The OWNER is indeterminate, only defined by the power of the gun. An agreement with the thief doesn't make it any less so. We live by agreement and consensus, but that has to include everybody, the landed and landless alike. That is what makes a peaceful sleep every night possible. We should not allow any power of one over the other.
The FBI as just claimed the right to take the intellectual property of every US based corporation.
At anytime the government can force them into a patent pool. But this story is about vilifying individually controlled encryption in general, to make it look like only criminals need it.
Actually the amendment is pretty wide open, since the definition of "reasonable" and "probable" really isn't very objective. It is merely derived from consensus, which may or may not be a bit more precise(?) than a simple majority. The cops can get what they want, depending which direction the PR works, which is what they are doing with the theatrics. In other words, the phone is not secure. The story is a distraction and propaganda.
Not a single candidate in either the Democratic or Republican party has mentioned the Constitutional protection which should exist.
I see. And is there some requirement that we vote for a Democratic or Republican? The entire House of Representatives can be completely purged very two years. Sorry folks, the damage is completely self inflicted.
Actually the goal is to outlaw everything, to give the police probable cause to smash your door down without a warrant over mere suspicion from gossipy neighbors. All you gardeners better watch out!
And while you pay the rent you have the right to stay. Whether the law will protect you or not, the right still exists. But like all rights, without a gun to back them up, they are paper tigers.
The law is an ass, fickle, and capricious. Renters have all the same rights as anybody. The only problem is that nobody stands up, too inconvenient. The path of least resistance is to let it slide. Lucky you!
And that is why the better cities set controls on that kind of shit. Renters derive no benefit from the speculative market. They should not suffer the consequences of it either. A form of "squatters rights" are needed here. You have no right to displace anyone that isn't a nuisance or dangerous, and especially if they pay the rent on time.
Absolutely wrong. Prices are set arbitrarily to bring in and push out a specific class of people. The market is driven by speculation, not this mythical "supply and demand". That is a fairy tale.
Renters have as many rights as a landlord or any other real estate speculator. Economics doesn't factor into the corruption at play here. Rents aren't determined by supply and demand. They are set arbitrarily. Sorry, big changes are due, but we aren't even near the tipping point to get enough people off the couch to demand them. A few are, but we need more.
The government can and does dictate retention policy for many things. And they can put a gag order on it besides with their NSLs and various other tricks. Once the judge puts the hammer down, you will do what they say if you want to keep your business and maybe your freedom.
The bank is using and controlling the encryption, not the customer. And the government will never have to ask them twice to turn everything over to them. The problem (to the government) is when the customer controls the encryption and is willing to protect his own rights.
It's entirely plausible to me that Apple built something the FBI can't get into using their existing tools and techniques
Why? How would you know? The ability to break encryption will be guarded like missile launch codes and other top secrets. The is no reason to believe that the government (whichever branch) cannot break into every phone out there. It is the safer bet to assume they can and act accordingly, regardless what Snowden says. They can then construct a case without exposing these abilities to daylight.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh dear! I hope you didn't take that seriously! It was ripped from one of those wacko sites that hate Obama.
Putin and Trump? Please. These guys are money makers, who's gonna whack them?
Anyway, most murders go unsolved, if not outright unknown. There are plenty of ways without going all 'James Bond' on the guy.
Very rare.
Uh huh... eh, no problem then. It's all good. Nice cop out man..
The OWNER is indeterminate, only defined by the power of the gun. An agreement with the thief doesn't make it any less so. We live by agreement and consensus, but that has to include everybody, the landed and landless alike. That is what makes a peaceful sleep every night possible. We should not allow any power of one over the other.
The FBI as just claimed the right to take the intellectual property of every US based corporation.
At anytime the government can force them into a patent pool. But this story is about vilifying individually controlled encryption in general, to make it look like only criminals need it.
Actually the amendment is pretty wide open, since the definition of "reasonable" and "probable" really isn't very objective. It is merely derived from consensus, which may or may not be a bit more precise(?) than a simple majority. The cops can get what they want, depending which direction the PR works, which is what they are doing with the theatrics. In other words, the phone is not secure. The story is a distraction and propaganda.
Not a single candidate in either the Democratic or Republican party has mentioned the Constitutional protection which should exist.
I see. And is there some requirement that we vote for a Democratic or Republican? The entire House of Representatives can be completely purged very two years. Sorry folks, the damage is completely self inflicted.
Just put your lithium ion battery on overload and leave it in the aft lavatory, you know, since you can't smoke anymore
Eh, this is a poor peoples Church Commission to find out how easy it is really to make one of those "heart attack guns" that they used on Scalia.
The old IBM ones, maybe, but the new ones are pretty chintzy, about ten or fifteen leaf cutter ants could carry it out of the house.
Actually the goal is to outlaw everything, to give the police probable cause to smash your door down without a warrant over mere suspicion from gossipy neighbors. All you gardeners better watch out!
And while you pay the rent you have the right to stay. Whether the law will protect you or not, the right still exists. But like all rights, without a gun to back them up, they are paper tigers.
I guess you didn't hear what has been happening over the last eight years.
The law is an ass, fickle, and capricious. Renters have all the same rights as anybody. The only problem is that nobody stands up, too inconvenient. The path of least resistance is to let it slide. Lucky you!
And that is why the better cities set controls on that kind of shit. Renters derive no benefit from the speculative market. They should not suffer the consequences of it either. A form of "squatters rights" are needed here. You have no right to displace anyone that isn't a nuisance or dangerous, and especially if they pay the rent on time.
This is just basic supply and demand economics.
Absolutely wrong. Prices are set arbitrarily to bring in and push out a specific class of people. The market is driven by speculation, not this mythical "supply and demand". That is a fairy tale.
There's no human right to $500/month rents in SF.
Renters have as many rights as a landlord or any other real estate speculator. Economics doesn't factor into the corruption at play here. Rents aren't determined by supply and demand. They are set arbitrarily. Sorry, big changes are due, but we aren't even near the tipping point to get enough people off the couch to demand them. A few are, but we need more.
The government can and does dictate retention policy for many things. And they can put a gag order on it besides with their NSLs and various other tricks. Once the judge puts the hammer down, you will do what they say if you want to keep your business and maybe your freedom.
Yeah, until the city decides to condemn your property, or the bank evicts you with forged papers.
Anyway, good troll, man!
As long as you don't displace someone else, you most definitely have the right to live where you please, including San Francisco.
On the contrary! No one has the right to displace another from their homes. The *right to life* is universal, not just for people that can afford it.
"hiding aliens"? The coyotes might be, but I doubt the government is.
Oh, right! That's going to happen! Please, HSBC is just looking for another way to launder money
The bank is using and controlling the encryption, not the customer. And the government will never have to ask them twice to turn everything over to them. The problem (to the government) is when the customer controls the encryption and is willing to protect his own rights.
It's entirely plausible to me that Apple built something the FBI can't get into using their existing tools and techniques
Why? How would you know? The ability to break encryption will be guarded like missile launch codes and other top secrets. The is no reason to believe that the government (whichever branch) cannot break into every phone out there. It is the safer bet to assume they can and act accordingly, regardless what Snowden says. They can then construct a case without exposing these abilities to daylight.
So are 99% of americans and their glorious oligarchic government.
Actually it's about 98.4%, according to the last election results.