The thing about encryption is that it isn't so much a "safe", it's more analogous to a private citizen having their own moon on which to store valuables.
It is more akin to speaking and writing everything in your own private language, and forcing the police to determine how to translate that language.
More like writing everything in a private language that even you don't understand, but you have the key to the machine that generates the translation.
Actually, it is more akin to writing everything in a secret code that only you understand. One that is well designed and difficult to execute a ciphertext-only attack on. Should the government be able to demand that a defendant translate that secret code for them?
No. It is more akin to writing everything in a secret code that even you don't understand, but you have the key to the machine that generates the translation.
Interesting. If these companies are licensing patents, isn't it law that those be disclosed on the "credits" screen or something??? I thought if an item sold had a patent on it it legally MUST have the number on it to be valid. As these companies are essentially paying for a license, there should be a page crediting these Microsoft patents.
Best of my understanding: Nope. It's not like trademarks, where you have to actively defend the mark in order to retain the rights to the mark.
As the patent holder, you can let everyone in the world use your invention for free with zero acknowledgement of your genius, or you can go around demanding payment with a pinky at the corner of your mouth. Your mileage will vary based on real-world conditions and the geothermal activity of your volcano hideout.
The question you allude to is whether the expectation of privacy by the people running open wifi is "reasonable". For most people who understands the technology, it is NOT reasonable to expect that someone will not read unencrypted traffic broadcast in public. Whether that means that the court would find that the general public's expectation of privacy is not reasonable is unclear.
However, that is not what this suit is about. This is about money, and trying to do anything possible to damage Google's reputation.
I experience the memory footprint problem also. It may be the sites I'm using are very heavyweight and remain in the cache, but it would be great to see some kind of graph that shows what memory is being used by which tabs, or is unreasonably persisting in the cache.
Aren't these version updates suggested for download when the browser starts? (I don't know, since I got my FF5 from an Ubuntu update, not direct from Mozilla.) If you aren't connected to the Internet, or if you have a very slow internet connection, I could see the problem, but I expect regular updates for my browser. If I don't get regular browser updates, then I worry about security issues.
I'm afraid "those ********" are a significant percentage of the population. Curiously, talking on the phone while driving produces a similar quality of driving to intoxication. The difference is that driving while intoxicated mostly occurs in the late evening, but driving while on the phone happens all darn day.
In the same way that a female cow is called a "cow", and a male cow is called a "bull". Generically, they are cows (or kine, but only if you're really, really old). Yeah, there's "cattle", too, but that's totally different etymology.
I will follow the rules of Ms. Deambrose's class. I will follow the rules of Ms. Deambrose's class. I will follow the rules of Ms. Deambrose's class. I will follow the rules of Ms. Deambrose's class. I will follow the rules of Ms. Deambrose's class. I will follow the rules of Ms. Deambrose's class.
Didn't do shit for me.
Perhpas it wasn't supposed to do anything for YOU.
Yeah, but Texas has no income tax, and housing is affordable. But you do have to put up with 2 groups of jerks:
a sizable portion of the texas population (and even a bigger chunk of elected/appointed officials)
the rest of the country who constantly trys to put *everyone* in texas in that group
You like the results, even happy to benefit from the results, but you *don't* like the ideas & policies that accomplished them, nor the people that saw that those ideas and policies were implemented?
I just don't know what can possibly be said, faced with such a critical-logic disconnect.
Strat
there's no indication that the person you're responding to 1) lives in Texas, 2) benefits from these policies, or 3) likes "the results".
Furthermore, nothing the Texas government has done (as far as I can tell) has helped housing prices remain relatively reasonable, aside from turning a blind eye to the employment of undocumented aliens as labor.
The tax structure in Texas is a mess, as is the legislative model, where basically every state law requires an ammendment to the state constitution. Furthermore, the state of Texas is facing a $27 billion budget deficit. Implying that the Texas legislature and governor are anything remotely resembling a model of responsible policy is thoroughly unconvincing.
There is no "the cloud". This is a terminology problem. People may use a cloud deployment model "internally" (wholly controlled by their own IT department) or "externally" (wholly managed by a third party), or a third-party hosted, completed separate infrastructure model.
People hear "cloud" and mostly think "someone else owns the infrastructure". As many others have noted, this is only one of the options when using a cloud model.
Part of the problem is when Schmidt says "cloud", people automatically think that he (and everyone else) is talking about a Google-owned cloud. It may be what he's thinking about, but many of the other cloud providers have other models in mind.
You should go back in time to tell NASA not to call it a launch pad. And tell Sikorsky to be sure it doesn't get called a landing pad or helicopter pad. Might want to warn the cryptographers to call it something else than a one-time pad. Oh, don't forget Star Trek and their PADD.
I was right with you, then you kind of lost the whole argument there at the end.
He has more courage in a few skin cells than a piece of shit like you has in an entire body.
Being brave is not the same as being a hero. Maybe most people would agree that Manning is very brave. However, being a hero suggests that the brave person pursues a laudable goal. Whether Manning's actions were praiseworthy is a questions on which people's opinions vary widely.
Facebook can do whatever the fuck they want. Ultimately, it is their site, so why would you get your panties in a bunch over what was deleted? If facebook "censors" you, it is really of no consequence. Just take your ball and go home if you don't like it. This is not like the government censoring you, or anything of the sort.
Stop whining over what Facebook or twitter deletes or "censors". Its really none of our business. You have no right to tell them what is right or wrong to delete.
I partly agree with the parent. It's reasonable for Facebook to control the algorithms and decisions that affect what content may appear on their site.
On the other hand, various governments may not entirely share this view due to issues around privacy, users' rights to control "their" information, and possibly other concerns.
Congress has been granted zero authority to forbid [internal domestic] travel by airplane or train, or car, or wagon. Read Amendments 9 and 10.
I imagine some would interpret this as meaning, "I want to believe this is true, so it must be true."
This is what happens when you kill the federalist system and replace it with a central oligarchy that exercises power without limits. You lose freedom as the voice of the People is no longer heard in the thousand-mile distant capitol city, and the central leadership cares more about gaining power than service to their bosses (us).
And this might be interpreted as, "Evidence of this is that things opposing with what I want are an examples of the decline of our country."
On the other hand, it is likely that a large number of people would share the point of view expressed.
Where I live, the electric utility's reliability is... less than perfect. If your hardware can't withstand the stress, you either don't have the right hardware, or you need a UPS. Nobody suggested killing the power as a good way to shut down a system; only as a last resort measure.
On the other hand, if your laptop or other mobile device can't withstand having the power cord removed, it is broken.
Most computers either have a physical power switch on the power supply, or are designed to switch to battery when the power cord is removed (perfectly normal, safe behaviour for a laptop, tablet, mobile phone, etc.)
A system should be able to survive a power outage of the sort caused by "yanking the power cord", turning off the power strip, etc. If you have components that can't survive that, you need a UPS, or a new computer.
Slashdot Mirror
The thing about encryption is that it isn't so much a "safe", it's more analogous to a private citizen having their own moon on which to store valuables.
It is more akin to speaking and writing everything in your own private language, and forcing the police to determine how to translate that language.
More like writing everything in a private language that even you don't understand, but you have the key to the machine that generates the translation.
Actually, it is more akin to writing everything in a secret code that only you understand. One that is well designed and difficult to execute a ciphertext-only attack on. Should the government be able to demand that a defendant translate that secret code for them?
No. It is more akin to writing everything in a secret code that even you don't understand, but you have the key to the machine that generates the translation.
I dare you to explain to someone, in person, the difference between speaking the word "google" instead of "googol". I imagine it goes like this:
"But when I said the O-L googol, you knew I meant 10^100, instead of the name of an information search company, right?"
Nationalism and racism are for people who have nothing to be personally proud about.
Eep. Apt observation, but rather frightening, when you think about how many people don't have anything to be personally proud about.
Fortunately for me, I'm personally proud having constructed this grammatically correct English sentence, so I'm cool.
DOH!
Interesting. If these companies are licensing patents, isn't it law that those be disclosed on the "credits" screen or something??? I thought if an item sold had a patent on it it legally MUST have the number on it to be valid. As these companies are essentially paying for a license, there should be a page crediting these Microsoft patents.
Best of my understanding: Nope. It's not like trademarks, where you have to actively defend the mark in order to retain the rights to the mark.
As the patent holder, you can let everyone in the world use your invention for free with zero acknowledgement of your genius, or you can go around demanding payment with a pinky at the corner of your mouth. Your mileage will vary based on real-world conditions and the geothermal activity of your volcano hideout.
The question you allude to is whether the expectation of privacy by the people running open wifi is "reasonable". For most people who understands the technology, it is NOT reasonable to expect that someone will not read unencrypted traffic broadcast in public. Whether that means that the court would find that the general public's expectation of privacy is not reasonable is unclear.
However, that is not what this suit is about. This is about money, and trying to do anything possible to damage Google's reputation.
By complying with Taiwanese law instead of continuing to violate it? Not sure how that qualifies as doing evil.
Oh, by the way, the Google motto "Don't be evil".
I experience the memory footprint problem also. It may be the sites I'm using are very heavyweight and remain in the cache, but it would be great to see some kind of graph that shows what memory is being used by which tabs, or is unreasonably persisting in the cache.
Aren't these version updates suggested for download when the browser starts? (I don't know, since I got my FF5 from an Ubuntu update, not direct from Mozilla.) If you aren't connected to the Internet, or if you have a very slow internet connection, I could see the problem, but I expect regular updates for my browser. If I don't get regular browser updates, then I worry about security issues.
I'm afraid "those ********" are a significant percentage of the population. Curiously, talking on the phone while driving produces a similar quality of driving to intoxication. The difference is that driving while intoxicated mostly occurs in the late evening, but driving while on the phone happens all darn day.
In the same way that a female cow is called a "cow", and a male cow is called a "bull". Generically, they are cows (or kine, but only if you're really, really old). Yeah, there's "cattle", too, but that's totally different etymology.
I will follow the rules of Ms. Deambrose's class.
I will follow the rules of Ms. Deambrose's class.
I will follow the rules of Ms. Deambrose's class.
I will follow the rules of Ms. Deambrose's class.
I will follow the rules of Ms. Deambrose's class.
I will follow the rules of Ms. Deambrose's class.
Didn't do shit for me.
Perhpas it wasn't supposed to do anything for YOU.
Yeah, but Texas has no income tax, and housing is affordable.
But you do have to put up with 2 groups of jerks:
a sizable portion of the texas population (and even a bigger chunk of elected/appointed officials)
the rest of the country who constantly trys to put *everyone* in texas in that group
You like the results, even happy to benefit from the results, but you *don't* like the ideas & policies that accomplished them, nor the people that saw that those ideas and policies were implemented?
I just don't know what can possibly be said, faced with such a critical-logic disconnect.
Strat
there's no indication that the person you're responding to 1) lives in Texas, 2) benefits from these policies, or 3) likes "the results".
Furthermore, nothing the Texas government has done (as far as I can tell) has helped housing prices remain relatively reasonable, aside from turning a blind eye to the employment of undocumented aliens as labor.
The tax structure in Texas is a mess, as is the legislative model, where basically every state law requires an ammendment to the state constitution. Furthermore, the state of Texas is facing a $27 billion budget deficit. Implying that the Texas legislature and governor are anything remotely resembling a model of responsible policy is thoroughly unconvincing.
Yeah, projects with dorky names don't go anywhere.
There is no "the cloud". This is a terminology problem. People may use a cloud deployment model "internally" (wholly controlled by their own IT department) or "externally" (wholly managed by a third party), or a third-party hosted, completed separate infrastructure model.
People hear "cloud" and mostly think "someone else owns the infrastructure". As many others have noted, this is only one of the options when using a cloud model.
Part of the problem is when Schmidt says "cloud", people automatically think that he (and everyone else) is talking about a Google-owned cloud. It may be what he's thinking about, but many of the other cloud providers have other models in mind.
The original IBM "Think pad" was a pad of paper with the word "THINK" printed on every page. The computer brand was a nod to that history.
And here, I notice that my recollection is mistaken, according to my own source... "THINK" was on the cover, not necessarily the pages.
The original IBM "Think pad" was a pad of paper with the word "THINK" printed on every page. The computer brand was a nod to that history.
You should go back in time to tell NASA not to call it a launch pad. And tell Sikorsky to be sure it doesn't get called a landing pad or helicopter pad. Might want to warn the cryptographers to call it something else than a one-time pad. Oh, don't forget Star Trek and their PADD.
I was right with you, then you kind of lost the whole argument there at the end.
He sure as hell is.
He has more courage in a few skin cells than a piece of shit like you has in an entire body.
Being brave is not the same as being a hero. Maybe most people would agree that Manning is very brave. However, being a hero suggests that the brave person pursues a laudable goal. Whether Manning's actions were praiseworthy is a questions on which people's opinions vary widely.
Facebook can do whatever the fuck they want. Ultimately, it is their site, so why would you get your panties in a bunch over what was deleted?
If facebook "censors" you, it is really of no consequence. Just take your ball and go home if you don't like it. This is not like the government censoring you, or anything of the sort.
Stop whining over what Facebook or twitter deletes or "censors". Its really none of our business. You have no right to tell them what is right or wrong to delete.
I partly agree with the parent. It's reasonable for Facebook to control the algorithms and decisions that affect what content may appear on their site.
On the other hand, various governments may not entirely share this view due to issues around privacy, users' rights to control "their" information, and possibly other concerns.
FIX:
Congress has been granted zero authority to forbid [internal domestic] travel by airplane or train, or car, or wagon. Read Amendments 9 and 10.
I imagine some would interpret this as meaning, "I want to believe this is true, so it must be true."
This is what happens when you kill the federalist system and replace it with a central oligarchy that exercises power without limits. You lose freedom as the voice of the People is no longer heard in the thousand-mile distant capitol city, and the central leadership cares more about gaining power than service to their bosses (us).
And this might be interpreted as, "Evidence of this is that things opposing with what I want are an examples of the decline of our country."
On the other hand, it is likely that a large number of people would share the point of view expressed.
Have you read the law so you can reasonably speculate whether people would support it?
Where I live, the electric utility's reliability is... less than perfect. If your hardware can't withstand the stress, you either don't have the right hardware, or you need a UPS. Nobody suggested killing the power as a good way to shut down a system; only as a last resort measure.
On the other hand, if your laptop or other mobile device can't withstand having the power cord removed, it is broken.
Zuck is always glad to add value to a discussion. :-)
Most computers either have a physical power switch on the power supply, or are designed to switch to battery when the power cord is removed (perfectly normal, safe behaviour for a laptop, tablet, mobile phone, etc.)
A system should be able to survive a power outage of the sort caused by "yanking the power cord", turning off the power strip, etc. If you have components that can't survive that, you need a UPS, or a new computer.