Bzzz, wrong. Tens (perhaps even hundreds) of thousands were protesting. Two hundred were arrested.
How would you feel after getting arrested for DUI if law enforcement searched through you entire house
I'd feel crappy about DUI...
If private data is irrelevant to the crime
Ah, but it is relevant! For example, did these people start to riot spontaneously, or were some of them part of conspiracy? And, in the latter case, who else was part of the same conspiracy — even if they weren't arrested? This is, how organized crime-rings are broken up — and there is nothing wrong about it.
It is a perfectly valid and legitimate investigation, and to denounce it in any way you have to approve of the rioting in the first place...
then it's fucking irrelevant, and privacy should be protected.
Yep. And that's what the Fourth Amendment protects. If they wish to search my house after a DUI, they'll need to convince a judge of the high probability of their cause.
But police talking to Facebook is not a search. It is a normal investigation, where police may talk to your associates, friends, neighbors, landlord, etc.
If you are connected to two or more, you are likely going onto a watchlist.
Sounds sensible to me, but I sense, you meant to imply, it is somehow wrong. I guess, it depends on what the list is then used for. If, as "Antifa" are doing, it will be used to "alert" employers of the employees' political activities, it would be dangerous, but I strongly doubt that both a) that's what you were concerned about; b) that's what DC police will do.
Could you elaborate?
I suggest getting a Trump/Pence bumper sticker just to be safe.
Unlike in certain 2nd and 3rd-world countries, where police could (indeed, are) used by the powerful not to fight real crimes, but to suppress political opposition, this is rarely the case in the US in general, and certainly not the case in TFA.
Thus the negative connotations of the verb "rat" are misplaced.
So don't use Facebook if you don't want its database wielded against you.
Not just Facebook — if you are planning to burn a bystander's car, or smash a store-front, or throw a brick at someone, the very Earth should burn under your feet and the Internet too should reject you. Such folks are neither "brave" nor are they "heroes" — they are scumbags abusing the liberties this country affords political protesters.
A number of crimes (including violent ones) have been committed, which the relevant law-enforcement agency(ies) are duly investigating. They have detained some suspects and are collecting evidence. What's so outrageous or even particularly newsworthy about this?
My Personal file server is software RAID-5 with a hot spare and a replacement drive on the shelf
While it is, indeed, prudent to keep a cold spare on the shelf, wasting a slot in your enclosure for a "hot spare" is just that — a waste. Here is my proof of it, but you can find other people telling you the same thing.
It is extremely unlikely, that a second disk will randomly die on you during those few hours it will take you to replace the first one with your cold spare and for the array to rebuild. What you want to avoid is correlated failures — when multiple drives fail for the same reason (such as a firmware bug, manufacturing defect, or an environmental factor — like heat).
But having a hot spare online is not helping against that either — buy drives from different manufacturers, different models, and from different batches.
Oh, and if by "software RAID-5" you mean anything other than ZFS (RAID-Z), then you really ought to upgrade.
The ships themselves need to be sentient for that to work, I think. Besides, even in Banks' creation, different civilizations have very different approaches to ship-naming. And the humanity from Earth is decidedly not part of Culture.
Software is much easier to change than hardware, is not it? Or should be?..
Anyway, the problem I intended to underline is the dubious choice of the plugin to survive — why Flash? What process was used to pick Flash, and how will the choice be enforced — the questions, that remain unanswered.
How do you enforce such an exception? By filename? By some kind of digital key?
And why pick Flash? I don't use it (there is no FreeBSD-variant), but I do use the Java-plugin to control an old (but still nicely functional) network switch. Did Adobe pay the Mozilla Foundation to retain the exception — while Oracle refused to pay for Java?
Anyway, hopefully, it will remain possible to disable the "feature" at compile-time...
So please explain, if the hypothetical device existed, what protection from self-incrimination anyone would have.
Why, obviously, you still can not be compelled to testify against yourself. Your objections smack of equivocation — you declare this and that to be "tantamount" to a testimony and protest..
That police may be able, due to advances in technology, to obtain evidence through means other than testimony does not change this. You attempted to dismiss my example of fingerprints before, but the distinction between something you know and something you have is without difference in this context. Advances in DNA-analysis is another major step from fingerprints to the hypothetical brain-reading.
Contrary to the perception of some, the Bill of Rights is not designed to help criminals "beat the system". Its purpose is to prevent police abuses. So, if you wish to argue against certain practices, you need to show evidence of (or potential for) new abuse. And I fail to see, how scanning my brain — if, indeed, it can be done without damage to the organ — is any more abuse-prone, than reading my INBOX or watching videos on my phone.
Come to think of it, my e-mail archives (since 1993) may contain stuff I've long forgotten! "Russian hackers" wishing to sabotage my election-campaign, for example, are likely to find juicier bits in there than in my brain...
Would a 4th amendment search of the memories in someone's brain be OK?
Yes, absolutely — as long as it can be done without undue damage to the person. The memories you have in your head are no different from those you recorded into a diary.
Trump and his wonderful deregulations just announced today that Cable providers don't need to do this. I have to wonder if Comcast was aware of this before their announcement?
Seriously, you think, Comcast, which spends millions of dollars lobbying various governments, could possibly have been unaware of developments at FCC? Or, more generally, that Comcast, whose CEO played golf with the President, is not benefiting from the barriers to entry imposed by the regulations?
The much more likely explanation is that Comcast, facing competition from the likes of Verizon, is trying to do, what the customers want. And they'll only have to do more of that, if FCC makes it easier for more competition to appear.
Heck, if you want to speculate about a communication-provider making a mistake due to a political miscalculation, take a closer look at Alphabet (Google) freezing its own broadband effort. Google executives were Hillary Clinton to win Presidency (and were actively helping her) and thus had no reasons to expect an improvement of business-climate. Had they known, Ajit Pai will soon become head of FCC, maybe, Google Fiber would've kept expanding...
Slashdot Mirror
Bzzz, wrong. Tens (perhaps even hundreds) of thousands were protesting. Two hundred were arrested.
I'd feel crappy about DUI...
Ah, but it is relevant! For example, did these people start to riot spontaneously, or were some of them part of conspiracy? And, in the latter case, who else was part of the same conspiracy — even if they weren't arrested? This is, how organized crime-rings are broken up — and there is nothing wrong about it.
It is a perfectly valid and legitimate investigation, and to denounce it in any way you have to approve of the rioting in the first place...
Yep. And that's what the Fourth Amendment protects. If they wish to search my house after a DUI, they'll need to convince a judge of the high probability of their cause.
But police talking to Facebook is not a search. It is a normal investigation, where police may talk to your associates, friends, neighbors, landlord, etc.
Sounds sensible to me, but I sense, you meant to imply, it is somehow wrong. I guess, it depends on what the list is then used for. If, as "Antifa" are doing, it will be used to "alert" employers of the employees' political activities, it would be dangerous, but I strongly doubt that both a) that's what you were concerned about; b) that's what DC police will do.
Could you elaborate?
Actually, that'd be an extremely dangerous things to do.
Unlike in certain 2nd and 3rd-world countries, where police could (indeed, are) used by the powerful not to fight real crimes, but to suppress political opposition, this is rarely the case in the US in general, and certainly not the case in TFA.
Thus the negative connotations of the verb "rat" are misplaced.
Not just Facebook — if you are planning to burn a bystander's car, or smash a store-front, or throw a brick at someone, the very Earth should burn under your feet and the Internet too should reject you. Such folks are neither "brave" nor are they "heroes" — they are scumbags abusing the liberties this country affords political protesters.
A number of crimes (including violent ones) have been committed, which the relevant law-enforcement agency(ies) are duly investigating. They have detained some suspects and are collecting evidence. What's so outrageous or even particularly newsworthy about this?
I know, what you meant to say, but what you did say implied, Trump's supporters would've reacted just as violently as Hillary's.
And that just is not true...
While it is, indeed, prudent to keep a cold spare on the shelf, wasting a slot in your enclosure for a "hot spare" is just that — a waste. Here is my proof of it, but you can find other people telling you the same thing.
It is extremely unlikely, that a second disk will randomly die on you during those few hours it will take you to replace the first one with your cold spare and for the array to rebuild. What you want to avoid is correlated failures — when multiple drives fail for the same reason (such as a firmware bug, manufacturing defect, or an environmental factor — like heat).
But having a hot spare online is not helping against that either — buy drives from different manufacturers, different models, and from different batches.
Oh, and if by "software RAID-5" you mean anything other than ZFS (RAID-Z), then you really ought to upgrade.
Are you that afraid of there appearing a Trump-class of ships some day?
It will be huge. And beautiful...
The ships themselves need to be sentient for that to work, I think. Besides, even in Banks' creation, different civilizations have very different approaches to ship-naming. And the humanity from Earth is decidedly not part of Culture.
Software is much easier to change than hardware, is not it? Or should be?..
Anyway, the problem I intended to underline is the dubious choice of the plugin to survive — why Flash? What process was used to pick Flash, and how will the choice be enforced — the questions, that remain unanswered.
You are right, that is the problem! But currently I have a solution for it. A solution, which Mozilla is about to take away...
How do you enforce such an exception? By filename? By some kind of digital key?
And why pick Flash? I don't use it (there is no FreeBSD-variant), but I do use the Java-plugin to control an old (but still nicely functional) network switch. Did Adobe pay the Mozilla Foundation to retain the exception — while Oracle refused to pay for Java?
Anyway, hopefully, it will remain possible to disable the "feature" at compile-time...
Getting thrown off a flight once was not enough for you?
Stay classy, dissenters, stay classy...
It is called "losing an argument". You'll get over it, I promise.
You forgot to call me a Nazi...
Why, obviously, you still can not be compelled to testify against yourself. Your objections smack of equivocation — you declare this and that to be "tantamount" to a testimony and protest..
That police may be able, due to advances in technology, to obtain evidence through means other than testimony does not change this. You attempted to dismiss my example of fingerprints before, but the distinction between something you know and something you have is without difference in this context. Advances in DNA-analysis is another major step from fingerprints to the hypothetical brain-reading.
Contrary to the perception of some, the Bill of Rights is not designed to help criminals "beat the system". Its purpose is to prevent police abuses. So, if you wish to argue against certain practices, you need to show evidence of (or potential for) new abuse. And I fail to see, how scanning my brain — if, indeed, it can be done without damage to the organ — is any more abuse-prone, than reading my INBOX or watching videos on my phone.
Come to think of it, my e-mail archives (since 1993) may contain stuff I've long forgotten! "Russian hackers" wishing to sabotage my election-campaign, for example, are likely to find juicier bits in there than in my brain...
No, it is not. Before you ask, the multiplication table and the Pythagorean theorem remain meaningful too — and just as relevant to the topic at hand.
Yes, absolutely — as long as it can be done without undue damage to the person. The memories you have in your head are no different from those you recorded into a diary.
Do fingerprints?
It seems like the warrant was issued upon probable cause and ...
In full compliance with the Bill of Rights, in other words. Are we supposed to be outraged anyway?
But, at least, a rapist can be expelled from a university on the victim's say-so — without appeal.
But, at least, now we know about this... Because, as I don't mind reminding yet again, dissent is patriotic once more...
Had it become sexist instead last November, things would've remained as they were for 8 more more years...
Well, thank you, Donald J. Trump!!! Oh, wait...
Seriously, you think, Comcast, which spends millions of dollars lobbying various governments, could possibly have been unaware of developments at FCC? Or, more generally, that Comcast, whose CEO played golf with the President, is not benefiting from the barriers to entry imposed by the regulations?
The much more likely explanation is that Comcast, facing competition from the likes of Verizon, is trying to do, what the customers want. And they'll only have to do more of that, if FCC makes it easier for more competition to appear.
Heck, if you want to speculate about a communication-provider making a mistake due to a political miscalculation, take a closer look at Alphabet (Google) freezing its own broadband effort. Google executives were Hillary Clinton to win Presidency (and were actively helping her) and thus had no reasons to expect an improvement of business-climate. Had they known, Ajit Pai will soon become head of FCC, maybe, Google Fiber would've kept expanding...
There, there. How much is Elon Musk paying you for spreading doubts and diverting our attention, while he builds his Elysium over there?
Well, obviously, human activity is responsible — do you want me to draw you a hockey-stick diagram?
Just goes to show, how irresponsible some humans (and RethugliKKKan$ in particular) are about our planet...
And it is going to get worse! Then, when the Earth is unlivable, these billionaires will escape to Mars.