When I was a schoolboy we were taught to take pride in the fact that we were and always had been a melting pot.
Yes - I've always found it amusing that the US is so proud of being a "melting pot". This suggests that all cultural distinctiveness will be lost and you have to become just like everyone else - it's the Borg approach to immigration. Not sure why you would want to be so proud of that but, having once been a US resident, I'll grant that it is an accurate metaphor.
Well, there is a certain danger in mistaking metaphors for reality. But when you melt stuff together, you don't lose the original characteristics, you blend them. Which is how we ended up with spaghetti and meatballs. Which isn't actually Italian, but owes its existence to Italian immigrants adapting their cuisine to American food pricing and availability. And is regularly enjoyed by almost everyone else in the USA.
For decades the CIA and NSA were put down for not being as good as the Russian KGB. Reason was the KGB bugged everyone and everything. It'd be shocked too if the NSA weren't somewhat good at broad surveillance.
I thought the reason was supposed to be that the KGB tortured people and we didn't.
"Friends spying on friends" is not something new and unusual, despite what at least 1 German politician implied. The US has arrested Israeli spies in decades past. Israel has arrested US spies. It may be deplorable, but it's universal. Raising a ruckus about it is just a sideshow.
Snowden apparently originally thought that this was part of his job and was OK with it. What allegedly turned him was when he realized that a lot of what he was doing was unrelated to spying on other nations, other nationals and terrorists, but was spying on US citizens even when there was absolutely no reason to think they were doing anything worth spying on.
My only gripe is that it's all pretty much Tomcat based
There are worse things a J2EE-based applications to run under. Since Tomcat supports the essentials without the overhead of supporting the full stack, it has very modest resource requirements compared to, for example, WebSphere or JBoss.
Of course, Jetty is also lightweight, but Jetty isn't as commonly used or supported these days.
Atlassian's turnkey solution for enterprise single sign-on and secure user authentication. Atlassian is a software vendor of modest relevance, producing Jira issue tracking and Confluence wiki software. I assume this would only be relevant if you run are rely on a system that uses Crowd for authentication. Where is it used? Where is any software package used?
Atlassian's most famous product is Jira, which is pretty commonly used in large-scale businesses. Large-scale businesses are also more likely to use SSO, since it's less trouble than maintaining dozens of app-specific login subsystems.
So the net result is effectively that the login ID is "sa" and the password is blank and everyone from the NSA to the Brothers of the Islamic Revolution of Upper West Turdistan, the New Reform Church of Neo-Communist Mao-fu-tze, the haXors Anymous 7EEt, the 57th-Street Beagle Boys gang and so forth could all waltz in and make themselves at home.
And introverts don't necessarily love the bustle of the city.
Don't count on it. It's actually easier to ignore crowds than it is to ignore individuals. An introvert (speaking as a die-hard card-carrying member) isn't necessarily a person who's afraid of people. We just don't get our jollies by dealing with people.
(guessing) is that there were many millions of illegal interceptions and stuff found in them was then used to apply for warrants. Like if the cops surreptitiously hack into your computer and find a downloaded Disney film, they can't bust you since the search was illegal and they can't tell you about it. But now that they know what was there, they apply for a warrant and then the Disney SWAT team shows up and raids your house, all with proper authorization. Welcome to the future.
That's something I've never really understood. If King Midas came to America and started paying 99% of the nation's tax burden (because it's his "fair share"), who do you think the government would work for? The more we ask the rich to pay for government services, who do you think new government policies will favor? If taxes were truly fairly split ($X per person), then everyone gets an share of the government's ear.
Of course, some of them wouldn't be able to buy groceries as well. Or did you really think that even half of what we've currently got could be bought for $25/year?
Then again, Corporations Are People. So if you own a corporation and it also pays taxes, you get 2 shares.
Putting aside the absurdity of the idealized Fair Tax, however, the US Government doesn't really give a rat's about how much taxes you pay. It only cares about the campaign donations you make. One representative at a time.
Phone number call records are not protected any more than the contents of a phone book.
False. YOU try and get those records. They are the private property of the telephone service provider. A similar situation existed in many states where people's automobile and driver license records were being tapped by marketers. The public, when informed, was generally outraged. There is, in fact, an information-sharing law in effect to prohibit the telephone service providers (or any other business) from sharing information except as permitted. You may recall the annual privacy notices.
ANY business records can be demanded upon presentation of a proper warrant, but the furor over the Snowden affair comes from the revelation that the net was being cast too far and too wide.
A letter sent in the mail without a sealed envelope, is not protected by the 4th amendment from searches.
A postcard or other open correspondence may be subject to casual reading, but I am very sceptical that a deliberate program of reading such correspondence is legal, whether by private persons or the government. And I can pretty well guarantee there would be a howl if people learned that the NSA was digitally scanning people's holiday postcards as a matter of routine.
What is an unencrypted email to your ISP, mail provider, and the recipient's ISP and mail provider? Besides indexed to hell for market research and ad targeting, it's public.
Once again, YOU cannot see anyone's email at any time. It is NOT public. Persons may be able to scan email in transit or on servers that they have authorized access to, but unauthorized access is flat-out illegal. We've already had debates over agencies like GMail being able to pick over people's correspondence and the last chapter has yet to be written on that subject. The only reason the ruckus hasn't been louder is that Google is considered more trustworthy than the US Government.
Stallman, and the EFF have been trying to educate you all about the limits of the 4th amendment, and you go on giving Google, Facebook, Apple, Yahoo, Microsoft etc. your information anyway, so why is anyone concerned _now_?
Don't presume to speak for me. I was arguing against Skype's lack of privacy and accountability years ago. I don't post the full details of my life to every social media site on the planet. As a matter of fact, there are limits to even what I'll do with a public library, since, unlike most people, I haven't forgotten the ham-handed tactics the Feds have subjected them to.
Why is anyone concerned now? Practically everyone is concerned now. We used to joke about stuff like this, but more and more we are receiving objective proof that not only are our lives under a microscope, but the degree of inspection and the resources being brought to bear are almost inconceivable. One of the reasons that "innocent people have nothing to hide" gets a pass from people who have no idea that they don't get to determine who is "innocent" has been the assumption that innocent people aren't having data collected on them that can later be used to prove their lack of "innocence". We now know better. We can reasonably infer that both direct and indirect information may be cross-correlated in unexpected ways to draw conclusions and initiate actions that would make Kafka scream in horror. And we now have actual data demonstrating just how all-encompassing the process is. And our only protection is that the people in charge of it all are saying "Trust us. We're only doing what we need to do to keep you safe". We're from the Government, and we're here to help you.
To me, this all sounds like a bunch of confused people who stepped into a phone booth and didn't close the door, or mailed a letter in an unsealed envelope. They argue their freedom has somehow been infringed, or privacy, or both, I can't tell, and it's just kind
By blocking a publicly accessible journalism website?
Oh, right this is the Army, where Process A Requires Solution B, So Do C Instead is command's modus operandi.
No, it actually makes sense.
Suppose your objective is to prevent malware from appearing on your PC. (or secure a server.) This isn't a Windows-vs-Unix thing, the answer is the same for what happens when a server gets rooted.
What's the best thing to do when your PC has malware on it? When a server is rooted? You wipe the disk and reinstall the OS from a known good image. It's the only way to be sure that not a single byte of malware/rootkit remains on the disk.
That's the objective. Not one byte of bad stuff on the disk. A single NOP in the wrong place could open a back door.
You could spend a few hours editing registry keys, burning a CD of the contents of/bin from a known good workstation and copying the files over, doing a byte-by-byte comparison of/bin/cp and/bin/ls, and so on, but you'd never be completely sure the system wasn't compromised. If you got rid of the malware and any back doors left by whoever rooted the system, you're fine.
That's what the.mil folks are trying to do with their networks, except that instead of "malware", it's "classified information on computers used for unclassified work."
And it's not as silly as it sounds. You want to know that if malware exists on your system, there's something wrong. In PC terms, there's no harm done by users downloading dancing-bunnies.exe as long as they never actually run it. (Maybe it's a false positive -- the user was merely going to spend a lunch break disassembling it to understand how the exploit was written... Maybe they're downloading a Linux rootkit for analysis on a PC, or vice versa. But how can you tell the difference between that and someone downloading a Linux rootkit with the intention of maliciously installing it on a Linux server that can only be accessed through the compromised PC...)
If you only have one user, you could ask them, but if you have 100,000 users, you can't. You just don't have enough sysadmins to nicely ask everyone on the network if their copy of the rootkit was downloaded deliberately with no intent of using it to harm the network, or if there's something seriously wrong. So you say "Sorry, no dancing-bunnies.exe on this part of the LAN. If you want to do virus research, do it at home, or, if we think you're smart enough, we'll give you a PC on the portion of the network that we've separated from the company LAN, and you can do research there without any risk of the dancing bunnies spreading to other users..."
And then you wipe the disk and reinstall the OS from a known good image.
The only reason classified information should appear on an unclassified machine is if there's a security breach. If every innocent download of dancing-bunnies.exe results in a nuke-and-reinstall on sight, your security researchers will stop doing it on the company LAN, eliminating the false positives.
I'm not sure, but it sounds like the logical extension of that is to round up all personnel who possess any knowledge of the leaked information and shoot them.
Just to make sure the infection is completely contained.
There is still value in maintaining a document's classified status even after the information has been released publicly. Just because CNN or some website has released a secret doesn't mean that Bad Guy X happened to be paying attention enough to go ahead and download the information. If information becomes automatically declassified the moment someone leaks it, you are just making it that much easier for future bad guys to acquire that knowledge. There is something to be said for making it as hard as possible for our enemies to acquire information that can be used against us. No need to make it easier for them by acquire it. Make them do the work necessary to seek out those sources that may have leaked it.
In this particular case, however, the Bad Guys would have had to have been on a 6-week drunk in the middle of the desert to have missed it. And still be there. If they had to do any less work it would be because door-to-door salesmen were peddling it on the streets.
I can understand the need to be cautious about leaked information, since those in the know are at risk for letting more things be known than had actually been known. Still, there comes a point where you can have the absurd situation where the bad guys know more than the good guys. Which is laughable enough in closed societies, but rather pathetic in what are allegedly open ones.
Dear Microsoft, I don't want my phone to know what I eat for breakfast, how I'm feeling or how I choose to spend my time. I just need it to make phone calls and check my email. That's it. That's all.
Can you please stop being such a creepy digital stalker? It's gone well past disturbing at this point.
Welcome! To the Microsoft Help Line. All of our agents are currently busy helping other customers. Please stay on the line. Your call is VERY important to us! Oh dear...
Samsung and HTC, and doubtless others, invented this first. My Galaxy S3 has a combined USB, HDMI and audio port. My ancient HTC Hero had a combined USB and audio port. Different connectors used different pins.
It seems like anything is new and worthy of patenting if it's on a computer, on the internet or on an Apple:-(
Technically, the Nook tablets did as well. Although you can plug a stock micro-usb cable into them, the speciality cable that came with the unit penetrated further into the socket and had something like 12 connectors instead of the standard 4. The extra connections lit up the multi-color charge status LED in the cable, but they also informed circuitry within the Nook. A stock micro USB registers as "Not Charging" even when it actually is charging.
it seems like there should be a simple and effective way to prevent the NSA from collecting metadada on you with a properly configured HOSTS file. If there were only some smart cookie that could explain it to us.
Well, sure. We'll just upload one to our Verizon cellphone.
What? You thought that the metadata came only from the INTERNET???
If you look at the laws themselves it's a bit weird; 18 USC sec. 2332a seems to introduce the term "weapons of mass destruction" for the sole purpose of re-naming a definition provided in 18 USC sec. 921 called "destructive device," which dates to 1934 at the latest. I'm not savvy enough to figure out when the "WMD" terminology was introduced, but it's at least older than 1996 and seems to serve no purpose other than sounding grandiose.
This is why laws should not be permitted to be introduced except that first one cubic inch of flesh and blood should be removed from the legislator's body.
Dead is dead. Murder is murder. If a person deliberately murders someone, we don't need 137 different types of murder law to charge the offender on, just one. Adding more anti-murder laws is grandiose at best and at worst may end up in creating legal loopholes that a broader definition would not.
Hmmm. The geotags for this set of beach pictures show that they weren't too far from this daycare center run by a couple whose mother-in-law is from Lebanon.
Slashdot Mirror
Who is still safe after that command, the operator, the cat or the system ?
It comes with Gnome 3. The cat lives, safe in the box. Everyone outside the box dies.
Damnit, now I want some spaghetti and meatballs...
Have a burrito instead.
And a fortune cookie for dessert.
"I am not a Frenchie, I'm a Belgie!"
-- Milo Perrier, Murder by Death
Actually, a parody quote of Hercule Poirot, The Mysterious Affair at Styles.
When I was a schoolboy we were taught to take pride in the fact that we were and always had been a melting pot.
Yes - I've always found it amusing that the US is so proud of being a "melting pot". This suggests that all cultural distinctiveness will be lost and you have to become just like everyone else - it's the Borg approach to immigration. Not sure why you would want to be so proud of that but, having once been a US resident, I'll grant that it is an accurate metaphor.
Well, there is a certain danger in mistaking metaphors for reality. But when you melt stuff together, you don't lose the original characteristics, you blend them. Which is how we ended up with spaghetti and meatballs. Which isn't actually Italian, but owes its existence to Italian immigrants adapting their cuisine to American food pricing and availability. And is regularly enjoyed by almost everyone else in the USA.
John McCain (perhaps you've heard of him???)
"Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran..."
For decades the CIA and NSA were put down for not being as good as the Russian KGB. Reason was the KGB bugged everyone and everything. It'd be shocked too if the NSA weren't somewhat good at broad surveillance.
I thought the reason was supposed to be that the KGB tortured people and we didn't.
"Friends spying on friends" is not something new and unusual, despite what at least 1 German politician implied. The US has arrested Israeli spies in decades past. Israel has arrested US spies. It may be deplorable, but it's universal. Raising a ruckus about it is just a sideshow.
Snowden apparently originally thought that this was part of his job and was OK with it. What allegedly turned him was when he realized that a lot of what he was doing was unrelated to spying on other nations, other nationals and terrorists, but was spying on US citizens even when there was absolutely no reason to think they were doing anything worth spying on.
My only gripe is that it's all pretty much Tomcat based
There are worse things a J2EE-based applications to run under. Since Tomcat supports the essentials without the overhead of supporting the full stack, it has very modest resource requirements compared to, for example, WebSphere or JBoss.
Of course, Jetty is also lightweight, but Jetty isn't as commonly used or supported these days.
Atlassian's turnkey solution for enterprise single sign-on and secure user authentication. Atlassian is a software vendor of modest relevance, producing Jira issue tracking and Confluence wiki software. I assume this would only be relevant if you run are rely on a system that uses Crowd for authentication. Where is it used? Where is any software package used?
Atlassian's most famous product is Jira, which is pretty commonly used in large-scale businesses. Large-scale businesses are also more likely to use SSO, since it's less trouble than maintaining dozens of app-specific login subsystems.
So the net result is effectively that the login ID is "sa" and the password is blank and everyone from the NSA to the Brothers of the Islamic Revolution of Upper West Turdistan, the New Reform Church of Neo-Communist Mao-fu-tze, the haXors Anymous 7EEt, the 57th-Street Beagle Boys gang and so forth could all waltz in and make themselves at home.
As long as you don't mind living in an oppressive Communist nation.
We're working on it. We're certainly well down the spying-on-citizens part.
And introverts don't necessarily love the bustle of the city.
Don't count on it. It's actually easier to ignore crowds than it is to ignore individuals. An introvert (speaking as a die-hard card-carrying member) isn't necessarily a person who's afraid of people. We just don't get our jollies by dealing with people.
(guessing) is that there were many millions of illegal interceptions and stuff found in them was then used to apply for warrants. Like if the cops surreptitiously hack into your computer and find a downloaded Disney film, they can't bust you since the search was illegal and they can't tell you about it. But now that they know what was there, they apply for a warrant and then the Disney SWAT team shows up and raids your house, all with proper authorization. Welcome to the future.
"It's a Great Big Beautiful Tomorrow..."
Wait. Did they demolish that one?
pay their "fair share" of taxes
That's something I've never really understood. If King Midas came to America and started paying 99% of the nation's tax burden (because it's his "fair share"), who do you think the government would work for? The more we ask the rich to pay for government services, who do you think new government policies will favor? If taxes were truly fairly split ($X per person), then everyone gets an share of the government's ear.
Of course, some of them wouldn't be able to buy groceries as well. Or did you really think that even half of what we've currently got could be bought for $25/year?
Then again, Corporations Are People. So if you own a corporation and it also pays taxes, you get 2 shares.
Putting aside the absurdity of the idealized Fair Tax, however, the US Government doesn't really give a rat's about how much taxes you pay. It only cares about the campaign donations you make. One representative at a time.
Maybe that explains why I'm such a more relaxed, peaceful, happy person when I'm out in the woods, with nothing more than I can carry in my backpack.
Cue banjo music.
Cheap doesn't do it justice. Laughable is more like it. I was expecting at least 2 orders of magnitude above that.
From every news report I can recall, spies very often workin for very little financial, political, or even ideological gain.
Phone number call records are not protected any more than the contents of a phone book.
False. YOU try and get those records. They are the private property of the telephone service provider. A similar situation existed in many states where people's automobile and driver license records were being tapped by marketers. The public, when informed, was generally outraged. There is, in fact, an information-sharing law in effect to prohibit the telephone service providers (or any other business) from sharing information except as permitted. You may recall the annual privacy notices.
ANY business records can be demanded upon presentation of a proper warrant, but the furor over the Snowden affair comes from the revelation that the net was being cast too far and too wide.
A letter sent in the mail without a sealed envelope, is not protected by the 4th amendment from searches.
A postcard or other open correspondence may be subject to casual reading, but I am very sceptical that a deliberate program of reading such correspondence is legal, whether by private persons or the government. And I can pretty well guarantee there would be a howl if people learned that the NSA was digitally scanning people's holiday postcards as a matter of routine.
What is an unencrypted email to your ISP, mail provider, and the recipient's ISP and mail provider? Besides indexed to hell for market research and ad targeting, it's public.
Once again, YOU cannot see anyone's email at any time. It is NOT public. Persons may be able to scan email in transit or on servers that they have authorized access to, but unauthorized access is flat-out illegal. We've already had debates over agencies like GMail being able to pick over people's correspondence and the last chapter has yet to be written on that subject. The only reason the ruckus hasn't been louder is that Google is considered more trustworthy than the US Government.
Stallman, and the EFF have been trying to educate you all about the limits of the 4th amendment, and you go on giving Google, Facebook, Apple, Yahoo, Microsoft etc. your information anyway, so why is anyone concerned _now_?
Don't presume to speak for me. I was arguing against Skype's lack of privacy and accountability years ago. I don't post the full details of my life to every social media site on the planet. As a matter of fact, there are limits to even what I'll do with a public library, since, unlike most people, I haven't forgotten the ham-handed tactics the Feds have subjected them to.
Why is anyone concerned now? Practically everyone is concerned now. We used to joke about stuff like this, but more and more we are receiving objective proof that not only are our lives under a microscope, but the degree of inspection and the resources being brought to bear are almost inconceivable. One of the reasons that "innocent people have nothing to hide" gets a pass from people who have no idea that they don't get to determine who is "innocent" has been the assumption that innocent people aren't having data collected on them that can later be used to prove their lack of "innocence". We now know better. We can reasonably infer that both direct and indirect information may be cross-correlated in unexpected ways to draw conclusions and initiate actions that would make Kafka scream in horror. And we now have actual data demonstrating just how all-encompassing the process is. And our only protection is that the people in charge of it all are saying "Trust us. We're only doing what we need to do to keep you safe". We're from the Government, and we're here to help you.
To me, this all sounds like a bunch of confused people who stepped into a phone booth and didn't close the door, or mailed a letter in an unsealed envelope. They argue their freedom has somehow been infringed, or privacy, or both, I can't tell, and it's just kind
No, it actually makes sense.
Suppose your objective is to prevent malware from appearing on your PC. (or secure a server.) This isn't a Windows-vs-Unix thing, the answer is the same for what happens when a server gets rooted.
What's the best thing to do when your PC has malware on it? When a server is rooted? You wipe the disk and reinstall the OS from a known good image. It's the only way to be sure that not a single byte of malware/rootkit remains on the disk.
That's the objective. Not one byte of bad stuff on the disk. A single NOP in the wrong place could open a back door.
You could spend a few hours editing registry keys, burning a CD of the contents of /bin from a known good workstation and copying the files over, doing a byte-by-byte comparison of /bin/cp and /bin/ls, and so on, but you'd never be completely sure the system wasn't compromised. If you got rid of the malware and any back doors left by whoever rooted the system, you're fine.
That's what the .mil folks are trying to do with their networks, except that instead of "malware", it's "classified information on computers used for unclassified work."
And it's not as silly as it sounds. You want to know that if malware exists on your system, there's something wrong. In PC terms, there's no harm done by users downloading dancing-bunnies.exe as long as they never actually run it. (Maybe it's a false positive -- the user was merely going to spend a lunch break disassembling it to understand how the exploit was written... Maybe they're downloading a Linux rootkit for analysis on a PC, or vice versa. But how can you tell the difference between that and someone downloading a Linux rootkit with the intention of maliciously installing it on a Linux server that can only be accessed through the compromised PC...)
If you only have one user, you could ask them, but if you have 100,000 users, you can't. You just don't have enough sysadmins to nicely ask everyone on the network if their copy of the rootkit was downloaded deliberately with no intent of using it to harm the network, or if there's something seriously wrong. So you say "Sorry, no dancing-bunnies.exe on this part of the LAN. If you want to do virus research, do it at home, or, if we think you're smart enough, we'll give you a PC on the portion of the network that we've separated from the company LAN, and you can do research there without any risk of the dancing bunnies spreading to other users..."
And then you wipe the disk and reinstall the OS from a known good image.
The only reason classified information should appear on an unclassified machine is if there's a security breach. If every innocent download of dancing-bunnies.exe results in a nuke-and-reinstall on sight, your security researchers will stop doing it on the company LAN, eliminating the false positives.
I'm not sure, but it sounds like the logical extension of that is to round up all personnel who possess any knowledge of the leaked information and shoot them.
Just to make sure the infection is completely contained.
There is still value in maintaining a document's classified status even after the information has been released publicly. Just because CNN or some website has released a secret doesn't mean that Bad Guy X happened to be paying attention enough to go ahead and download the information. If information becomes automatically declassified the moment someone leaks it, you are just making it that much easier for future bad guys to acquire that knowledge. There is something to be said for making it as hard as possible for our enemies to acquire information that can be used against us. No need to make it easier for them by acquire it. Make them do the work necessary to seek out those sources that may have leaked it.
In this particular case, however, the Bad Guys would have had to have been on a 6-week drunk in the middle of the desert to have missed it. And still be there. If they had to do any less work it would be because door-to-door salesmen were peddling it on the streets.
I can understand the need to be cautious about leaked information, since those in the know are at risk for letting more things be known than had actually been known. Still, there comes a point where you can have the absurd situation where the bad guys know more than the good guys. Which is laughable enough in closed societies, but rather pathetic in what are allegedly open ones.
Dear Microsoft, I don't want my phone to know what I eat for breakfast, how I'm feeling or how I choose to spend my time. I just need it to make phone calls and check my email. That's it. That's all.
Can you please stop being such a creepy digital stalker? It's gone well past disturbing at this point.
Welcome! To the Microsoft Help Line. All of our agents are currently busy helping other customers. Please stay on the line. Your call is VERY important to us! Oh dear...
No, when you're sad, the NSA will have cause to spy on you.
Or angry.
Samsung and HTC, and doubtless others, invented this first. My Galaxy S3 has a combined USB, HDMI and audio port. My ancient HTC Hero had a combined USB and audio port. Different connectors used different pins.
It seems like anything is new and worthy of patenting if it's on a computer, on the internet or on an Apple :-(
Technically, the Nook tablets did as well. Although you can plug a stock micro-usb cable into them, the speciality cable that came with the unit penetrated further into the socket and had something like 12 connectors instead of the standard 4. The extra connections lit up the multi-color charge status LED in the cable, but they also informed circuitry within the Nook. A stock micro USB registers as "Not Charging" even when it actually is charging.
it seems like there should be a simple and effective way to prevent the NSA from collecting metadada on you with a properly configured HOSTS file. If there were only some smart cookie that could explain it to us.
Well, sure. We'll just upload one to our Verizon cellphone.
What? You thought that the metadata came only from the INTERNET???
If you look at the laws themselves it's a bit weird; 18 USC sec. 2332a seems to introduce the term "weapons of mass destruction" for the sole purpose of re-naming a definition provided in 18 USC sec. 921 called "destructive device," which dates to 1934 at the latest. I'm not savvy enough to figure out when the "WMD" terminology was introduced, but it's at least older than 1996 and seems to serve no purpose other than sounding grandiose.
This is why laws should not be permitted to be introduced except that first one cubic inch of flesh and blood should be removed from the legislator's body.
Dead is dead. Murder is murder. If a person deliberately murders someone, we don't need 137 different types of murder law to charge the offender on, just one. Adding more anti-murder laws is grandiose at best and at worst may end up in creating legal loopholes that a broader definition would not.
Hmmm. The geotags for this set of beach pictures show that they weren't too far from this daycare center run by a couple whose mother-in-law is from Lebanon.
TERRORISTS!
I'm confused, if a connector designed by one company and used only by that company is not a proprietary connector, what is?
Well, if you're a proper Apple fanboi, it's a Universal Connector!