working to prevent.
I do like the phrase "other-worldly outlandish" to describe the situation. It beats "hogwash", which was my first reaction. This is just a search warrant application, though, and I wonder what the FBI agent's culpability is for making, let's say, "less than truthful" statements in order to obtain a search warrant.
To just kill him and dump his carcass in a hole the ground seems like a waste of viable organs. Consider how many people are in desperate need of organ transplants. Why not keep him alive long enough to match his parts to people that could make good use of them? Eyes, kidneys, lungs, liver, heart, whatever. Blood banks can always use more plasma, he's sure to have plenty of that.
To see true justice he should be forced to contribute back to the society he harmed, in my view.
It matters plenty. While it's good news that more people are applying critical thinking skills and choosing to discard that which is incredible, it is very bad news that the vast majority of people lack this capacity.
That says something astonishing about our species and the way the brain works. It's also great news for charlatans. Want to get rich? Make friends and influence people? Tell them what they want to hear. Most of them will buy it hook, line, and sinker.
Because if the corporation will pay a fine, but a person would get jail time... that's pretty much what a double standard means.
Where it gets interesting is that for about $80 and a a little paperwork you can incorporate yourself. Whether you are contemplating a life of crime or just concerned about the possibility of someone suing you, it seems like money well spent considering all the legal protections you gain.
It's more like the FBI's investigations into various criminal and subversive groups.
The FBi is a law enforcement organization. It's their job to investigate US citizens when there is reason to believe they are involved in breaking US law.
The NSA is a military organization. Their charter (and the constitution) explicitly precludes them from targeting US citizens, yet they do it anyway. What does it mean when a country's military deems every citizen such a threat to national security that they are considered valid intelligence targets? It says to me we are considered the enemy - each and every one of us. This cannot possibly end well.
I'll allow that I may be wrong. I don't know; it's never happened before so I don't know what it feels like:P
I note in the excellent link you provided under the section of data mining it says
Data miners buy prescription information from pharmacies and PBMs.
Apparently, data identifying a specific person is removed "sufficient to remove the data from the protection of the CMIA and HIPAA", and the records are assigned a number.
Further,
Prescription data miners have the ability to re-identify individual data based on the number assigned to it, and they operate separately from the entities - health care providers, health plans, health care clearinghouses, and their contractors or business associates - that do have legal obligations.
I don't think it too far-fetched to think this happening, particularly since I started seeing a lot of targeted ads for asthma medications not long after coming down with respiratory difficulties last year. Somebody's doing something shady, I'll bet.
Slashdot Mirror
OK, I stand corrected. I guess you can :)
Holy crap, I'm surprised anyone put up with as much as you did for as long as you did. That's really above and beyond what anyone should have to deal with. Have you considered looking into an open source OS like Linux Mint or Ubuntu? You can install it side by side with Windows or run it in a virtual machine without negatively affecting your existing Windows installation. That will give you the control over your media collection that you really need. You have more than paid dearly for those files, you should be able to use them the way you want.
Oh yeah, now you're comparing locks to guns?
It's not that far-fetched. Cryptography was on the U.S. Munitions List as an Auxiliary Military Equipment up until 1992 or so. There are still restrictions of the export of encryption technology.
But the director of the FBI, would must know what he is talking about, and must know that its just completely wrong.
Of course he knows. He knows better than most people do. When he talks of breaking encryption, he's talking about weakening your encryption, not his. He's going continue to use the most robust tools at his disposal to protect his privacy. But he's the good guy, at least in his mind. You, he's not so sure about.
In the end it doesn't matter what he wants. It's a foolish request that can't be implemented. The tools to communicate securely over unsecure channels are freely available to everyone at no cost. More importantly, we have the math. You can't outlaw math.
What's your solution then?
In the current environment, the more money you have the more access you have to influence political discussion. Money has quite effectively replaced speech. If you eliminate the role of large money "contributions" from politics, representatives will have to act in the best interest of all their constituents, not just the wealthiest, to get reelected. It's a start, anyway.
Actually, it's classic doublespeak, designed to shut down any debate or dissension. To oppose The USA Freedom act is to publicly come out against the USA and Freedom. Just like opposition to the PATRIOT act branded you an unpatriotic apple-pie-hating flag-burning radical.
It also speaks volumes about how brazen our so-called representatives have become. They don't even try hide it - It's right there in your face, and if you don't like it, too bad. There's nothing you can do about it.
I would think you'd tone it down a bit at least while there is another prominent story on the front page about professional internet trolling. It would be less transparent and maybe you could dupe a few more people that way. Not that I'm one to criticize.You have a job to do, probably one you hate and don't care if it's done well or not. Still, trolling is a art, and if you're going to do it, why not do it well?
Circling back to who the targets should be.
Let's talk about the people who should not be targetted by military intelligence - the American people. That's the problem right there.
Let's also not forget that Obama ran for office on a platform that included "I will stop domestic spying." ... And as soon as he got into office, he did the opposite.
I think he's wrong on this issue and can't help but wonder what his advisors are telling him to make him change his view so dramatically. My guess is they know more about the disposition of "missing" nuclear materials from the former Soviet Union than they are telling the public. It's the only thing I can think of that would explain it.
The the most important issue of today will not be appearing on the front page and that is very sad. This used to be the place where we could come together and share a common bond. Those days are gone.
That wasn't their argument. Their claim was that the web page should not be altered before it is rendered in the browser.
And that's a terrible argument made by clueless people. I'm surprised the court let them get away with wasting their time. No one could or should expect to control exactly how a web page is shown to the end user because you don't know their presentation requirements. I probably need new glasses and turn my browser's font size up to what is probably an absurd degree. If the day comes when I'm totally blind I'll use text-to-speech or some other accessibility tool according to my needs. And I'll stop using Adblock Edge when they pry it from my cold, dead hands.
...did they reimburse the guy?
They will, likely to an exorbitant extent once he gets a good attorney and sues. The cops are going to have a lot of fun explaining to a judge and jury why they broke into the guys car and blew his stuff up. Especially in view of the fact that they were dead wrong to do so.
As a former troublemaker, I never understood how suspension is a punishment. I considered a three day vacation from school to be supreme good fortune.
This shows the next stage have a total capital expenditure of 8 dollars per device and after that near 0 CapEx.
8 dollars per device assuming it is in every net-enabled device. No capital expenditure assuming chip manufacturers decide to embed this in their products. Those seem like rather large assumptions to me.
This is an ASIC. From TFA:
"The concept is interesting, but every time you are doing an activity, even bitcoin mining, you are consuming power, even if it uses an ASIC," said industry analyst Patrick Moorhead of Moor Insights & Strategy, referring to the type of chip 21 has developed, an application-specific integrated circuit.
Sounds like they are trying to build a distributed network of them. How well it will work remains to be seen.
Planes typically yaw in flight all the time, it's called dog tailing.
You mean there is a plausible explanation that doesn't involve elite hackers controlling a plane fly-by-wire from the entertainment system? I wonder why the FBI never considered that.
Remember, the fundamental purpose of the American legal system to keep lawyers wealthy, and judges are nothing but lawyers in robes. Just as dishonest.
My personal experience with lawyers is almost universally bad*, and with judges it's been universally good.
Usually when I talk to lawyers I have to speak slowly, because I can see them crunching the numbers trying to calculate how much money they can make off either me or the case. Amusingly, on a particularly sensitive issue, I received the exact opposite legal advice from two lawyers who happened to be husband and wife (one referred me to the other.) I thought "of course they can't agree on anything, they're married" and went with someone else.
Judges on the other hand have gotten things right, at least in the few instances I've dealt with them. Lawyers, I find, lie for a living, and judges are used to being lied to for a living so they're pretty good at dismissing bullshit.
* The lone exception is the real estate lawyer that helped me buy my home. He was over 80 years old, a friend of the family, and charged ridiculously low fees for the service he performed. Sadly, he passed a few years ago. May he rest in peace.
...it's not about safety, it's about making people feel like they are safe.
I'd feel safer if security professionals vetted the system, and verified that it was safe from hacking. Precisely what the FBI is actively working to prevent.
I do like the phrase "other-worldly outlandish" to describe the situation. It beats "hogwash", which was my first reaction. This is just a search warrant application, though, and I wonder what the FBI agent's culpability is for making, let's say, "less than truthful" statements in order to obtain a search warrant.
To just kill him and dump his carcass in a hole the ground seems like a waste of viable organs. Consider how many people are in desperate need of organ transplants. Why not keep him alive long enough to match his parts to people that could make good use of them? Eyes, kidneys, lungs, liver, heart, whatever. Blood banks can always use more plasma, he's sure to have plenty of that.
To see true justice he should be forced to contribute back to the society he harmed, in my view.
It matters plenty. While it's good news that more people are applying critical thinking skills and choosing to discard that which is incredible, it is very bad news that the vast majority of people lack this capacity.
That says something astonishing about our species and the way the brain works. It's also great news for charlatans. Want to get rich? Make friends and influence people? Tell them what they want to hear. Most of them will buy it hook, line, and sinker.
Because if the corporation will pay a fine, but a person would get jail time ... that's pretty much what a double standard means.
Where it gets interesting is that for about $80 and a a little paperwork you can incorporate yourself. Whether you are contemplating a life of crime or just concerned about the possibility of someone suing you, it seems like money well spent considering all the legal protections you gain.
It's more like the FBI's investigations into various criminal and subversive groups.
The FBi is a law enforcement organization. It's their job to investigate US citizens when there is reason to believe they are involved in breaking US law.
The NSA is a military organization. Their charter (and the constitution) explicitly precludes them from targeting US citizens, yet they do it anyway. What does it mean when a country's military deems every citizen such a threat to national security that they are considered valid intelligence targets? It says to me we are considered the enemy - each and every one of us. This cannot possibly end well.
Because without some sort of constraint of the plot device it removes a whole lot of plot opportunities
Precisely. Without constraints, Captain Kirk would surely manage to bang every green woman in the known Universe.
It would not exonerate their clients, but it may get them off because the law broke the law to get them down.
If law officers are breaking the law, then what is the difference between them and criminals?
I'll allow that I may be wrong. I don't know; it's never happened before so I don't know what it feels like :P
I note in the excellent link you provided under the section of data mining it says
Data miners buy prescription information from pharmacies and PBMs.
Apparently, data identifying a specific person is removed "sufficient to remove the data from the protection of the CMIA and HIPAA", and the records are assigned a number.
Further,
Prescription data miners have the ability to re-identify individual data based on the number assigned to it, and they operate separately from the entities - health care providers, health plans, health care clearinghouses, and their contractors or business associates - that do have legal obligations.
I don't think it too far-fetched to think this happening, particularly since I started seeing a lot of targeted ads for asthma medications not long after coming down with respiratory difficulties last year. Somebody's doing something shady, I'll bet.