Maybe I'm naïve because I live in Canada but I don't see it being as bad as you make it to be. I'll never be naïve enough to think authorities are only working for our best interest but I'm also not willing to believe in conspiracy theories built on propaganda.
The fact that Edward Snowden was allowed to reveal so many secrets tells me there is a lack of control on the authorities otherwise he would have been locked up and forgotten long time ago.
I tend to agree. The free information age has put a number of obstacles in the way of news providers. It took most news providers many years to opt into the free information age but possibly too late. When they finally got onboard, most news providers had sites built but the content and quality of presentation was poor to say the least. Limited articles (for non subscribers) and crappy layouts. Many of them are better now but with google and yahoo news, who needs them now?
Evidence should be excluded, even if a bad guy gets away, because the cops need to follow the f-ing rules
This is the part that will always make the justice system make exceptions over and over again. Remember, the bad guy isn't supposed to win. At least, that's what I learned watching television.
I disagree. If you block the highway, traffic won't get through unless willing to take the shoulder. In this case the shoulder is remapping your DNS. Most non technical users won't do that hence reducing the clientele to mostly technical users (like it was in the BBS days).
I too believe piracy is inevitable but I'm afraid it's going to shrink significantly. Government everywhere is finding ways to obtain more jurisdiction over internet entities run within it's borders. This means that cybercrime will be similar to crime in that it will hide in the shadows. This means closed circles with only trusted new members (such as what private trackers do).
With government ruling over ISPs and forcing DNS redirects (luckily not happening where I live yet), non technical users won't obtain access to this content as easily as before.
My parents which aren't from the technology generation do record lots of video when they go on vacation and their storage requirements are above the 2TB mark.
This being said, nobody would buy SSD for long term storage. That's not what SSDs are meant for (at this current time)
128GB is probably enough for most but doesn't really give much space for future requirements. I'd think 256GB is enough for every single user in my work place since work files are required to be on their network drive or department drive. The base install for engineers here is 90GB. Other users are probably about 40GB.
At first glance it looks that way but they are smart to be silent if they want to protect their own situation. The person who accepts the hush money isn't in it to make change happen. Most people figure: "why would I screw up my reputation to possibly help my colleagues". Like in every fight against big corporations and government it takes one person to be willing to sacrifice everything in order to solve a problem. Look at rape cases against BIG names. It always takes one to speak up for dozens more to find the courage to talk.
As an employer would you hire that person if you knew about said public claims? Many wouldn't risk their management position over it since they would fear what would happen if they needed to layoff that person in the near future.
I don't disagree with your comment but it is slightly ignorant. Gaming is not any different than hobbies such as puzzle making or board games. People do whatever makes them happy when spending time inside. That's not to say they won't go out and make a snow man, play hockey or go skiing. But once the evening settles there's nothing better than a 2 hours playing online games with friends.
If it's a DDoS you can't stop it from the server side. It's not a software issue. Sony alone cannot resolve the issue. I'm no DDoS avoidance guru but I understand enough about it to know it can't be solved at their server level.
Anytime the price and reliability of SSD improves it makes it more viable for end users and business work stations. If I had a bigger budget, every workstation would currently have an SSD.
When I was 16 I was naive too and the world was filled with unicorns and rainbows. Then I grew up, witnessed reality and even experienced crime first hand.
I figure it must all be a complex scheme because we have police, jails that are full and courts that can't keep up.
Because "child predators" (or actually, this risk of encountering the same) are for the most part a fictional creation of the bigmedia. Stay scared, comrade, stay scared.
Regarding your previous comment, I get that you maybe a conspiracy theorist but child sexual abuse and homicides are real. Whether the media makes it scarier is irrelevant. For that matter any crime is a potential target for the requirement to access data and the large the motivation the more rules and rights will be broken.
I'm not arguing the need for the rights that stem from the 5th amendment. What I'm arguing is that we aren't consistent and are allowing individuals/corporations to hide information that would incriminate them. So how do we stop criminals if they are allowed to hide behind encryption? This is what the article speaks of.
I guess the other option is to automatically consider the party guilty if he refuses to provide the authorities access or charge those who aren't cooperating. IMHO this would be trading one evil for another.
At the end of the day it's a serious problem that needs a viable solution.
I could go into more details as to what your options are but at the end of the day it won't be free. If you can't afford a lawyer to start with you will have to obtain legal aid. Otherwise you will have to work with a lawyer that is willing to fight a case against a corporation (there are plenty of lawyers that will take on a case and expect a marginal amount of money during the legal process and expect full payout later on).
Even if the rules state that each party must pay his legal cost there is in many cases legal course to obtaining a large portion of the fees back. This obviously varies from state to state or country to country.
Slashdot Mirror
The mafia isn't he consumer. The junkie is.
Both are a problem. It's created because there's a market.
That didn't prevent Napster or Pirate Bay from going down. When you play on the fine line of illegal, you're playing with fire.
And how do you know the IP address of said network?
God forbid we find out Henry Ford did something bad. They won't be able to sell his cars anymore.
Maybe I'm naïve because I live in Canada but I don't see it being as bad as you make it to be. I'll never be naïve enough to think authorities are only working for our best interest but I'm also not willing to believe in conspiracy theories built on propaganda.
The fact that Edward Snowden was allowed to reveal so many secrets tells me there is a lack of control on the authorities otherwise he would have been locked up and forgotten long time ago.
I tend to agree. The free information age has put a number of obstacles in the way of news providers. It took most news providers many years to opt into the free information age but possibly too late. When they finally got onboard, most news providers had sites built but the content and quality of presentation was poor to say the least. Limited articles (for non subscribers) and crappy layouts. Many of them are better now but with google and yahoo news, who needs them now?
Evidence should be excluded, even if a bad guy gets away, because the cops need to follow the f-ing rules
This is the part that will always make the justice system make exceptions over and over again. Remember, the bad guy isn't supposed to win. At least, that's what I learned watching television.
I disagree. If you block the highway, traffic won't get through unless willing to take the shoulder. In this case the shoulder is remapping your DNS. Most non technical users won't do that hence reducing the clientele to mostly technical users (like it was in the BBS days).
I too believe piracy is inevitable but I'm afraid it's going to shrink significantly. Government everywhere is finding ways to obtain more jurisdiction over internet entities run within it's borders. This means that cybercrime will be similar to crime in that it will hide in the shadows. This means closed circles with only trusted new members (such as what private trackers do).
With government ruling over ISPs and forcing DNS redirects (luckily not happening where I live yet), non technical users won't obtain access to this content as easily as before.
My parents which aren't from the technology generation do record lots of video when they go on vacation and their storage requirements are above the 2TB mark.
This being said, nobody would buy SSD for long term storage. That's not what SSDs are meant for (at this current time)
If you keep your work stuff on the computer 256GB is not much especially if you have music on the same box.
Does your company not require you to keep your work on the network drive? I mean, god forbid you workstation dies.
128GB is probably enough for most but doesn't really give much space for future requirements. I'd think 256GB is enough for every single user in my work place since work files are required to be on their network drive or department drive. The base install for engineers here is 90GB. Other users are probably about 40GB.
Nobody is asking for a police state. Just to keep the same level of justice.
At first glance it looks that way but they are smart to be silent if they want to protect their own situation. The person who accepts the hush money isn't in it to make change happen. Most people figure: "why would I screw up my reputation to possibly help my colleagues". Like in every fight against big corporations and government it takes one person to be willing to sacrifice everything in order to solve a problem. Look at rape cases against BIG names. It always takes one to speak up for dozens more to find the courage to talk.
As an employer would you hire that person if you knew about said public claims? Many wouldn't risk their management position over it since they would fear what would happen if they needed to layoff that person in the near future.
I don't disagree with your comment but it is slightly ignorant. Gaming is not any different than hobbies such as puzzle making or board games. People do whatever makes them happy when spending time inside. That's not to say they won't go out and make a snow man, play hockey or go skiing. But once the evening settles there's nothing better than a 2 hours playing online games with friends.
They are known for high level DDoS attacks so I assume that's what it was.
If it's a DDoS you can't stop it from the server side. It's not a software issue. Sony alone cannot resolve the issue. I'm no DDoS avoidance guru but I understand enough about it to know it can't be solved at their server level.
Anytime the price and reliability of SSD improves it makes it more viable for end users and business work stations. If I had a bigger budget, every workstation would currently have an SSD.
When I was 16 I was naive too and the world was filled with unicorns and rainbows. Then I grew up, witnessed reality and even experienced crime first hand.
I figure it must all be a complex scheme because we have police, jails that are full and courts that can't keep up.
Stay naïve comrade
Because "child predators" (or actually, this risk of encountering the same) are for the most part a fictional creation of the bigmedia. Stay scared, comrade, stay scared.
Regarding your previous comment, I get that you maybe a conspiracy theorist but child sexual abuse and homicides are real. Whether the media makes it scarier is irrelevant. For that matter any crime is a potential target for the requirement to access data and the large the motivation the more rules and rights will be broken.
I'm not arguing the need for the rights that stem from the 5th amendment. What I'm arguing is that we aren't consistent and are allowing individuals/corporations to hide information that would incriminate them. So how do we stop criminals if they are allowed to hide behind encryption? This is what the article speaks of.
I guess the other option is to automatically consider the party guilty if he refuses to provide the authorities access or charge those who aren't cooperating. IMHO this would be trading one evil for another.
At the end of the day it's a serious problem that needs a viable solution.
Very well said.
I could go into more details as to what your options are but at the end of the day it won't be free. If you can't afford a lawyer to start with you will have to obtain legal aid. Otherwise you will have to work with a lawyer that is willing to fight a case against a corporation (there are plenty of lawyers that will take on a case and expect a marginal amount of money during the legal process and expect full payout later on).
Even if the rules state that each party must pay his legal cost there is in many cases legal course to obtaining a large portion of the fees back. This obviously varies from state to state or country to country.
Are we going to get an article for every new feature released in Windows 10?
How did they win their case if they actually falsely labeled the product?