Not if the rule of law is upheld. If courts are answerable to higher courts, and the highest courts answerable to quality written declarations, then as long as defendants appeal when they should, and as long as those of the highest courts do not cheat the word which founded their institutions, then there is a way, albeit slow and perhaps unattainable to some due to money and thereby representation (the ACLU and others try to offset this), of maintaining order.
you can say i forgot and say nothing as testimony, and then you have to stand by what overs have on you, its not always pretty but it is a right that you have (at least in the us)
I praise that you have defended it so well and my statement of Briton stating they dont need it is unfounded. Someone like you is certainly ready to defend their rights.
However, i am frightened when i read articles where the government (at least by the american bill of rights standards) seems to be overstepping, or at least trying to overstep (in the us, while controversial, police often get away with saying anything to try to make arrests.) the peoples rights such as thesse:
Where is the outrage? Those posting don't seem to understand the implications of requiring citizens to furnish, by law, that which could lead to their arrest. (If the prosecution/government didnt believe it would why would they be asking for it?) In my book that is self-incrimination.
With things like this in place there is nothing preventing anybody (police/government or over-wise) from creating files of random data (which encrypted data is indecipherable from) that contain nothing, labeling them in alluring way, and as the defendant (whom the files were laid on) cannot come up with encryption keys, putting them in jail.
This is a clear overstepping upon citizen's rights and it needs to be seen clearly as such.
Them claiming that hey dont need it is exactally why it becomes nothing and the court can step all over it like in this instance. The Russian constitution has similar rights, yet they are not observed. So does the EU's treaties and charters have enless rights and virtues it enshrines, it doesnt mean they are defended and held up. One of the things that upholds the US constitution is its terseness, saneness, and closeness to the chartering of the national government itsself, although certainly its constant defence is the most critical.
If the british in this thread and in general dont respond to such a claim then is it any differnt than them not having a Bill of Rights in the first place?
The key is not digital, it does not exist on any machine. It *may* exist, and then only in the mind of the defendant. It only becomes digital when it is typed in, and then is erased after, it is like knowing where a treasure is hidden, and the right to refuse to tell of that is solidly defended, both in physical reality and in law (at least here in the us). By ruling that he (or anybody) has to give up a key he (or anybody) may or may not have (only those on trial truly know) the law becomes guilty until proven innocent, a system that can only yield to oppression.
the right against self-incrimination is one firmly seated in reality. One can always not give the incription key, one can always say one does not remember it, there is nothing they can do to ge tit out of you, so if you are legally binded to give it then there is nothing preventing the government from saying and person has a key to something that they actually dont have and locking them up for that. with that right there is no line in the sand constantly moved and there is a good defense against tyerany, the man should not give up the key he should proclaim he forgot it weather he did or not, that is the only sane defense against tyranny.
There is nothing preventing the prosecurion and jury from believing bad stuff is behind that encryption wall but there is nothing, and it should be illegal to proclaim or legislate otherwise, that forces him to give up incriminating evidence. What the British court ruled is a downright lie and yields to tyranny, yields to guilty until proven innocent.
no you got it wrong, now china its self is becoming a huge consumer, they can simply replace themselves in our shoes, and as we never pay our bills it wont make a different. plus all the newfound prosperity will satiate any desire for revolution. were screwed.
one user can execute a forkbomb and whipe everybody out, also the thin clients i have used are way underspowered and completely die when a group of people get on them, the huge memory needs of these computers make it unfeasable--why is computing allways done with small commoidy system?
um there were 2 expansions for starcraft that sucked so much blizzard practically disowned them (before brood war), that was content but it sucked. content is about quality, now there could be 3 games of quality but that is unlikly, either they doused the quality or they watered it down like what is happening to wow, streaching it out as thin as possible to hold on players to buy, buy, buy (thats how many buys you have have to make for a decent game)
blizzard was bought out only a few years ago, starcraft warcraft, diablo 1 and 2 and even wow (original at least) were made completely under an independent blizzard. They quality could be substancially differnt now that they are under management by a big company with generally not nearly the standards as blizzard had.
fucking absurd, this is the two-tier network, this forces small ingenuous services out and only google chacha etc are then able to participate, huting the telecoms with decreased usage, seriously the sms messages cost them nothing, they use basically zilch bankwidth, by cutting off the network interconnects they hurt themselves and their customers.
yahoo is not lock in, its zimbra (zimbra.com) and its open-source and suports imap, pop3, and ical and uses sendmail, etc--you can install it on your local machine (although you should make an agreement that you own all of the files if it is remotely hosted)
google is mega-lock-in, although not as bad as exchange, they have non-standard IMAP handling, propritarty calander and completely inaccesable contact system.
zimbra.com , its got better features than google and better stability and interoperability than outlook, its widely deployed, baked by commercial vendors and support, and its open-source unlike the other vendors----it is owned by yahoo so maybe thats what their pitching you, id go with that, unless all you want is email and then maybe google
i do have to say that school really are not good, but with computers these days education is going to be changing a lot Most students want to learn if they are given support, a venue to gain curiosity on their own time(a library, the internet) and some reason to believe than someone might actually care what they learned. From my experience schools are doing absolutely terrible on all three of these
schools force kids who arnt getting anything out of school to either stoop to its level or dumb it down for everybody else. My school basically lied to students in order to make them all take list of classes so they ouldnt have to deal with their interests and have to work on 'scheduling conflicts'
schools emphasize sports like they will actually get you a job and pretend that if you do the bare minimum passing requirements you will actually have something better than a GED (simply because these students give them the same amount of money and a smart demanding student or a failing test-score dropping student, and they are a piece of cake to teach)
when all schools care about is if they pass (some state made 50% the official lowest score possible) students realize that their schools are obviously lying to them and then they cant trust anything else out of their mouths and have no idea weather people will actually hire them later on, so why work when it is all just a crap shoot anyways? this is probably the biggest problem against minorities is that they can never get anything but bullshit and they just have to trust it and only those that have llready been throught the bullshit have any idea whats real and whats not
my state doesnt have charter schools and although i have never really seen them in action they seem like the best smal thing i can think of in the near future, allowing at least some control if the students can get sufficient information to choose, etc.
maybe as the internet develops it can actually better vet this type of stuff. Probably not though, google will turn everything on the internet into blog spam advertising other blogs of spam (without paying for it of course) and with digg and giaa all newcomers to the internet will spawn a giant vortex in which new users only function will be to but ci4li5 and penis enlargements so the rest of us can stay online.
Slashdot Mirror
common carrier provision are quite good and have a long legal history, if ISP's are held as common carriers it is better for everybody. nuff said
Not if the rule of law is upheld. If courts are answerable to higher courts, and the highest courts answerable to quality written declarations, then as long as defendants appeal when they should, and as long as those of the highest courts do not cheat the word which founded their institutions, then there is a way, albeit slow and perhaps unattainable to some due to money and thereby representation (the ACLU and others try to offset this), of maintaining order.
Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.-- John Emerich Edward Dalberg Acton, first Baron Acton (1834â"1902)
the only way to prevent godd men from becoming evil is to limit their power.
also:
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (who polices the police?)
How dare you reference your precious freedoms as 'etc,etc.' I think you need to actually read it, and read the US Bill of rights too while your at it.
you can say i forgot and say nothing as testimony, and then you have to stand by what overs have on you, its not always pretty but it is a right that you have (at least in the us)
I praise that you have defended it so well and my statement of Briton stating they dont need it is unfounded. Someone like you is certainly ready to defend their rights.
However, i am frightened when i read articles where the government (at least by the american bill of rights standards) seems to be overstepping, or at least trying to overstep (in the us, while controversial, police often get away with saying anything to try to make arrests.) the peoples rights such as thesse:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/11/14/ripa_encryption_key_notice/
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/11/385589.html?c=on#c184457
Where is the outrage? Those posting don't seem to understand the implications of requiring citizens to furnish, by law, that which could lead to their arrest. (If the prosecution/government didnt believe it would why would they be asking for it?) In my book that is self-incrimination.
With things like this in place there is nothing preventing anybody (police/government or over-wise) from creating files of random data (which encrypted data is indecipherable from) that contain nothing, labeling them in alluring way, and as the defendant (whom the files were laid on) cannot come up with encryption keys, putting them in jail.
This is a clear overstepping upon citizen's rights and it needs to be seen clearly as such.
There was also talk of a proposal whereby if you discuss the order to hand over the key with anyone, you can get 5 years in prison.
This is because they know its wrong and are trying to prevent people from getting their fair defence.
Them claiming that hey dont need it is exactally why it becomes nothing and the court can step all over it like in this instance. The Russian constitution has similar rights, yet they are not observed. So does the EU's treaties and charters have enless rights and virtues it enshrines, it doesnt mean they are defended and held up. One of the things that upholds the US constitution is its terseness, saneness, and closeness to the chartering of the national government itsself, although certainly its constant defence is the most critical.
If the british in this thread and in general dont respond to such a claim then is it any differnt than them not having a Bill of Rights in the first place?
truecrypt
The key is not digital, it does not exist on any machine. It *may* exist, and then only in the mind of the defendant. It only becomes digital when it is typed in, and then is erased after, it is like knowing where a treasure is hidden, and the right to refuse to tell of that is solidly defended, both in physical reality and in law (at least here in the us). By ruling that he (or anybody) has to give up a key he (or anybody) may or may not have (only those on trial truly know) the law becomes guilty until proven innocent, a system that can only yield to oppression.
suddenly im glad i live in the us
the right against self-incrimination is one firmly seated in reality. One can always not give the incription key, one can always say one does not remember it, there is nothing they can do to ge tit out of you, so if you are legally binded to give it then there is nothing preventing the government from saying and person has a key to something that they actually dont have and locking them up for that. with that right there is no line in the sand constantly moved and there is a good defense against tyerany, the man should not give up the key he should proclaim he forgot it weather he did or not, that is the only sane defense against tyranny.
There is nothing preventing the prosecurion and jury from believing bad stuff is behind that encryption wall but there is nothing, and it should be illegal to proclaim or legislate otherwise, that forces him to give up incriminating evidence. What the British court ruled is a downright lie and yields to tyranny, yields to guilty until proven innocent.
hes only doing this because Obama is allreay going to win.
According to this site (not a bs-site) it is currently as 96% change for Obama
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/
no you got it wrong, now china its self is becoming a huge consumer, they can simply replace themselves in our shoes, and as we never pay our bills it wont make a different. plus all the newfound prosperity will satiate any desire for revolution. were screwed.
one user can execute a forkbomb and whipe everybody out, also the thin clients i have used are way underspowered and completely die when a group of people get on them, the huge memory needs of these computers make it unfeasable--why is computing allways done with small commoidy system?
*chan stuff doesnt get edited out of russian wikipedia like it does en wikipedia, i guess the Russians dont have as many bureaucratic bastards
holy shit Viktor Yushchenko was not only able to give a straight answer but actually knew what he was talking about!
wow those russians seems much more 4chan-like than americans
learn from this physics teaching master at mit:
http://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/Physics/8-01Physics-IFall1999/VideoLectures/ (mit ocw)
The key is to just explain it, no bs and no assumptions of previous knowledge, then have students solve problem directly relevent.
um there were 2 expansions for starcraft that sucked so much blizzard practically disowned them (before brood war), that was content but it sucked. content is about quality, now there could be 3 games of quality but that is unlikly, either they doused the quality or they watered it down like what is happening to wow, streaching it out as thin as possible to hold on players to buy, buy, buy (thats how many buys you have have to make for a decent game)
blizzard was bought out only a few years ago, starcraft warcraft, diablo 1 and 2 and even wow (original at least) were made completely under an independent blizzard. They quality could be substancially differnt now that they are under management by a big company with generally not nearly the standards as blizzard had.
fucking absurd, this is the two-tier network, this forces small ingenuous services out and only google chacha etc are then able to participate, huting the telecoms with decreased usage, seriously the sms messages cost them nothing, they use basically zilch bankwidth, by cutting off the network interconnects they hurt themselves and their customers.
google will probablybe the best uptime, but yahoo will probably be just as good, exchange----not so good
yahoo is not lock in, its zimbra (zimbra.com) and its open-source and suports imap, pop3, and ical and uses sendmail, etc--you can install it on your local machine (although you should make an agreement that you own all of the files if it is remotely hosted) google is mega-lock-in, although not as bad as exchange, they have non-standard IMAP handling, propritarty calander and completely inaccesable contact system.
zimbra.com , its got better features than google and better stability and interoperability than outlook, its widely deployed, baked by commercial vendors and support, and its open-source unlike the other vendors----it is owned by yahoo so maybe thats what their pitching you, id go with that, unless all you want is email and then maybe google
my state doesnt have charter schools and although i have never really seen them in action they seem like the best smal thing i can think of in the near future, allowing at least some control if the students can get sufficient information to choose, etc.
maybe as the internet develops it can actually better vet this type of stuff. Probably not though, google will turn everything on the internet into blog spam advertising other blogs of spam (without paying for it of course) and with digg and giaa all newcomers to the internet will spawn a giant vortex in which new users only function will be to but ci4li5 and penis enlargements so the rest of us can stay online.