Now, if they can do something like looking at the scratches in the IDE pins in the HD, to see how many times it has been plugged in to something, I would be seriously impressed. That would be unprecedented in forensics, as far as I know.
But it still wouldn't prove the data hasn't been copied, because there's no need to remove the drive at all.
Boot the laptop from CD (using DamnSmallLinux, Knoppix, or any similar distribution), copy the drive image to another system over the network, and shutdown.
The Los Angeles Sheriff's Department (LASD) was reportedly evaluating a 4-pound UAV for surveillance use over the sprawling L.A. Basin, which also happens to be some of the busiest airspace in the world. Members were rightly concerned about the risk of a midair collision with the small, radio-controlled aircraft.
AOPA staff promptly raised the issue with the FAA. Not only did that action make sure that a mini-UAV wouldn't be sharing L.A.'s airspace with GA pilots, it will also lead to a better policy controlling UAVs nationwide.
The FAA made it clear to the LASD that as a public operator, it would need a certificate of authorization (COA) and an experimental airworthiness certificate before it could fly a UAV, regardless of size, in the National Airspace System. (National airspace includes Class G, uncontrolled airspace.) Those are the same rules that apply to the larger UAVs being flown by the military and Department of Homeland Security.
Public and commercial operators aren't flying UAVs for "recreational purposes," so they are not permitted to fly remotely piloted aircraft under the provisions of the FAA's radio-controller modeler's advisory circular.
According to AOPA's FAA sources, the LASD reassured the agency that it will fully comply with all FAA regulations.
After trying several different "virtual" servers, I ended up at Linode, which uses User Mode Linux. I run two servers: a personal domain for mail, web, etc. and a file server for my employer.
I can install any distribution I want, or pick from a set of initial distributions they provide. The kernel is the only software component I can't change. I can update to newer versions or apply security patches as often as I want, without waiting for the administrator of the system to do it.
The web-based interface lets me reboot the system with a browser, or even boot it on a different root partition -- I occassionally copy the root partition to an unused partition so that I can use it as a backup if the original one gets borked. There's also a way to access the "console" if networking gets misconfigured or I have to boot in single user mode.
Don't prey on children and don't plan terrorist acts and you'll be fine.
From TFA:
At the meeting with privacy experts yesterday, Justice Department officials focused on wanting to retain the records for use in child pornography and terrorism investigations. But they also talked of their value in investigating other crimes like intellectual property theft and fraud, said Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center in Washington, who attended the session.
"It was clear that they would go beyond kiddie porn and terrorism and use it for general law enforcement," Mr. Rotenberg said.
---- end cite.
The problem with a "surveillance state" is that the collected information can be abused by the people that collect it. And worse: over-zealous law enforcement can find sufficient evidence of a crime anywhere they want, given the vagueness of many statutes.
The price you found ($177/month for 30/5) is what Verizon offers in most places.
However, in a few markets, there are other providers that offer speed/price that are competitive with FIOS. So, Verizon essentially doubled the speed of all the packages.
In those markets, you can get 60/5 for ~$180/month.
So exactly when did "getting your ass kicked by a bunch of jerks" turn into being "an unwilling Fight Club participant"?
There was apparently plenty of willing participants in this particular instance (or at least "unwilling to press charges"). The video in question portrayed a number of "consensual" fights. It came into public view when an unwilling participant was seriously injured.
Unfortunately, all you can do is pre-order a printed catalogue. And the "special limited edition boxed set" itself is being billed as a collector's item, for $500.
Now, how many shots will it take an NC in heavy armor with heavy assault to kill you? One. Cause the NC have magical guns. (not really, they just kill me a lot)
LOL. You should hear what the NC say about the TR and VS heavy assault weapons.:-)
The secret to success with the NC heavy assault weapon (basically, a big-ass shotgun) is to close on your target. At close range, it's awesome when it works. Unfortunately, there's a lingering bug that causes you to "miss" at point-blank range, and it's been there since beta.
The secret to defending yourself against the NC Jackhammer is to engage the other player while maintaining your distance.
Not entirely. The Reserves play on the same server as everyone else. They can continue to play until the end of the demo period (March 24, 2007 -- no matter when you start).
All of the areas, vehicles, and weapons are available to the Reserve players. The BR 6 limitation just means they won't be able to "learn" more than a handful of certifications at any one time. But, you can "forget" a certification every 6 hours, so you can re-cert (almost) as often as you want.
You start with 7 cert points at BR1, and you'll get an additional one for each BR until BR6. At BR6, you get your first "implant" instead.
The only real handicap for a Reserve player is that paying subscribers will go to the head of the queue (in front of Reserve players) when a zone is population-locked (i.e. there are already 133 players from your empire in that zone).
AFAIK they broke the contract (which promised not to go into music ) and now they are acting like a record label
RTFA. The (abbreviated) terms of the current agreement are there:
Apple Corps was awarded rights to the name on "creative works whose principal content is music" while Apple Computer was allowed "goods and services . . . used to reproduce, run, play or otherwise deliver such content".
Critically, however, the agreement prevented Apple Computer from distributing content on physical media. This was designed to cover CDs and tapes, but it is unclear whether it included later inventions such as digital music files or devices used to play them.
--- end cite
The article doesn't quote the prohibition against distribution on physical media, and the writer's opinion seems to be in conflict with the earlier statement. The phrase: "goods and services... used to reproduce, run, play or otherwise deliver such content" seems to describe iTunes and the iPod.
On the 2004 return, "sponsorship revenues" were $4,422,674.
In statement 7, the explanation is:
Qualified sponsorshiop payments received as the result of agreements between various search providers and Mozilla. These arrangements facilitate the dissemination of the Foundation's Firefox browser, thereby increasing the
accessibility of the internet. Mozilla receives payments for allowing the Internet search provider to occupy its default or primary search location, or for
the opportunity to be included in the Firefox web browser.
(Original is all caps. Lameness filter wouldn't let me post it that way)
I'm not sure how complete the coverage is, as I haven't found a map. My father reports seeing the access points at various places around the city, but he doesn't have a WiFi card to access it (yet).
The Supreme Court has held that the 14th Amendment causes all of the restrictions provided by the US Constitution to be applied to the states as well.
Although Rep. John Bingham (the author of the first part of the 14th amendment) said that it was intended to nationalize the Bill of Rights and make it binding on the states, and Senator Jacob Howard said almost the same when introducing it in the Senate -- it has not been interpreted that way by the Supreme Court.
Instead, parts of the Bill of Rights have been "selectively incorporated" and applied to states on a case-by-case basis. Google for "14th amendment selective incorporation" and you'll get a large amount of information on the subject.
Why not test it on living human cells separated from living humans?
RTFA.
In previous tests, Leszczynski's group found evidence of mobile phone radiation causing cell-level changes such as shrinkage, but he said it was still impossible to say if that had significant health effects.
"Cells function in a different way when they are in the body than in laboratory surroundings. Now we want to confirm whether radiation causes cell level changes in humans as well," he said.
At the risk of stepping on some toes, I'd like to point out that the majority of pilots that have testified in this discussion are flying small aircraft. [...] I haven't read any reports (so far) from major airline pilots stating the same.
These reports don't typically make the mass media. I have read plenty of reports in the flying press from airline pilots.
In addition to repeated reports of interference that started or stopped in coincidence with announcements ("you may now use an approved portable electronic device" or "in preparation for landing, please turn off all electronic devices"), there have also been reports of interferenece that ws identifiable as a cellphones. Audible interference from a GSM phone is instantly recognizable, after you have heard it once.
No, but 15 years of handheld cell phones being carried onto planes while "on" and not resulting in one single crash (or even instrument oddities that I know of) means a lot statistically.
The "instrument oddities" have occurred. You can pretend that you didn't know about them, but just look earlier in this thread and you can see multiple reports of exactly that by the pilots that have observed them.
It means that cell phones don't cause plane crashes. Period.
No, it means that a cell phone (or other unwanted transmitter on a plane) hasn't been the documented cause of a crash, yet. The reason is not because there is no risk, but because pilots are trained to use multiple sources of information to navigate and manuever a plane under instrument flight rules. If one source diverges from the other(s), backup procedures are in place to prevent the deviation from becoming an issue.
The problem is: backup procedures can fail as well. The NTSB investigates every commercial airline accident in the US, and nearly every one of them in recent memory is the result of a chain of mistakes or failures, rather than a single one. Removing any one of those mistakes or failures might have broken the chain and prevented the accident.
And the backup procedures themselves introduce some risk. Near the end of instrument approaches in marginal conditions, any anomaly in the navigation system is enough for most pilots to initiate a missed approach and go around for another try. Air traffic control is always prepared for it, but it can really screw up the best-laid plans on a busy day and create many opportunities for another mistake.
The amazing thing to me is that people argue this from the point of "these things cause crashes, we have to keep them off planes". Wrong. If a plane can be brought down by someone's cell phone, and I can't make these letters big enough: THEN YOU NEED TO FIX THE FUCKING PLANE!
When a cell-phone (or other device) radiates a harmonic on a frequency that coincides with the one used by a aircraft navigation or communication receiver, there isn't much you can do to fix the receiver. Fortunately, different systems use different frequencies and even entirely different bands, so there is enough diversity to avoid most interference. And when there is interference, there's usually a backup. But, it's not risk-free.
Seriously. This is a problem with the plane, not the phone. Of course, as we learned in my first paragraph, this actually isn't a problem with the plane, it's a fantasy.
Your assertion in your first paragraph has been disproved already. So which one is the fantasy?
I can't believe people keep bringing this up.
I can't believe self-proclaimed experts assert it can't happen, even after first-hand reports are posted.
If a cell phone were able to bring down a plane, imagine what a thunderstorm would do to every plane within 100 miles.
Thunderstorms generate a different kind (impulse) of interference which is easily filtered.
I should think they would do the same thing in China as they are doing in America... Not give it up.
Google has refused, so far. The US government has asked a federal court to force Google to comply. If the court rules in the feds favor, Google doesn't have much choice, if they want to stay in business.
However, a US court is not likely to compel Google to provide search histories that are traceable to a specific user or IP address, in the absence of a warrant. And a warrant is not likely to be granted for a specific user's search history unless there is reasonable suspicion that a crime was committed.
But, it isn't a crime to criticize the government in the US. It _is_ a crime to do so in China -- or at least they will invent a crime, if necessary.
Google is explicitly keeping Gmail out of China. But, their servers for http://www.google.cn/ are in China. Are they tracking search history? If that information is retained there, the Chinese government can seize it whenever they want, no matter what Google says.
Google: We don't offer a service that puts anyone in that situation, and the best way we honor their situation is to ensure that we are not associated with a similar situation. We don't offer products that would put us in a position of putting people like that in danger.
Does Google maintain the same history of keyword searches by IP and by "cookie" at google.cn? If so, what are they going to do when the Chinese government demands they provide that information?
It's not hard to imagine a situation where that information would put a Chinese Google user in danger.
Compaq was one of the first manufacturers to ship a PC that was explicitly designed to be "99%" compatible with the IBM PC. It was also "portable", which meant that it was about the size of a sewing machine and weighed 40 lbs. Later, most people dubbed it "luggable".
I bought it from "Sears Business Systems Center", and later upgraded it to a "XT", adding a 10 megabyte hard drive. The hard drive was one of the first 3-1/2 inch drives, which Compaq shock-mounted with rubber grommets inside of a 5-1/4 inch hard drive enclosure. Eventually, I upgraded it to 512K RAM and added an 8087 coprocessor to the 4.77 MHz 8088. The entire thing cost me about $7,000 in mid-80's dollars (That's about $12,500 in 2005 dollars). Today, I can build a decent PC for under $1,000 -- it won't be a great 3D gaming system, but it will be more that adequate for most people.
For about a year, I had a 16-MHz 386 "daughterboard" from Intel in this PC. It plugged into a PC-AT slot, had it's own RAM, and only used the I/O subsystem in the PC. It got me through a post-graduate class where I needed a lot of CPU for running logic simulations. I eventually sold the daughterboard when I replaced the system with a 486-33.
I still have the Compaq -- and it still works. Occassionally I pull it out of the closet and turn it on to show people one of the first IBM-PC clones.
Slashdot Mirror
But they no longer own it. Discover Financial Services is now owned by Morgan Stanley.
But it still wouldn't prove the data hasn't been copied, because there's no need to remove the drive at all.
Boot the laptop from CD (using DamnSmallLinux, Knoppix, or any similar distribution), copy the drive image to another system over the network, and shutdown.
i objected to the misuse of "discreet" in place of "discrete" in a headline yesterday, and got modded as both off-topic AND troll.
It's discrete, not discreet.
Not quite:
http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2006/060609 uav.html
The Los Angeles Sheriff's Department (LASD) was reportedly evaluating a 4-pound UAV for surveillance use over the sprawling L.A. Basin, which also happens to be some of the busiest airspace in the world. Members were rightly concerned about the risk of a midair collision with the small, radio-controlled aircraft.
AOPA staff promptly raised the issue with the FAA. Not only did that action make sure that a mini-UAV wouldn't be sharing L.A.'s airspace with GA pilots, it will also lead to a better policy controlling UAVs nationwide.
The FAA made it clear to the LASD that as a public operator, it would need a certificate of authorization (COA) and an experimental airworthiness certificate before it could fly a UAV, regardless of size, in the National Airspace System. (National airspace includes Class G, uncontrolled airspace.) Those are the same rules that apply to the larger UAVs being flown by the military and Department of Homeland Security.
Public and commercial operators aren't flying UAVs for "recreational purposes," so they are not permitted to fly remotely piloted aircraft under the provisions of the FAA's radio-controller modeler's advisory circular.
According to AOPA's FAA sources, the LASD reassured the agency that it will fully comply with all FAA regulations.
I can install any distribution I want, or pick from a set of initial distributions they provide. The kernel is the only software component I can't change. I can update to newer versions or apply security patches as often as I want, without waiting for the administrator of the system to do it.
The web-based interface lets me reboot the system with a browser, or even boot it on a different root partition -- I occassionally copy the root partition to an unused partition so that I can use it as a backup if the original one gets borked. There's also a way to access the "console" if networking gets misconfigured or I have to boot in single user mode.
From TFA:
At the meeting with privacy experts yesterday, Justice Department officials focused on wanting to retain the records for use in child pornography and terrorism investigations. But they also talked of their value in investigating other crimes like intellectual property theft and fraud, said Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center in Washington, who attended the session.
"It was clear that they would go beyond kiddie porn and terrorism and use it for general law enforcement," Mr. Rotenberg said.
---- end cite.
The problem with a "surveillance state" is that the collected information can be abused by the people that collect it. And worse: over-zealous law enforcement can find sufficient evidence of a crime anywhere they want, given the vagueness of many statutes.
There's no need to install OpenOffice.org. Install:
http://www.cutepdf.com/download/converter.exe
http://www.cutepdf.com/download/CuteWriter.exe
That will give you a PDF printer device, to which you can print from ANY application. It will prompt you for a filename, and generate the PDF.
However, in a few markets, there are other providers that offer speed/price that are competitive with FIOS. So, Verizon essentially doubled the speed of all the packages.
In those markets, you can get 60/5 for ~$180/month.
There was apparently plenty of willing participants in this particular instance (or at least "unwilling to press charges"). The video in question portrayed a number of "consensual" fights. It came into public view when an unwilling participant was seriously injured.
The "regular" 2-volume set is $81.
LOL. You should hear what the NC say about the TR and VS heavy assault weapons. :-)
The secret to success with the NC heavy assault weapon (basically, a big-ass shotgun) is to close on your target. At close range, it's awesome when it works. Unfortunately, there's a lingering bug that causes you to "miss" at point-blank range, and it's been there since beta.
The secret to defending yourself against the NC Jackhammer is to engage the other player while maintaining your distance.
You can find a torrent here:
http://www.mininova.org/tor/262474
This was posted elsewhere. I can't vouch for its reliability.
Not entirely. The Reserves play on the same server as everyone else. They can continue to play until the end of the demo period (March 24, 2007 -- no matter when you start).
All of the areas, vehicles, and weapons are available to the Reserve players. The BR 6 limitation just means they won't be able to "learn" more than a handful of certifications at any one time. But, you can "forget" a certification every 6 hours, so you can re-cert (almost) as often as you want.
You start with 7 cert points at BR1, and you'll get an additional one for each BR until BR6. At BR6, you get your first "implant" instead.
The only real handicap for a Reserve player is that paying subscribers will go to the head of the queue (in front of Reserve players) when a zone is population-locked (i.e. there are already 133 players from your empire in that zone).
RTFA. The (abbreviated) terms of the current agreement are there:
Apple Corps was awarded rights to the name on "creative works whose principal content is music" while Apple Computer was allowed "goods and services . . . used to reproduce, run, play or otherwise deliver such content".
Critically, however, the agreement prevented Apple Computer from distributing content on physical media. This was designed to cover CDs and tapes, but it is unclear whether it included later inventions such as digital music files or devices used to play them.
--- end cite
The article doesn't quote the prohibition against distribution on physical media, and the writer's opinion seems to be in conflict with the earlier statement. The phrase: "goods and services ... used to reproduce, run, play or otherwise deliver such content" seems to describe iTunes and the iPod.
In statement 7, the explanation is:
Qualified sponsorshiop payments received as the result of agreements between various search providers and Mozilla. These arrangements facilitate the dissemination of the Foundation's Firefox browser, thereby increasing the accessibility of the internet. Mozilla receives payments for allowing the Internet search provider to occupy its default or primary search location, or for the opportunity to be included in the Firefox web browser.
(Original is all caps. Lameness filter wouldn't let me post it that way)
I'm one of those "asshats", and I've never had a merchant reject my card.
Only about 1 in 20 actually look at the signature block and ask for my ID. I praise them and thank them for doing so.
I've heard of some merchants refusing to accept signed cards. Mine are signed -- and next to the signature is 'DEMAND PHOTO ID' in big block letters.
http://www.cctexas.com/wifi/
I'm not sure how complete the coverage is, as I haven't found a map. My father reports seeing the access points at various places around the city, but he doesn't have a WiFi card to access it (yet).
Although Rep. John Bingham (the author of the first part of the 14th amendment) said that it was intended to nationalize the Bill of Rights and make it binding on the states, and Senator Jacob Howard said almost the same when introducing it in the Senate -- it has not been interpreted that way by the Supreme Court.
Instead, parts of the Bill of Rights have been "selectively incorporated" and applied to states on a case-by-case basis. Google for "14th amendment selective incorporation" and you'll get a large amount of information on the subject.
RTFA.
In previous tests, Leszczynski's group found evidence of mobile phone radiation causing cell-level changes such as shrinkage, but he said it was still impossible to say if that had significant health effects.
"Cells function in a different way when they are in the body than in laboratory surroundings. Now we want to confirm whether radiation causes cell level changes in humans as well," he said.
These reports don't typically make the mass media. I have read plenty of reports in the flying press from airline pilots.
In addition to repeated reports of interference that started or stopped in coincidence with announcements ("you may now use an approved portable electronic device" or "in preparation for landing, please turn off all electronic devices"), there have also been reports of interferenece that ws identifiable as a cellphones. Audible interference from a GSM phone is instantly recognizable, after you have heard it once.
The "instrument oddities" have occurred. You can pretend that you didn't know about them, but just look earlier in this thread and you can see multiple reports of exactly that by the pilots that have observed them.
It means that cell phones don't cause plane crashes. Period.
No, it means that a cell phone (or other unwanted transmitter on a plane) hasn't been the documented cause of a crash, yet. The reason is not because there is no risk, but because pilots are trained to use multiple sources of information to navigate and manuever a plane under instrument flight rules. If one source diverges from the other(s), backup procedures are in place to prevent the deviation from becoming an issue.
The problem is: backup procedures can fail as well. The NTSB investigates every commercial airline accident in the US, and nearly every one of them in recent memory is the result of a chain of mistakes or failures, rather than a single one. Removing any one of those mistakes or failures might have broken the chain and prevented the accident.
And the backup procedures themselves introduce some risk. Near the end of instrument approaches in marginal conditions, any anomaly in the navigation system is enough for most pilots to initiate a missed approach and go around for another try. Air traffic control is always prepared for it, but it can really screw up the best-laid plans on a busy day and create many opportunities for another mistake.
The amazing thing to me is that people argue this from the point of "these things cause crashes, we have to keep them off planes". Wrong. If a plane can be brought down by someone's cell phone, and I can't make these letters big enough: THEN YOU NEED TO FIX THE FUCKING PLANE!
When a cell-phone (or other device) radiates a harmonic on a frequency that coincides with the one used by a aircraft navigation or communication receiver, there isn't much you can do to fix the receiver. Fortunately, different systems use different frequencies and even entirely different bands, so there is enough diversity to avoid most interference. And when there is interference, there's usually a backup. But, it's not risk-free.
Seriously. This is a problem with the plane, not the phone. Of course, as we learned in my first paragraph, this actually isn't a problem with the plane, it's a fantasy.
Your assertion in your first paragraph has been disproved already. So which one is the fantasy?
I can't believe people keep bringing this up.
I can't believe self-proclaimed experts assert it can't happen, even after first-hand reports are posted.
If a cell phone were able to bring down a plane, imagine what a thunderstorm would do to every plane within 100 miles.
Thunderstorms generate a different kind (impulse) of interference which is easily filtered.
Google has refused, so far. The US government has asked a federal court to force Google to comply. If the court rules in the feds favor, Google doesn't have much choice, if they want to stay in business.
However, a US court is not likely to compel Google to provide search histories that are traceable to a specific user or IP address, in the absence of a warrant. And a warrant is not likely to be granted for a specific user's search history unless there is reasonable suspicion that a crime was committed.
But, it isn't a crime to criticize the government in the US. It _is_ a crime to do so in China -- or at least they will invent a crime, if necessary.
Google is explicitly keeping Gmail out of China. But, their servers for http://www.google.cn/ are in China. Are they tracking search history? If that information is retained there, the Chinese government can seize it whenever they want, no matter what Google says.
Does Google maintain the same history of keyword searches by IP and by "cookie" at google.cn? If so, what are they going to do when the Chinese government demands they provide that information?
It's not hard to imagine a situation where that information would put a Chinese Google user in danger.
I bought it from "Sears Business Systems Center", and later upgraded it to a "XT", adding a 10 megabyte hard drive. The hard drive was one of the first 3-1/2 inch drives, which Compaq shock-mounted with rubber grommets inside of a 5-1/4 inch hard drive enclosure. Eventually, I upgraded it to 512K RAM and added an 8087 coprocessor to the 4.77 MHz 8088. The entire thing cost me about $7,000 in mid-80's dollars (That's about $12,500 in 2005 dollars). Today, I can build a decent PC for under $1,000 -- it won't be a great 3D gaming system, but it will be more that adequate for most people.
For about a year, I had a 16-MHz 386 "daughterboard" from Intel in this PC. It plugged into a PC-AT slot, had it's own RAM, and only used the I/O subsystem in the PC. It got me through a post-graduate class where I needed a lot of CPU for running logic simulations. I eventually sold the daughterboard when I replaced the system with a 486-33.
I still have the Compaq -- and it still works. Occassionally I pull it out of the closet and turn it on to show people one of the first IBM-PC clones.