Where freedom refers to the the government being free to fuck you over as much as they want!
After I now read from both sides (court record posted in an article on here earlier - http://yro.slashdot.org/story/... - and the other is this one), it confirms that both sides (government & Levison) were playing politic and game with each other in order to prove themselves right. Sadly, the government is holding better cards.
TFA did not mention about Levison asking for money the first time in order to comply with what the government asked for which could change certain thought about him. He also didn't mention about what he did to stir government agent's anger (11-page of 4pt font print out of encryption key). Of course, who is going to write something that could discriminate oneself?
Anyway, readers should listen with one ear and keep the other ear. Whole heartedly believe in one side of the story would just enhance the bias. Pondering about reasons and try to understand the situation would give much better constructive thought.
According to eyewitness testimonial, sighting was with clear, blue, cloudless skies, no aircraft in sight, altitude unknown but definitely above airliner cruising altitude. The object hovered roughly in the same location for over 2 hours, not drifting more than 10 degrees in any direction. Was sighted approximately 60 degrees above the horizon. Image in video was shot with about 150 power magnification.
so a starshade at a mere 37000 miles doesn't have to worry about being out of line
Actually, it is 37,000 kilometres, so that it is even better for the shade. But I am not sure about the size of the starshade because it looks quite small (on TFA)...
I want one of these hydrogen fuel cell people to show me where you can sink a well and get hydrogen. Because otherwise, they're missing a big part of the whole equation.
I don't know whether or not you are naive or else. Why would you been thinking about digging hydrogen gas? There are plenty of ways to produce it (i.e. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H... or simply Google it). There are already patents for hydrogen battery & engine (i.e. CN103352777A - hydrogen engine system, CN203085685U - "Sodium borohydride hydrolysis hydrogen production fuel battery", etc.). I do not know why you are so sarcastic about the whole idea. What is wrong with you?
Better still, you should have a choice: a $30 unpatchable router with a 3 year lifespan, or a $50 patchable router.
$30 is not worth it if it is vulnerable out of the shelf when you bought it. Also, how long do you think each product would be in a store before it is sold? So no to unpatchable because the patchable is still a safer choice.
And how much do you think they need to charge more in order to recoup the cost (right now the price is varied)? I know that it is not much (if not go over), but I just want to see how others think if they have to pay extra for this kind of service, which does not seem to be needed for those who already have a smart phone with their own Internet connection from their service provider...
CNA is a private English school, as such they are not exactly cheap. So, save a really bad apple, nobody there should be in need of money.
Expensive school is not equal to no bad apples. Your assumption does not work here. Why? May I ask you who pay for the kids to go to school? Also who make the decision for them to go there? If the kids have done their own research themselves and pay for their own way, I am sure they would not need to ask for money because they should know the value of money and the quality of education they are getting (or they would not pay to go to that school). Sadly, I have never seen a kid like that even though there may be a few, but that does not support or prove your statement of 'no bad apple in an expesive private school'.
A topic of talking can turn into anything. Recording conversation is a good prevention, but I want them to keep doing it. If they stop recording, it would be opening a hole of security.
I hope that the project goes as plan. However, nothing is perfect in this world and I have already foreseen a few situations when things may go wrong. I do not wish it to happen, but it is very likely because there could be a bad apple in any thing we involve. One very likely to happen situation is the younger in Brazil would ask the elder here to send him/her money. Once the elder send money from the sympathy/empathy, the younger would take advantage of that and keeps asking. Then other younger may start to copy. I am not saying that all of the those who ask for money are lying, but I am saying that most if not all of the them (younger) still do not realize what is right and wrong especially in the culture that Westerners do not experience.
It is nice to hear about a project which aims for the good, but expecting only good things to happen is going to cause problems later on. I hope they have some preventions or plans to handle any issues. Dealing with different humans is much more difficult than dealing with different computer platforms/languages/problems.
Don't tell me the rules of a game I play for a living, son.
Yes, that is the problem of patent nowadays - argue the uniqueness (and try to be non-obvious) when getting a patent, but try to cover everything and make it similar when suing. In other words, the patent owner would argue their way that the claims are not the same with prior arts by comparing as a whole. But when the patent owner wants to sue, their attorney will dissect his/her patent into each claim and use the specific value of each parameter as key for infringement.
This studio arrangement patent is one of them (look at its claims). For example, looking at a specific parameter value of claim 1 - "the image capture position comprising at least one image capture device equipped with an eighty-five millimeter lens" - you can see a few things here. 1) the word "eighty-five" is used with a hyphen which could throw off keyword search for inexperience searchers. 2)Even though it has a specific number, one may infringe the patent if other criteria are met but not the lens.
Patent attorneys know the rules and they play them well by inventing new English words to avoid keyword search. They sometimes classify their patent application to something else which could be close but not exactly obvious classification. If they really play on the rules straight, their patent applications would very likely not be issued.
To me, a technique of taking photos in a studio should not be patentable. Yes, there are varieties of doing so, but there are a few techniques that will give the best result with certain set and value of parameters. I would rather see it as "trade secret" instead of patent.
We have gay marriage now and the software scene is still mostly male, unfortunately.
I do not get which direction of your statement is going... One meaning it is a sincere but rather silly. The second meaning, it is a sarcastic mean statement. The last meaning is funny but quite a cruel joke.
You don't need to be rude. And by the way, there are many others, who read and post on this forum, are not from native English speaking countries. Furthermore, if you are very smart, you should have already known that often time English can be ambiguous.
Are you talking "middle" = median, or "middle" = mean?
To me, the word "middle" has a loose meaning as "in between." If you attempt to quantify it using maths, then it is neither "median" nor "mean" because you are not talking about normal bell curve! Those super rich will ruin your curve. I would use "mode" instead of those two.
Upper class / Aristocracy
Middle class >-- here it is, in the middle
Lower class / Working class
This gives a bit of the meaning but it is not clear. What is "working class"? Anyone who "work" is categorized in the lower class? Or anyone who mainly use labor in their job? So if a mechanic who earns $60k+ a year would be in the lower class? (just an example)
My experience with Indian workers was unfortunate. I worked with 7 Indians on 4 different occasions between 4 to 6 months each. The first occasion was with 2 males. One was very aggressive and the other was submissive; however, the aggressive one liked to talk but not walk. As a result, my friend (Korean) and I (in the same team) had to do the grunt work in order to get the work done. The second time was with a male. This one was very similar to the first aggressive one I met -- talk but not walk. He promised that he would do this and that, but no work or progress when the deadline was near. I had to do his work in order to complete the project. The third occasion was with 1 male and 2 females. The male was OK but I did not interact much with him so no further comment. The females were both submissive but one was a bit more aggressive than the other; however, both did not really know what they were doing and kept asking me for what and/or how to do the work. The last occasion was with a female. This one was very aggressive and opinionated. She would try to push her idea through regardless how bad it was. We had to compromise sometimes and luckily the situation was still under control.
All in all, it is a stereotyping from our own experiences. If I have a choice, I would not want to work with Indians because of my unfortunate experience. If I am being forced to work with them, I will give a benefit of the doubt. I know that there are good one out there, but I have yet found or met one...
My point is not about number of kids, but I want to clarify his statement -- "It turns out that its really not as expensive to raise children as people claim." Why? Because I do not believe what he said. I felt that he & his wife did not pay their own college expenses. I felt that he took a lot of help from either government or their family or both. When one has been helped (may include financial help), the one does NOT feel that it is "as expensive as" others think.
By the way, he said that he is the only person who works, so his wife income has no place here.
my wife has stayed home with our seven children ever since she graduated from college.
You may have to consider several factors involved your statement. Speaking of that, there are many questions to be asked in order to understand how and why you said it. 1)Who paid for both of your education? 2)Where do you live? 3)What help did you get from the Government along these years? 4)Who else help your family during these years, or only two of you?, 5)How much did you claim your kids for tax deduction? and 6)What does your wife think about raising 7 kids?
Your point is correct if and only if all emails are used for the project only. However, I doubt that they create multiple email addresses for him to use in different project! In other words, there would be other emails that are used for other projects and other stuff as well. Even though 1/13 is not that much, it is still a possible number of emails used for the project communication. Just my two cents...
My only real nitpick is... hardly unreadble. Small yes, but its not like they don't easily posess the technology to deal with such a minor inconvinence.
Just to let you know, it is dangerous to assume that it is still readable.;-) It is safer to say it is unreadable because 1)the language is the court record tends to show that it is useless, 2)most older people cannot read 4-pt font without any assisting device, 3)we do not know how it is being printed (many inkjet and older printers aren't that good when print something that small), 4)we do not know what kind of font it is being used so some characters may be very similar even in the bigger font size, 5)it is very tedious to attempt to convert a long random character set of 11-page paper into a digital format because one wrong character will cause thing to not work, and 6)you cannot move most government employees' behind to really do their work, let alone asking them to do work outside their job description.:-)
Yes, they both are childish, but 2 wrong don't make things right. I don't see that he has every right to be childish, and I don't see that the Government should have done what they did.;-)
Number of day does NOT matter. From TFA, the case is MORE complicated than it looks because there are tit for tat and politic all over the place from both sides. I tried to summarize the background of the case below.
1) June 28, 2013 - Government obtained pen/trap order to install pen/trap device to the email system in order to capture all non-content data (both from header & not from header but not email content) in "real-time" basis, and any technical assistant to use the device, from a targeted email account for 60 days.
2) On the same day, Lavison met with an FBI agent and refused to comply because the account has enable encryption services.
3) The same order on June 28 was reissued (after the meeting) with additional request that Lavabit must provide unencrypted data (non-content data which is still not the email content).
4) During this time, Larvison ignored contacts from the FBI.
5) July 9, 2013 - Government obtained show cause order to get reasons/explanations of why Lavison failed to comply.
6) July 10, 2013 - Lavison, his counsel, and representative from Government were on conference call for the show cause. The conference discussed on permission on data collection but not sure whether Lavison would allow the Government to install pen/trap device. The Government also asked for the keys for decrypting any encrypted content.
7) July 13, 2013 - Lavison contacted the Government proposing that he could capture the data and sent it to the Government. Furthermore, he requested $2,000 for the services. If the Government wanted daily updates, he asked for $1,500 more. The Government refused because the data is not done in real-time, so it cannot be trusted. Lavison argued the order did not require "real-time" access.
8) July 16, 2013 - it is the show cause hearing day. The Government had obtained a seizure warrant to get "all information necessary to decrypt communications sent to or from the targeted email including encryption keys and SSL keys" and also decrypted data associated with the targeted account.
9) Lavison refused to turn over the keys for a reason that it would compromise all other accounts; besides, there was no explicit request for them before.
10) The court agreed with the Government because of the search warrant which an implication for encryption keys request.
11) Lavison allowed the Government to install a pen/trap device on the system. The court did not ask for the keys but issued another hearing on July 26 to confirm Lavison compliance.
12) Even though the device was installed, the data obtained from the device could not be used because it was encrypted and the Government did not have the keys.
13) Right before the compliance hearing, Lavison tried to void the seizure warrant given, but the Government responded that Lavison's objection ignored the order on June 28.
14) August 1, 2013 - the court agreed that the Government that it is lawful for the Government to get the encryption keys because the Government would not look at other unrelated information but only the targeted. The court ordered Lavison to turn over the keys by 5pm on August 2, 2013.
15) Lavison gave (and claimed to be) encryption keys in an 11-page print out with 4-point font to the FBI right before 5pm. The Government told Lavison to give it in standard (digital) format by August 5.
16) August 5, 2013 - the Government moved the case for sanction and sought a fine of $5,000 a day.
17) August 7, 2013 - Lavison gave the keys to the Government, but the Government had lost 6 weeks of potential data so they pressed charge on Lavison.
You see, first Lavison wanted money for what he was going to do -- bad move. Then the Government knew the loop hole and obtained the seizure warrant to help the case. Then Lavison retaliated by not giving the key and the Government could not decrypt any data they obtained. After failing to void the warrant, he then retaliated furthermore by giving an unreadable version of the encrypted keys. After the Government pushed him e
If you read TFA, you will find out quickly that the headline (both from this site and on TFA) is seriously misleading! What TFA is talking about is doing statistic on 30k websites, and determine what language/frame work they used to implement. Then check on each of them for vulnerability attack, such as SQL injection, XSS, etc. So, the language itself has NOTHING to do with the security, but it is the implementation of the site itself! The article itself is not well written either... Too many quotes from many people in copy-and-paste style. Then the author tries to thrown in numbers (i.e. percentage of this and that) to make it look like it is that useful... NOT!
TLDR? Below is what TFA is actually about...
WhiteHat researchers examined the vulnerability assessment results of the more than 30,000 websites to measure how the underlying programming languages and frameworks perform in the field. With that information, the report yields key findings around which languages are most prone to which classes of attack, for how often and how long as well as a determination as to whether or not popular modern languages and frameworks yield similar results in production websites
So American people now refer Tampa, FL as west coast??? The context for other than Americans may be ambiguous, but for most Americans, it should be understandable unless...
Slashdot Mirror
Where freedom refers to the the government being free to fuck you over as much as they want!
After I now read from both sides (court record posted in an article on here earlier - http://yro.slashdot.org/story/... - and the other is this one), it confirms that both sides (government & Levison) were playing politic and game with each other in order to prove themselves right. Sadly, the government is holding better cards.
TFA did not mention about Levison asking for money the first time in order to comply with what the government asked for which could change certain thought about him. He also didn't mention about what he did to stir government agent's anger (11-page of 4pt font print out of encryption key). Of course, who is going to write something that could discriminate oneself?
Anyway, readers should listen with one ear and keep the other ear. Whole heartedly believe in one side of the story would just enhance the bias. Pondering about reasons and try to understand the situation would give much better constructive thought.
According to eyewitness testimonial, sighting was with clear, blue, cloudless skies, no aircraft in sight, altitude unknown but definitely above airliner cruising altitude. The object hovered roughly in the same location for over 2 hours, not drifting more than 10 degrees in any direction. Was sighted approximately 60 degrees above the horizon. Image in video was shot with about 150 power magnification.
That's the quote from one of TFA...
so a starshade at a mere 37000 miles doesn't have to worry about being out of line
Actually, it is 37,000 kilometres, so that it is even better for the shade. But I am not sure about the size of the starshade because it looks quite small (on TFA)...
I want one of these hydrogen fuel cell people to show me where you can sink a well and get hydrogen. Because otherwise, they're missing a big part of the whole equation.
I don't know whether or not you are naive or else. Why would you been thinking about digging hydrogen gas? There are plenty of ways to produce it (i.e. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H... or simply Google it). There are already patents for hydrogen battery & engine (i.e. CN103352777A - hydrogen engine system, CN203085685U - "Sodium borohydride hydrolysis hydrogen production fuel battery", etc.). I do not know why you are so sarcastic about the whole idea. What is wrong with you?
but why shouldn't I get to make that decision?
Because your decision accounts only your own point of view and reason. My decision accounts others' safety and not from self.
Better still, you should have a choice: a $30 unpatchable router with a 3 year lifespan, or a $50 patchable router.
$30 is not worth it if it is vulnerable out of the shelf when you bought it. Also, how long do you think each product would be in a store before it is sold? So no to unpatchable because the patchable is still a safer choice.
And how much do you think they need to charge more in order to recoup the cost (right now the price is varied)? I know that it is not much (if not go over), but I just want to see how others think if they have to pay extra for this kind of service, which does not seem to be needed for those who already have a smart phone with their own Internet connection from their service provider...
CNA is a private English school, as such they are not exactly cheap. So, save a really bad apple, nobody there should be in need of money.
Expensive school is not equal to no bad apples. Your assumption does not work here. Why? May I ask you who pay for the kids to go to school? Also who make the decision for them to go there? If the kids have done their own research themselves and pay for their own way, I am sure they would not need to ask for money because they should know the value of money and the quality of education they are getting (or they would not pay to go to that school). Sadly, I have never seen a kid like that even though there may be a few, but that does not support or prove your statement of 'no bad apple in an expesive private school'.
A topic of talking can turn into anything. Recording conversation is a good prevention, but I want them to keep doing it. If they stop recording, it would be opening a hole of security.
I hope that the project goes as plan. However, nothing is perfect in this world and I have already foreseen a few situations when things may go wrong. I do not wish it to happen, but it is very likely because there could be a bad apple in any thing we involve. One very likely to happen situation is the younger in Brazil would ask the elder here to send him/her money. Once the elder send money from the sympathy/empathy, the younger would take advantage of that and keeps asking. Then other younger may start to copy. I am not saying that all of the those who ask for money are lying, but I am saying that most if not all of the them (younger) still do not realize what is right and wrong especially in the culture that Westerners do not experience.
It is nice to hear about a project which aims for the good, but expecting only good things to happen is going to cause problems later on. I hope they have some preventions or plans to handle any issues. Dealing with different humans is much more difficult than dealing with different computer platforms/languages/problems.
Don't tell me the rules of a game I play for a living, son.
Yes, that is the problem of patent nowadays - argue the uniqueness (and try to be non-obvious) when getting a patent, but try to cover everything and make it similar when suing. In other words, the patent owner would argue their way that the claims are not the same with prior arts by comparing as a whole. But when the patent owner wants to sue, their attorney will dissect his/her patent into each claim and use the specific value of each parameter as key for infringement.
This studio arrangement patent is one of them (look at its claims). For example, looking at a specific parameter value of claim 1 - "the image capture position comprising at least one image capture device equipped with an eighty-five millimeter lens" - you can see a few things here. 1) the word "eighty-five" is used with a hyphen which could throw off keyword search for inexperience searchers. 2)Even though it has a specific number, one may infringe the patent if other criteria are met but not the lens.
Patent attorneys know the rules and they play them well by inventing new English words to avoid keyword search. They sometimes classify their patent application to something else which could be close but not exactly obvious classification. If they really play on the rules straight, their patent applications would very likely not be issued.
To me, a technique of taking photos in a studio should not be patentable. Yes, there are varieties of doing so, but there are a few techniques that will give the best result with certain set and value of parameters. I would rather see it as "trade secret" instead of patent.
Even though it is kind of funny, the example of OJ is not for patent but rather trademark. ;-)
We have gay marriage now and the software scene is still mostly male, unfortunately.
I do not get which direction of your statement is going... One meaning it is a sincere but rather silly. The second meaning, it is a sarcastic mean statement. The last meaning is funny but quite a cruel joke.
Gr8Apes is correct. What you are talking is a part of omnibar functionality but is NOT what TFA is talking about (local v. remote data access)...
You don't need to be rude. And by the way, there are many others, who read and post on this forum, are not from native English speaking countries. Furthermore, if you are very smart, you should have already known that often time English can be ambiguous.
Are you talking "middle" = median, or "middle" = mean?
To me, the word "middle" has a loose meaning as "in between." If you attempt to quantify it using maths, then it is neither "median" nor "mean" because you are not talking about normal bell curve! Those super rich will ruin your curve. I would use "mode" instead of those two.
Upper class / Aristocracy
Middle class >-- here it is, in the middle
Lower class / Working class
This gives a bit of the meaning but it is not clear. What is "working class"? Anyone who "work" is categorized in the lower class? Or anyone who mainly use labor in their job? So if a mechanic who earns $60k+ a year would be in the lower class? (just an example)
My experience with Indian workers was unfortunate. I worked with 7 Indians on 4 different occasions between 4 to 6 months each. The first occasion was with 2 males. One was very aggressive and the other was submissive; however, the aggressive one liked to talk but not walk. As a result, my friend (Korean) and I (in the same team) had to do the grunt work in order to get the work done. The second time was with a male. This one was very similar to the first aggressive one I met -- talk but not walk. He promised that he would do this and that, but no work or progress when the deadline was near. I had to do his work in order to complete the project. The third occasion was with 1 male and 2 females. The male was OK but I did not interact much with him so no further comment. The females were both submissive but one was a bit more aggressive than the other; however, both did not really know what they were doing and kept asking me for what and/or how to do the work. The last occasion was with a female. This one was very aggressive and opinionated. She would try to push her idea through regardless how bad it was. We had to compromise sometimes and luckily the situation was still under control.
All in all, it is a stereotyping from our own experiences. If I have a choice, I would not want to work with Indians because of my unfortunate experience. If I am being forced to work with them, I will give a benefit of the doubt. I know that there are good one out there, but I have yet found or met one...
Sounds like a movie which Michael Douglas & Demi Moore were the lead actor/actress -- Disclosure 1994 http://www.imdb.com/title/tt01... . ;)
My point is not about number of kids, but I want to clarify his statement -- "It turns out that its really not as expensive to raise children as people claim." Why? Because I do not believe what he said. I felt that he & his wife did not pay their own college expenses. I felt that he took a lot of help from either government or their family or both. When one has been helped (may include financial help), the one does NOT feel that it is "as expensive as" others think.
By the way, he said that he is the only person who works, so his wife income has no place here.
my wife has stayed home with our seven children ever since she graduated from college.
You may have to consider several factors involved your statement. Speaking of that, there are many questions to be asked in order to understand how and why you said it. 1)Who paid for both of your education? 2)Where do you live? 3)What help did you get from the Government along these years? 4)Who else help your family during these years, or only two of you?, 5)How much did you claim your kids for tax deduction? and 6)What does your wife think about raising 7 kids?
Your point is correct if and only if all emails are used for the project only. However, I doubt that they create multiple email addresses for him to use in different project! In other words, there would be other emails that are used for other projects and other stuff as well. Even though 1/13 is not that much, it is still a possible number of emails used for the project communication. Just my two cents...
My only real nitpick is... hardly unreadble. Small yes, but its not like they don't easily posess the technology to deal with such a minor inconvinence.
Just to let you know, it is dangerous to assume that it is still readable. ;-) It is safer to say it is unreadable because 1)the language is the court record tends to show that it is useless, 2)most older people cannot read 4-pt font without any assisting device, 3)we do not know how it is being printed (many inkjet and older printers aren't that good when print something that small), 4)we do not know what kind of font it is being used so some characters may be very similar even in the bigger font size, 5)it is very tedious to attempt to convert a long random character set of 11-page paper into a digital format because one wrong character will cause thing to not work, and 6)you cannot move most government employees' behind to really do their work, let alone asking them to do work outside their job description. :-)
Yes, they both are childish, but 2 wrong don't make things right. I don't see that he has every right to be childish, and I don't see that the Government should have done what they did. ;-)
Number of day does NOT matter. From TFA, the case is MORE complicated than it looks because there are tit for tat and politic all over the place from both sides. I tried to summarize the background of the case below.
1) June 28, 2013 - Government obtained pen/trap order to install pen/trap device to the email system in order to capture all non-content data (both from header & not from header but not email content) in "real-time" basis, and any technical assistant to use the device, from a targeted email account for 60 days.
2) On the same day, Lavison met with an FBI agent and refused to comply because the account has enable encryption services.
3) The same order on June 28 was reissued (after the meeting) with additional request that Lavabit must provide unencrypted data (non-content data which is still not the email content).
4) During this time, Larvison ignored contacts from the FBI.
5) July 9, 2013 - Government obtained show cause order to get reasons/explanations of why Lavison failed to comply.
6) July 10, 2013 - Lavison, his counsel, and representative from Government were on conference call for the show cause. The conference discussed on permission on data collection but not sure whether Lavison would allow the Government to install pen/trap device. The Government also asked for the keys for decrypting any encrypted content.
7) July 13, 2013 - Lavison contacted the Government proposing that he could capture the data and sent it to the Government. Furthermore, he requested $2,000 for the services. If the Government wanted daily updates, he asked for $1,500 more. The Government refused because the data is not done in real-time, so it cannot be trusted. Lavison argued the order did not require "real-time" access.
8) July 16, 2013 - it is the show cause hearing day. The Government had obtained a seizure warrant to get "all information necessary to decrypt communications sent to or from the targeted email including encryption keys and SSL keys" and also decrypted data associated with the targeted account.
9) Lavison refused to turn over the keys for a reason that it would compromise all other accounts; besides, there was no explicit request for them before.
10) The court agreed with the Government because of the search warrant which an implication for encryption keys request.
11) Lavison allowed the Government to install a pen/trap device on the system. The court did not ask for the keys but issued another hearing on July 26 to confirm Lavison compliance.
12) Even though the device was installed, the data obtained from the device could not be used because it was encrypted and the Government did not have the keys.
13) Right before the compliance hearing, Lavison tried to void the seizure warrant given, but the Government responded that Lavison's objection ignored the order on June 28.
14) August 1, 2013 - the court agreed that the Government that it is lawful for the Government to get the encryption keys because the Government would not look at other unrelated information but only the targeted. The court ordered Lavison to turn over the keys by 5pm on August 2, 2013.
15) Lavison gave (and claimed to be) encryption keys in an 11-page print out with 4-point font to the FBI right before 5pm. The Government told Lavison to give it in standard (digital) format by August 5.
16) August 5, 2013 - the Government moved the case for sanction and sought a fine of $5,000 a day.
17) August 7, 2013 - Lavison gave the keys to the Government, but the Government had lost 6 weeks of potential data so they pressed charge on Lavison.
You see, first Lavison wanted money for what he was going to do -- bad move. Then the Government knew the loop hole and obtained the seizure warrant to help the case. Then Lavison retaliated by not giving the key and the Government could not decrypt any data they obtained. After failing to void the warrant, he then retaliated furthermore by giving an unreadable version of the encrypted keys. After the Government pushed him e
If you read TFA, you will find out quickly that the headline (both from this site and on TFA) is seriously misleading! What TFA is talking about is doing statistic on 30k websites, and determine what language/frame work they used to implement. Then check on each of them for vulnerability attack, such as SQL injection, XSS, etc. So, the language itself has NOTHING to do with the security, but it is the implementation of the site itself! The article itself is not well written either... Too many quotes from many people in copy-and-paste style. Then the author tries to thrown in numbers (i.e. percentage of this and that) to make it look like it is that useful... NOT!
TLDR? Below is what TFA is actually about...
WhiteHat researchers examined the vulnerability assessment results of the more than 30,000 websites to measure how the underlying programming languages and frameworks perform in the field. With that information, the report yields key findings around which languages are most prone to which classes of attack, for how often and how long as well as a determination as to whether or not popular modern languages and frameworks yield similar results in production websites
Maybe that pocket change is the bonus for their people this year? :-P
So American people now refer Tampa, FL as west coast??? The context for other than Americans may be ambiguous, but for most Americans, it should be understandable unless ...