The MPAA isn't the judicial branch, they don't get to be a judge and jury in these cases, they are the plaintiff. Nor are they the legislative branch, if they want to write a law, they need to buy off their congressman like they always have before. And the ISP isn't a police force, they are a witness and vendor to the defendant. If the MPAA wants to enforce penalties like this, use the legal system that already exists rather than acting like the mafia and enforcing their own laws with their own judge and their own police force.
Regardless, I don't see what reason the ISPs would have to work with the MPAA, it's against their financial best interest to eliminate consumers. And it's against the better interest of society to have laws that permanently cut off individuals from the internet, this has become a basic necessity in modern life, not unlike electricity made its transition to necessity in the last century. Anyone that cannot legally use the internet would be much more likely to be unemployed, possibly homeless and a burden on the local society.
If an ISP chooses to enforce these policies, they should immediately lose any local monopoly on providing internet service, open up the area to competition, possibly municipal internet. And ISPs should become liable for denial of service for any reason that is not legally recognized and where an individual was never convicted of a crime. It would be nice if the government found a few laws that the MPAA violated just for attempting to get a policy like this through, discrimination against individuals, anti-trust, extortion, etc.
"Cooley said the story began in late summer when the Secretary of State’s Office received a request from the Georgia Department of Revenue. The state agency, he said, wanted regular voter files plus something not given out to the public: voters’ Social Security numbers, birth dates and driver’s license numbers."
I can understand voter records including an address and birth date (verifying someone is old enough to vote and in the right precinct, and easier distinguishing between multiple people in a home with the same or similar name). But why do voter records need to include social security numbers and drivers license numbers? And why does the department of revenue need to see a list of voters? You should be able to vote without driving a car, social security numbers should only be used for social security and taxes, and voting shouldn't come with the threat of a government auditor showing up at your door. If the information isn't tracked and stored, then it can't be leaked or abused.
Civilian pilots is what they call the CIA and other members of the intelligence community. Lots of the spy planes of past eras were piloted by "civilians". Sounds to me like an awkward phrasing of "the CIA negotiated some air time in our drones" with the phrasing designed to distract from what's actually happening and instead creating a debate about a completely different topic.
Then again, the intelligence agencies already have plenty of drones and that's no secret, so it's entirely possible I'm wearing too much tin foil.
... not exploiting existing ones, at least not intentionally. This is a requirement for places like financial firms that have to show there was no insider trading going on, so phone calls and messaging systems have to have full logs. Every other system is simply banned for compliance. So if Slack wants to be used in those companies, they have to have this capability.
Seems like a story of company expansion more than privacy being exploited, but of course, like others say, if it's not on your computer, don't assume that it's private.
But I still agree with others, the NASA designs are over engineered, designed by committee for maximum vendor usage so jobs get created in as many states as possible, making it difficult for Congress to cut their budget.
That's a terrible analogy. Email is paid by each end of the connection paying their ISP for the network and possibly mail server access, and the sender being willing to do the work of creating the email for free (or getting paid through an outside mechanism). Contrast that with youtube where the provider of the video needs to make some money to keep their lights on and pay for their end of the network traffic. Either you have ads to pay for the other end of that network connection, hosting fees, and the content creator, or you need to workout a subscription or micropayment system.
Besides, SPAM works completely outside of the email payment system by frequently hijacking a host with malware and use their resources to send the junk. Ads, on the other hand, pay the person that is providing the service or content, and are only pushed to you when you request the content. Don't want to see an ad? Then don't go to an ad supported website. Don't want to see SPAM? Sorry, there's no easy opt out for that.
Same here, still waiting for my identity verification.
Got all the way to the "verifying identity" step a week or two after launch and have been stuck there ever since. Sent in my drivers license and SSN scans and never heard back. All I received (before my ID had a chance to be verified) was a file called "IndentityProfingFailureNotice.pdf" (sic) that cannot be opened. It's been over a month waiting for them to check my credentials. Apparently I have a message according to a banner that I can close, but I don't see anywhere on the site to check messages.
Unfortunately, since I applied during the initial rush, the phone number to the 3rd party credit reporting bureau was not taking any calls, and I'm not longer able to use that method to verify my identity. And I still question why the credit reporting bureau thought I had pets that I'd taken to a vet and a phone number on the other side of the state. Seems like they were mixing up my identity with someone else. (Yes I check my credit reports for identity theft, nothing there. And you can't report a bad security question to the bureaus, at least not that I can see.)
That's the goal of far too much legislation. This way law enforcement always has something they can charge people with that they don't like and lets everyone else go about their business. We no longer have a "rule of law" in this country, we have a "rule of staying on law enforcement's good side." In all likelihood, you committed 3 felonies yesterday and will do so again today:
It must be terrible to have to constantly pay more and feel like your getting less and less in return.
Welcome to the life of every tax payer, cable TV subscriber, health insurance purchaser, etc. I feel both the laugher of irony and the sorrow of more wasted tax payer dollars when private companies turn things around and "tax" the government.
This isn't designed to stop the determined thief, there will still be plenty of piracy. Instead, it's designed to maximize profits from average users. Friends no longer let other friends borrow a copy of their book like they would have done with a physical book, because they are afraid that it could get shared publicly.
It's not so different from how dvd DRM isn't to stop people from making copies of movies, it's to prevent the manufacturers of players from adding features that customers would like, such as region free playing and the ability to skip ads at the beginning of the disk.
In both cases, criminals can easily do what they've always done, but the law abiding users are less and less able to use the product in ways that used to be legal.
If you really want to "destroy an industry" then allow self driving vehicles to replace cab services. People could subscribe to a car service or pay per use to have a car when they need it. The cars would automatically recharge when not needed, automatically deploy to areas of high demand, be callable with a smart phone app and station themselves at predetermined locations for non-app users. Google can integrate voice commands, local search, maps, and their field trip app so there isn't even a need to talk to a cab driver again.
When cab drivers are finding alternate ways to get customers, you've altered an industry. When cab drivers are looking for a different career, you've destroyed an industry.
Did TFA intentionally use a 10 point font that's too small for older people to read on this article? Maybe I'm getting too old, but I was cont-+'ing that a half dozen times so I wouldn't have to use a magnifying glass.
I've been with them for 2 years without a contract (they used to hide the option in the past, and they didn't allow you to pay for the phone over time). Not once have they changed my plan, features, or my monthly charges. The only thing that changed was my 3rd party insurance plan reduced their coverage.
The great thing about T-Mobile phones from 2 years ago was that they weren't crippled. They allowed the portable wifi hotspot feature out of the box, without any extra charge. And they included a "call out over wifi" option for people in a bad coverage area (though that didn't fix incoming calls).
Nearly every crime involves transportation and communication. This is less of a story about how cybercrime is a threat and we should all unplug from the dangerous internet and worry about the next attack on a major utility company. Rather it's a realization that technology is an extension of our lives now, everything is impacted by it, and that's no different for criminals.
When corporations keep record profits internally and pay their people minimum wage, we scream that it's not fair and they need to pay their employees more. When they pay no taxes because they paid their employees with large stock options, they aren't paying their fair share, even though the marginal rate for employees is typically higher than the tax rate of a corporation. And contrary to the implications of the article, stock options do cost the company something, they cost the company the future ability to use those shares of the company to raise investor funds.
This all said, I do agree there's an inherent unfairness to small businesses who can't easily utilize international laws to move profits to a location where corporate income isn't taxed. But unless you're trying to move more business out of the US, I don't agree that the right answer is to force companies to pay taxes on foreign income. Rather, we should be doing more to eliminate red tape and other barriers to entry faced by people that want to start a company and hire people.
Hardcoded initial passwords should never be used for anything other than the first access to a device (after a reset) to configure it with the customers own password and settings. It should also not be usable from any public facing interfaces, but that's a side issue. This is no different from being given a temporary password and told to change it when you first login to a computer or web site.
Leaving default passwords, even if they are unique per device, exposes the security risk that someone will discover those passwords. With unique passwords, all someone needs to find is the database or printing records used to create all those unique labels, or they can discover an algorithm used to generate the unique passwords. Once hacked, unique passwords provide only marginally better security than identical default passwords, but they create a bigger issue because of the false sense of security they have given users that assume they are secure.
Google: What will it take to get this app in the app store?
Apple: It would take an act of Congress. ... some time later...
Apple: It was a figure of speech!
You don't register with a party in my state, but my neighbor still has a list of names and addresses to visit when she canvases the neighborhood. I'm pretty sure they just note which primary elections you vote in, and since Democrats have been incumbents lately, I've been classified as a Republican. I vote in every primary in the false hope of blocking the extreme right and left wings from getting on the ballot.
Not only should we make someone's vote secret, we should also make it secret whether they voted at all.
You have to look at the intention of the monopoly and the competition they face. When the bundling of IE happened, there was no desktop OS competition. All they had was the competition of moving the desktop into the browser, and MS wanted to be sure that they controlled that migration and limited it to their browser. Their competition was Netscape and their intention was to eliminate this competition by bundling and keeping their product "free."
When you look at the AV space, MS doesn't face competition from the AV vendors, they are helping their product work safer. Their competition is from Apple in the consumer space, Linux in the server space, and Google in the mobile and cloud space. Adding AV to their OS is an attempt to compete in the market, not to eliminate their competition of AV vendors.
That said, it will be interesting to see if and how 3rd party AV vendors will be allowed to replace the built-in AV.
Admit that you'll never know if anyone's name online is their real name, let them put whatever name they want, but then limit what they can do until they build up some reputation.
If they are a new user, don't let them run around spamming on everyone else's posts and throttle the number of activities they can take until it's been verified by other more trusted members. Allow people to flag posts or identities as spam, and follow up with moderators (or even algorithms analyzing the flags) to suspend or outright ban the offender.
Can you even access the pull down the activate USB mass-storage mode when the phone is locked?
Yes you can activate the USB without unlocking the phone, at least that's the case on my G2. But this only gives access to the SD card, which you have physical access to anyway (remove battery, pull SD card, mount with any adapter). The device's internal memory is another case, and may be protected when the screen is locked and development mode is disabled, but I personally wouldn't trust this lock. An obvious first step for anyone that is paranoid is having a remote-wipe capability.
To every inquiry, it will answer you in the form of a question, just like every other sales and support person I've worked with. Doesn't seem much different to me.
Maybe now all the established security vendors will create a decent offering that works over IP, rather than plugging their old technology into a voip box. I wouldn't trust my home security to Comcast, but the established security vendors need to upgrade their products off of telephone modem technology badly.
If you were on IP, a simple "ping" could be run periodically to make sure you haven't had your connection cut. And you can get more advanced, like viewing the status on a web page (we already have banking online, so this can be done right) or getting a feed of the audio and video during a break-in to give police a heads up if it's a likely false alarm or send pictures of the criminal so police know who to look for. The alerts would also be sent faster, and can be encrypted over IP, rather than waiting for the modem to dial out.
In a statement released on the Kremlin's website on Thursday, Medvedev instructed the country's communications ministry to draw up amendments "aimed at allowing authors to let an unlimited number of people use their content on the basis of free licensing."
So before they didn't allow authors to use free licenses?
And as much as I'd hope that Russia is relaxing copyright for the greater benefit, I'm pretty sure this is the same as it's always been for nations that are below the top. Mainly, those on top try to stay there with strict IP laws, and all the other nations have lax enforcement and laws to make it cheaper to compete and catch up. The US did it while we were a developing nation, China and India do it today, so it's no surprise if Russia goes this direction if they see themselves falling behind.
So far, the NOVA summary is on target. In addition to the pitot tubes freezing, which is an obvious design flaw, it sounds like the pilots reacted improperly to the loss of speed data.
Slashdot Mirror
The MPAA isn't the judicial branch, they don't get to be a judge and jury in these cases, they are the plaintiff. Nor are they the legislative branch, if they want to write a law, they need to buy off their congressman like they always have before. And the ISP isn't a police force, they are a witness and vendor to the defendant. If the MPAA wants to enforce penalties like this, use the legal system that already exists rather than acting like the mafia and enforcing their own laws with their own judge and their own police force.
Regardless, I don't see what reason the ISPs would have to work with the MPAA, it's against their financial best interest to eliminate consumers. And it's against the better interest of society to have laws that permanently cut off individuals from the internet, this has become a basic necessity in modern life, not unlike electricity made its transition to necessity in the last century. Anyone that cannot legally use the internet would be much more likely to be unemployed, possibly homeless and a burden on the local society.
If an ISP chooses to enforce these policies, they should immediately lose any local monopoly on providing internet service, open up the area to competition, possibly municipal internet. And ISPs should become liable for denial of service for any reason that is not legally recognized and where an individual was never convicted of a crime. It would be nice if the government found a few laws that the MPAA violated just for attempting to get a policy like this through, discrimination against individuals, anti-trust, extortion, etc.
"Cooley said the story began in late summer when the Secretary of State’s Office received a request from the Georgia Department of Revenue. The state agency, he said, wanted regular voter files plus something not given out to the public: voters’ Social Security numbers, birth dates and driver’s license numbers."
I can understand voter records including an address and birth date (verifying someone is old enough to vote and in the right precinct, and easier distinguishing between multiple people in a home with the same or similar name). But why do voter records need to include social security numbers and drivers license numbers? And why does the department of revenue need to see a list of voters? You should be able to vote without driving a car, social security numbers should only be used for social security and taxes, and voting shouldn't come with the threat of a government auditor showing up at your door. If the information isn't tracked and stored, then it can't be leaked or abused.
Civilian pilots is what they call the CIA and other members of the intelligence community. Lots of the spy planes of past eras were piloted by "civilians". Sounds to me like an awkward phrasing of "the CIA negotiated some air time in our drones" with the phrasing designed to distract from what's actually happening and instead creating a debate about a completely different topic.
Then again, the intelligence agencies already have plenty of drones and that's no secret, so it's entirely possible I'm wearing too much tin foil.
... not exploiting existing ones, at least not intentionally. This is a requirement for places like financial firms that have to show there was no insider trading going on, so phone calls and messaging systems have to have full logs. Every other system is simply banned for compliance. So if Slack wants to be used in those companies, they have to have this capability.
Seems like a story of company expansion more than privacy being exploited, but of course, like others say, if it's not on your computer, don't assume that it's private.
At least it's not the Rube Goldberg design of MLAS...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
But I still agree with others, the NASA designs are over engineered, designed by committee for maximum vendor usage so jobs get created in as many states as possible, making it difficult for Congress to cut their budget.
That's a terrible analogy. Email is paid by each end of the connection paying their ISP for the network and possibly mail server access, and the sender being willing to do the work of creating the email for free (or getting paid through an outside mechanism). Contrast that with youtube where the provider of the video needs to make some money to keep their lights on and pay for their end of the network traffic. Either you have ads to pay for the other end of that network connection, hosting fees, and the content creator, or you need to workout a subscription or micropayment system.
Besides, SPAM works completely outside of the email payment system by frequently hijacking a host with malware and use their resources to send the junk. Ads, on the other hand, pay the person that is providing the service or content, and are only pushed to you when you request the content. Don't want to see an ad? Then don't go to an ad supported website. Don't want to see SPAM? Sorry, there's no easy opt out for that.
Same here, still waiting for my identity verification.
Got all the way to the "verifying identity" step a week or two after launch and have been stuck there ever since. Sent in my drivers license and SSN scans and never heard back. All I received (before my ID had a chance to be verified) was a file called "IndentityProfingFailureNotice.pdf" (sic) that cannot be opened. It's been over a month waiting for them to check my credentials. Apparently I have a message according to a banner that I can close, but I don't see anywhere on the site to check messages.
Unfortunately, since I applied during the initial rush, the phone number to the 3rd party credit reporting bureau was not taking any calls, and I'm not longer able to use that method to verify my identity. And I still question why the credit reporting bureau thought I had pets that I'd taken to a vet and a phone number on the other side of the state. Seems like they were mixing up my identity with someone else. (Yes I check my credit reports for identity theft, nothing there. And you can't report a bad security question to the bureaus, at least not that I can see.)
That's the goal of far too much legislation. This way law enforcement always has something they can charge people with that they don't like and lets everyone else go about their business. We no longer have a "rule of law" in this country, we have a "rule of staying on law enforcement's good side." In all likelihood, you committed 3 felonies yesterday and will do so again today:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704471504574438900830760842.html
When I see my local politicians doing this, it just shows how much they like the current setup:
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/06/ken-cuccinelli-virginia-oral-anal-sex-sodomy
It must be terrible to have to constantly pay more and feel like your getting less and less in return.
Welcome to the life of every tax payer, cable TV subscriber, health insurance purchaser, etc. I feel both the laugher of irony and the sorrow of more wasted tax payer dollars when private companies turn things around and "tax" the government.
This isn't designed to stop the determined thief, there will still be plenty of piracy. Instead, it's designed to maximize profits from average users. Friends no longer let other friends borrow a copy of their book like they would have done with a physical book, because they are afraid that it could get shared publicly.
It's not so different from how dvd DRM isn't to stop people from making copies of movies, it's to prevent the manufacturers of players from adding features that customers would like, such as region free playing and the ability to skip ads at the beginning of the disk.
In both cases, criminals can easily do what they've always done, but the law abiding users are less and less able to use the product in ways that used to be legal.
If you really want to "destroy an industry" then allow self driving vehicles to replace cab services. People could subscribe to a car service or pay per use to have a car when they need it. The cars would automatically recharge when not needed, automatically deploy to areas of high demand, be callable with a smart phone app and station themselves at predetermined locations for non-app users. Google can integrate voice commands, local search, maps, and their field trip app so there isn't even a need to talk to a cab driver again.
When cab drivers are finding alternate ways to get customers, you've altered an industry. When cab drivers are looking for a different career, you've destroyed an industry.
Did TFA intentionally use a 10 point font that's too small for older people to read on this article? Maybe I'm getting too old, but I was cont-+'ing that a half dozen times so I wouldn't have to use a magnifying glass.
I've been with them for 2 years without a contract (they used to hide the option in the past, and they didn't allow you to pay for the phone over time). Not once have they changed my plan, features, or my monthly charges. The only thing that changed was my 3rd party insurance plan reduced their coverage.
The great thing about T-Mobile phones from 2 years ago was that they weren't crippled. They allowed the portable wifi hotspot feature out of the box, without any extra charge. And they included a "call out over wifi" option for people in a bad coverage area (though that didn't fix incoming calls).
Nearly every crime involves transportation and communication. This is less of a story about how cybercrime is a threat and we should all unplug from the dangerous internet and worry about the next attack on a major utility company. Rather it's a realization that technology is an extension of our lives now, everything is impacted by it, and that's no different for criminals.
When corporations keep record profits internally and pay their people minimum wage, we scream that it's not fair and they need to pay their employees more. When they pay no taxes because they paid their employees with large stock options, they aren't paying their fair share, even though the marginal rate for employees is typically higher than the tax rate of a corporation. And contrary to the implications of the article, stock options do cost the company something, they cost the company the future ability to use those shares of the company to raise investor funds.
This all said, I do agree there's an inherent unfairness to small businesses who can't easily utilize international laws to move profits to a location where corporate income isn't taxed. But unless you're trying to move more business out of the US, I don't agree that the right answer is to force companies to pay taxes on foreign income. Rather, we should be doing more to eliminate red tape and other barriers to entry faced by people that want to start a company and hire people.
Hardcoded initial passwords should never be used for anything other than the first access to a device (after a reset) to configure it with the customers own password and settings. It should also not be usable from any public facing interfaces, but that's a side issue. This is no different from being given a temporary password and told to change it when you first login to a computer or web site.
Leaving default passwords, even if they are unique per device, exposes the security risk that someone will discover those passwords. With unique passwords, all someone needs to find is the database or printing records used to create all those unique labels, or they can discover an algorithm used to generate the unique passwords. Once hacked, unique passwords provide only marginally better security than identical default passwords, but they create a bigger issue because of the false sense of security they have given users that assume they are secure.
Google: What will it take to get this app in the app store?
... some time later ...
Apple: It would take an act of Congress.
Apple: It was a figure of speech!
You don't register with a party in my state, but my neighbor still has a list of names and addresses to visit when she canvases the neighborhood. I'm pretty sure they just note which primary elections you vote in, and since Democrats have been incumbents lately, I've been classified as a Republican. I vote in every primary in the false hope of blocking the extreme right and left wings from getting on the ballot.
Not only should we make someone's vote secret, we should also make it secret whether they voted at all.
You have to look at the intention of the monopoly and the competition they face. When the bundling of IE happened, there was no desktop OS competition. All they had was the competition of moving the desktop into the browser, and MS wanted to be sure that they controlled that migration and limited it to their browser. Their competition was Netscape and their intention was to eliminate this competition by bundling and keeping their product "free."
When you look at the AV space, MS doesn't face competition from the AV vendors, they are helping their product work safer. Their competition is from Apple in the consumer space, Linux in the server space, and Google in the mobile and cloud space. Adding AV to their OS is an attempt to compete in the market, not to eliminate their competition of AV vendors.
That said, it will be interesting to see if and how 3rd party AV vendors will be allowed to replace the built-in AV.
Admit that you'll never know if anyone's name online is their real name, let them put whatever name they want, but then limit what they can do until they build up some reputation.
If they are a new user, don't let them run around spamming on everyone else's posts and throttle the number of activities they can take until it's been verified by other more trusted members. Allow people to flag posts or identities as spam, and follow up with moderators (or even algorithms analyzing the flags) to suspend or outright ban the offender.
There's no need to reinvent the wheel here.
Yes you can activate the USB without unlocking the phone, at least that's the case on my G2. But this only gives access to the SD card, which you have physical access to anyway (remove battery, pull SD card, mount with any adapter). The device's internal memory is another case, and may be protected when the screen is locked and development mode is disabled, but I personally wouldn't trust this lock. An obvious first step for anyone that is paranoid is having a remote-wipe capability.
To every inquiry, it will answer you in the form of a question, just like every other sales and support person I've worked with. Doesn't seem much different to me.
Maybe now all the established security vendors will create a decent offering that works over IP, rather than plugging their old technology into a voip box. I wouldn't trust my home security to Comcast, but the established security vendors need to upgrade their products off of telephone modem technology badly.
If you were on IP, a simple "ping" could be run periodically to make sure you haven't had your connection cut. And you can get more advanced, like viewing the status on a web page (we already have banking online, so this can be done right) or getting a feed of the audio and video during a break-in to give police a heads up if it's a likely false alarm or send pictures of the criminal so police know who to look for. The alerts would also be sent faster, and can be encrypted over IP, rather than waiting for the modem to dial out.
So before they didn't allow authors to use free licenses?
And as much as I'd hope that Russia is relaxing copyright for the greater benefit, I'm pretty sure this is the same as it's always been for nations that are below the top. Mainly, those on top try to stay there with strict IP laws, and all the other nations have lax enforcement and laws to make it cheaper to compete and catch up. The US did it while we were a developing nation, China and India do it today, so it's no surprise if Russia goes this direction if they see themselves falling behind.
So far, the NOVA summary is on target. In addition to the pitot tubes freezing, which is an obvious design flaw, it sounds like the pilots reacted improperly to the loss of speed data.