As long as you place trades on the book that you're willing to fill based on the rules of that market there's no reason why you should be called a 'crook' for that.
He didn't do that.
By allegedly placing multiple, simultaneous, large-volume sell orders at different price points—a technique known as “layering”—Sarao created the appearance of substantial supply in the market. As part of the scheme, Sarao allegedly modified these orders frequently so that they remained close to the market price, and typically canceled the orders without executing them.
He places many sell orders with no intention of filling them. While it is fine to cancel an order it becomes manipulation when one places and cancels many orders.
Timing. Stingray allows real-time access to the presence of a desired number without having to wait for the information to filter through the telco's bureaucracy. A telco will not watch for a suspect while police will.
BTW, would a blanket search warrant even be Constitutional?
I bet the warrant was more like "here is the list of locations from the cell phone we would like to search". I think that because the judge approved all the locations the OP calls it a "blanket warrant".
Maybe the the officer was acting like a dick in response to some action on your part. I find police officers have a tendency to respond in a similar manner to which they are treated.
I wince whenever I hear flaky claims like "most people do not have the experience or knowledge..."; heck, most people don't have the experience or knowledge to read Slashdot. That is just arrogance, and dismissal, and is entirely unworthy.
How about instead of making blanket assessments you look at each individual instance. Sure, in many instances the "most people do not have the experience or knowledge..." argument is invalid. In this instance I think it is.
I really don't give a hoot about this particular case, but how about giving us an educated guess as to how many 'innocent' cell phone calls are intercepted each and every day in each and every major city(and undoubtedly many mid and small sized cities as well) by not only the local PD but also any number of state and federal agencies.
Those are "interceptions" that are not logged or looked at. All that happens is the call is passed through to the real cell tower.
You see the judge had decided to issue a blanket search warrant for all the locations on the GPS.
So the cell phone of a suspect found in possession of dealer quantities of drugs was searched and found to contain an number of locations. The judge found that the link between the drugs and the locations on the cell phone sufficient evidence to provide probable cause to search those locations. You do not have enough detail to make an accurate determination on how far the warrant went. Was it restricted to locations visited in the previous few hours? Last day? Last Week? Ever? It it was the last few hours I would call it reasonable. Do you even know how many places were searched and in what priority? If the warrant only covered a few hours I do not see the problem.
A search warrant for one cell phone is really a warrant for thousands of cell phones.
Nope, a search warrant allows evidence in court. Any evidence gathered from phone numbers not on the stingray warrant would not be allowed in court. See the difference?
Auto mechanics has always required knowledge, skill, and personal responsibility, and nothing has changed!
Modifying a physical device such as a throttle cable has well known and simple testing procedures. In this case the car would act improperly the first time the gas pedal was pressed. Undocumented software, on the other hand, is much more complex and there may be unknown interactions. Auto mechanics are not system programmers and do not have the testing rigs to apply many different inputs to verify that the system works correctly.
1. How many accidents have happened in the last years due to misprograming of ECUs
Some accidents need to happen before anything is done?
2. How many independent and small shops that eat into automakers profits will close down due to the impossibility of performing any but the most simple repair jobs?
This is exactly why I mate my original comment. It is not about "simple repair jobs". Or even tuning the car using approved software.
Industry concerns are mounting that modifying these ECUs and the software coding that runs them could lead to vulnerabilities in vehicle safety and cyber security.
It is about modifying the code in the ECU not about modifying the parameters in the ECU. The latter is how one tunes the vehicle. It has nothing to do with any other repair on the vehicle.
Well then you'd better fucking quit driving, because any backyard genius has always been able to do that with a fucking brick on the pedal (or under it, as applicable)!
That would be a deliberate act rather than an accident caused by not fully understanding the interactions in an undocumented control system. See the difference?
Police outlined for the first time this month their usage of the stingray, pegging it at more than 4,300 times — a figure experts called a "huge number" compared to a trickle of disclosures in other cities.
Lets do the math over. 4300/8/365= 1.5 times a day. Then there is the issue of duration and range. Is every day a different court order? Is every Stingray a different court order? One ongoing investigation that covers a home, a workplace and a meeting place would more than cause that many "uses".
isn't dangerous enough to justify destroying the concept of ownership of property and replacing it with corporate serfdom,
Exaggerate much? Not allowing mods to one component of vehicles is not "destroying the concept of ownership of property". You still own the car, you can still sell the car, you can still fix almost everything on the car. Ability to mod an ECU has nothing to to with ownership of other items. This blatant exaggeration just shows that you don't have a real argument.
If they try that then bitch. They have not.The ECU (engine control unity) has nothing to do with the infotainment unit. Sorry but I dont want to be driving down the road with some backyard genius who has "tweaked" their ECU and ABS in such a way as it disables the breaks and locks the throttle open.
And if their car catches on fire then they only have themselves to blame for not knowing what they are doing.
Which they will deny and blame the car company since all evidence of their tampering will have been destroyed. Fire burn chips but old fashioned mods leave evidence.
Modding for performance usually means tinkering with spark timing, injection timing, fuel pressure, etc which increase the likelihood of an engine fire.
OEMs and their main lobbying organization say car's ECUs have become too complex and dangerous for consumers and third parties to handle.
FTFY
then the person would be held responsible if or when that modification was discovered.
What if the modification is not discovered? The manufacturer gets the blame.
making it illegal for you to drink alcohol if you happen to have a driver's license
Bad analogy. One can drink alcohol while holding a driver's license and still not drive. Once the ECU is modified it will effect the vehicle any time it is driven.
My point is that like drunk driving, and laws that prohibit that activity
Are there safety standards for engine timing, fuel pump pressures, max fuel flow, etc? These parameters could improve the power output but could lead to an engine explosion. In that explosion any evidence of tampering may be destroyed and the manufacturer would be held responsible.
Industry concerns are mounting that modifying these ECUs and the software coding that runs them could lead to vulnerabilities in vehicle safety and cyber security. Imagine an amateur makes a coding mistake that causes brakes to fail and a car crash ensues. Furthermore, automakers say these modifications could render cars non-compliant with environmental laws that regulate emissions.
This is not about replacing brakes, oil changes, replacing spark plugs, etc. It is about making software changes that most people do not have the experience or knowledge to do.
If you mean this map you might notice that the percentages are based on number of countries and not population. By population the statistics are very different.
Although many nations have abolished capital punishment, over 60% of the world's population live in countries where executions take place, such as China, India, the United States and Indonesia, the four most-populous countries in the world, which continue to apply the death penalty
My comment was to counter the idea that there was no way he could be a serious threat. All I was saying is that he might be armed. There is something between "ignore him" and "shoot him down". It is called watchful waiting. Set up at the Capitol Lawn and follow him with a helicopter filming it all the way. If he deviates from his stated plan then shot him down.
Slashdot Mirror
As long as you place trades on the book that you're willing to fill based on the rules of that market there's no reason why you should be called a 'crook' for that.
He didn't do that.
By allegedly placing multiple, simultaneous, large-volume sell orders at different price points—a technique known as “layering”—Sarao created the appearance of substantial supply in the market. As part of the scheme, Sarao allegedly modified these orders frequently so that they remained close to the market price, and typically canceled the orders without executing them.
He places many sell orders with no intention of filling them. While it is fine to cancel an order it becomes manipulation when one places and cancels many orders.
What's the advantage of the Stingray then?
Timing. Stingray allows real-time access to the presence of a desired number without having to wait for the information to filter through the telco's bureaucracy. A telco will not watch for a suspect while police will.
BTW, would a blanket search warrant even be Constitutional?
I bet the warrant was more like "here is the list of locations from the cell phone we would like to search". I think that because the judge approved all the locations the OP calls it a "blanket warrant".
Maybe the the officer was acting like a dick in response to some action on your part. I find police officers have a tendency to respond in a similar manner to which they are treated.
I wince whenever I hear flaky claims like "most people do not have the experience or knowledge..."; heck, most people don't have the experience or knowledge to read Slashdot. That is just arrogance, and dismissal, and is entirely unworthy.
How about instead of making blanket assessments you look at each individual instance. Sure, in many instances the "most people do not have the experience or knowledge..." argument is invalid. In this instance I think it is.
I really don't give a hoot about this particular case, but how about giving us an educated guess as to how many 'innocent' cell phone calls are intercepted each and every day in each and every major city(and undoubtedly many mid and small sized cities as well) by not only the local PD but also any number of state and federal agencies.
Those are "interceptions" that are not logged or looked at. All that happens is the call is passed through to the real cell tower.
You see the judge had decided to issue a blanket search warrant for all the locations on the GPS.
So the cell phone of a suspect found in possession of dealer quantities of drugs was searched and found to contain an number of locations. The judge found that the link between the drugs and the locations on the cell phone sufficient evidence to provide probable cause to search those locations. You do not have enough detail to make an accurate determination on how far the warrant went. Was it restricted to locations visited in the previous few hours? Last day? Last Week? Ever? It it was the last few hours I would call it reasonable. Do you even know how many places were searched and in what priority? If the warrant only covered a few hours I do not see the problem.
A search warrant for one cell phone is really a warrant for thousands of cell phones.
Nope, a search warrant allows evidence in court. Any evidence gathered from phone numbers not on the stingray warrant would not be allowed in court. See the difference?
Auto mechanics has always required knowledge, skill, and personal responsibility, and nothing has changed!
Modifying a physical device such as a throttle cable has well known and simple testing procedures. In this case the car would act improperly the first time the gas pedal was pressed. Undocumented software, on the other hand, is much more complex and there may be unknown interactions. Auto mechanics are not system programmers and do not have the testing rigs to apply many different inputs to verify that the system works correctly.
1. How many accidents have happened in the last years due to misprograming of ECUs
Some accidents need to happen before anything is done?
2. How many independent and small shops that eat into automakers profits will close down due to the impossibility of performing any but the most simple repair jobs?
This is exactly why I mate my original comment. It is not about "simple repair jobs". Or even tuning the car using approved software.
Industry concerns are mounting that modifying these ECUs and the software coding that runs them could lead to vulnerabilities in vehicle safety and cyber security.
It is about modifying the code in the ECU not about modifying the parameters in the ECU. The latter is how one tunes the vehicle. It has nothing to do with any other repair on the vehicle.
Well then you'd better fucking quit driving, because any backyard genius has always been able to do that with a fucking brick on the pedal (or under it, as applicable)!
That would be a deliberate act rather than an accident caused by not fully understanding the interactions in an undocumented control system. See the difference?
Police outlined for the first time this month their usage of the stingray, pegging it at more than 4,300 times — a figure experts called a "huge number" compared to a trickle of disclosures in other cities.
Lets do the math over. 4300/8/365= 1.5 times a day. Then there is the issue of duration and range. Is every day a different court order? Is every Stingray a different court order? One ongoing investigation that covers a home, a workplace and a meeting place would more than cause that many "uses".
Big numbers look big until you break them down.
isn't dangerous enough to justify destroying the concept of ownership of property and replacing it with corporate serfdom,
Exaggerate much? Not allowing mods to one component of vehicles is not "destroying the concept of ownership of property". You still own the car, you can still sell the car, you can still fix almost everything on the car. Ability to mod an ECU has nothing to to with ownership of other items. This blatant exaggeration just shows that you don't have a real argument.
If they try that then bitch. They have not.The ECU (engine control unity) has nothing to do with the infotainment unit. Sorry but I dont want to be driving down the road with some backyard genius who has "tweaked" their ECU and ABS in such a way as it disables the breaks and locks the throttle open.
Even multi-million dollar safes are not tamper proof. There are some pretty ingenious people out there that can get around just about and method.
And if their car catches on fire then they only have themselves to blame for not knowing what they are doing.
Which they will deny and blame the car company since all evidence of their tampering will have been destroyed. Fire burn chips but old fashioned mods leave evidence.
The car and everything it's made of is my property and what I want to do with it is my choice.
A statement said by many people right up until something goes wrong and they sue the manufacturer.
Does tinkering with anything in the car always affect the ECU?
No and that is not what this is about. As I said the headline in inaccurate.
And even then, does absolutely any possible change to the ECU always cause the vehicle to violate safety or environmental regulations?
Not absolutely but there is a very high probability that it might.
Drinking is not always related to driving. Tinkering with an ECU is always related to driving. See the difference?
Modding for performance usually means tinkering with spark timing, injection timing, fuel pressure, etc which increase the likelihood of an engine fire.
And when the mod for performance causes and engine fire where the ECU is destroyed and all evidence of modification is gone?
If the ECU mod causes a car fire and the ECU is destroyed how do you verify that the ECU was modded?
OEMs and their main lobbying organization say car's ECUs have become too complex and dangerous for consumers and third parties to handle.
FTFY
then the person would be held responsible if or when that modification was discovered.
What if the modification is not discovered? The manufacturer gets the blame.
making it illegal for you to drink alcohol if you happen to have a driver's license
Bad analogy. One can drink alcohol while holding a driver's license and still not drive. Once the ECU is modified it will effect the vehicle any time it is driven.
My point is that like drunk driving, and laws that prohibit that activity
Are there safety standards for engine timing, fuel pump pressures, max fuel flow, etc? These parameters could improve the power output but could lead to an engine explosion. In that explosion any evidence of tampering may be destroyed and the manufacturer would be held responsible.
From the article;
Industry concerns are mounting that modifying these ECUs and the software coding that runs them could lead to vulnerabilities in vehicle safety and cyber security. Imagine an amateur makes a coding mistake that causes brakes to fail and a car crash ensues. Furthermore, automakers say these modifications could render cars non-compliant with environmental laws that regulate emissions.
This is not about replacing brakes, oil changes, replacing spark plugs, etc. It is about making software changes that most people do not have the experience or knowledge to do.
Thank you.
If you mean this map you might notice that the percentages are based on number of countries and not population. By population the statistics are very different.
Although many nations have abolished capital punishment, over 60% of the world's population live in countries where executions take place, such as China, India, the United States and Indonesia, the four most-populous countries in the world, which continue to apply the death penalty
My comment was to counter the idea that there was no way he could be a serious threat. All I was saying is that he might be armed. There is something between "ignore him" and "shoot him down". It is called watchful waiting. Set up at the Capitol Lawn and follow him with a helicopter filming it all the way. If he deviates from his stated plan then shot him down.
They can and do.