So what was the allegedly classified information? If this is all able to made public now, what specific thing did the government want deleted from the record of what the attorney had said?
The drug is NOT ready. That's the whole point of this. They were given experimental "serum" which had not even reached Human trials (years away from them in fact, they had just recently reached simian trials after the mouse models which is essentially the very first step towards human trials). This stuff could have outright killed them. These two people subjected themselves to essentially untested experimentation in the hope of a miracle. They got lucky.
Had they tested this stuff on a bunch of Africans and they died can you imagine the bad press it would have generated? I can see the headlines now. "America tests drugs on poor Africans in unethical medical experimentation".
While I agree, if you're dying already... I mean, here's a wavier form to sign before we give you this, but... your options are a 60% chance of death (I think that's what this strain is at so far) and you seem to be deteriorating fast into that 60%; *or* an experimental drug that might cure you, or kill you, and we're not really sure what the odds are - but it's worked in mice and monkeys so far.
I'm reminded of trying to tweak VM parameters back in Linux 2.4.x kernel days, and finding out that "vm.fooparam" worked in 2.4.6, was deprecated by 2.4.12, and then brought back in 2.4.18... while "vm.barparam" didn't exist in 2.4.6, was new for 2.4.12, and probably did nothing by 2.4.18... it was just silly to have to dig around just to find out what parameters actually did anything in what really was a "patch release".
Step 1: configure an IGP. For more information on how to configure an IGP, see chapter 12, section 3.
Step 2: enable the appropriate interfaces for MPLS. For more information on how to enable interfaces for MPLS, see chapter 2, section 1.
Step 3: create an LSP between the two PE nodes. For more information an how to configure LSPs, see chapter 2, section 10.
Step 4: enable a signaling protocol such as BGP or LDP. For more information on how to configure BGP as an L3VPN signaling protocol, see chapter 10, section 9. For more information on how to configure (targeted) LDP as your L3VPN signaling protocol, see chapter 7, section 1.
Step 5: configure the route-target: set route-target 12345:1. For more information on route-target configuration, see chapter 8, section 2.
Step 6: configure the route-distinguisher: set route-distinguisher 12345:100. For more information on route-distinguisher configuration, see chapter 8, section 3.
And that, my friend, is why commercial documentation sucks a monkey's ass.
Damn, you just described the O'Reilly Sendmail book perfectly! (LMFAO) It's an excellent reference for someone who knows a good amount about Sendmail already, but even as a fairly advanced admin I find it really convoluted in a lot of ways.
And if you know ed, you know edlin for windows/dos. Believe it or not, I've had some machines so messed up at times, or on such slow connections, knowing ed/edlin came in handy.
Yeah, I've worked on everything from BSD SunOS4.x, Solaris, DEC Ultrix, SGI Irix, HPUX, Apollo Domain(BSD), UniPlus 68K stuff, Linux, Net/Free/OpenBSD, and I'm sure I'm missing something(s) in there, the one constant has been ed/vi. I can hop on pretty much any flavor of "unix" and get things done, not sure why I'd want to learn a new one when I'm pretty proficient in what I know now.
I'm sure there's some nice features in some of them, I just really haven't needed them (or not often enough to really care if it takes me a bit longer once in a blue moon to do something they might make easier).
Not at all. According to this ruling, the entity accused of committing a crime *in the US* can be required to turn over the existing evidence of the activity which is *illegal* in the US. Documents showing you smoked pot in Amsterdam would be immaterial to prosecuting for smoking pot in the US. (If you were dumb enough to claim that you *never* smoked pot, however, it would completely and utterly destroy your credibility.)
Actually, if you were dumb enough to claim *in court* that you never smoked pot, you could be held in contempt for lying in court and tossed in jail until the judge decides to let you out, regardless of if you ever smoked anything in the US.
Our government has jurisdiction over its citizens, and businesses that operate within its borders.
Basically, what you're saying is that you think that if someone on US soil does something illegal, and hides the evidence offshore, the government shouldn't be able to get to said evidence without jumping through a crapton of legal hoops?
There is no more of a 'crapton' of legal hoops than there is here... if the data is in the US, they go to a US judge with their evidence for a warrant,and once they have the warrant they get the information. If the data is in the EU/UK, they take their evidence for the warrant to a EU/UK judge/court and ask for authorization to get the data, and if the EU/UK judge ok's it as being within the laws of their country, they get approval to get the data.
No more "hoops" then they have to go through here, just a different judge.
- You've hidden bombs on public transit all over the country, and the list of where you hid them is stored on a server in the UK; should the government be able to get a warrant for that information?
And a not so appropriate, yet still thought provoking one:
- You're a serial killer in the US, but every time you murder someone you drive to your Canadian cabin in the woods to hide the body; should the US be able to get search warrants for said cabin?
First case, yes, since we have treaties with the UK for such things they should be able to contact GCHQ or whoever in the UK and get a warrant for them to get that information and turn it over to the US authorities (assuming they have actual evidence that the server in question actually contains that information).
And yes to the second, again the US has treaties and a 'working relationship' with Canada and I'm sure they could get the RCMP to work with them to raid the Canadian cabin and search the woods for hidden bodies - again, assuming they have some actual evidence to warrant such a request.
Note that if it's a server in North Korea, or a cabin in North Korea the guy is somehow getting the bodies back to, this may be a moot point since we have no real diplomatic relations with NK - they may, however, comply anyways if requested, who knows - point being that it is up to the country in question to comply with our request, they are not "bound" by our laws, but in the interest of cooperation they might agree.
The legal situation has already been cleaned up, though Microsoft isn't happy about it. Microsoft has already published on this since the last ruling. What they are asserting is that the foreign customer (business) that uses Azure is knowingly transferring their data to the USA (regardless of where the physical servers are) when they use Azure and thus they are the ones legally responsible. So far that seems to be pasting muster with the EU.
I.e. Azure sells to company X in France. Company X has data that is subject to privacy laws. By company X using Azure they are the ones moving the data to the USA violating French law. Which turns this into a France / French company issue and not an Microsoft / France issue. Better for everyone to regulate.
So, in essence, everyone in the world should stop using US services entirely. I'm sure that helps the US economy greatly. (/sarcasm)
What if the data was in my locked briefcase in Microsoft's London office.... Do you think they should just hand it over to USA prosecutors without going through the UK's legal process?
Yes. Microsoft USA has a legal obligation to get it from Microsoft UK even if the data is in the London office. Microsoft UK may not care but Microsoft USA must.
So if MSUSA gets the demand for the data, and they ask MSUK for it, and MSUK says "no, it's against UK law for us to give you that" - does MSUSA sue MSUK in a UK court, spending MS money on lawyers on both sides (US & UK) to basically sue themselves for access? Or should they simply tell the government "MSUK says it's against UK law, you'll have to take it up in the UK courts" and the US govt then takes MSUK to UK court to try and get it?
If a US court subpoena business records from a US entity, that entity must produce those records or provide a reason why they can not comply. Simply saying that the requested records are with an overseas subsidiary isn't going to fly as the US entity has control of the subsidiary, and thus the US entity can direct the subsidiary to produce the records and the subsidiary cannot say no.
If subpoenas were that easy to evade all multinationals would do it.
Perhaps, but what if producing said records is against the law in the other country?
For instance, what if the US requests health care records for an EU employee in a subsidiary? Or, in the reverse, what if an EU company wants the health care records for an employee in a US subsidiary? Does HIPAA apply or EU laws? What if a company headquartered in Saudi Arabia has a US subsidiary, and they catch your GF/wife driving to her job at their subsidiary... do they have the right to give her 50 lashes because women driving is against the law in S.A.?
What if someone stored child pr0n on overseas servers? You want them to get out of jail because the data is in a different country? Of course not. Where the data is stored should not matter, not in that case or in any other case.
Let me know how that works out when your GF gets beaten/stoned to death for not wearing her burka in public, because it's against the law in some Islamic countries and by your rationale those laws should apply here too, right?
If you believe Chinese test results then you probably are busy taking photos of the North Korean unicorn burial site as well. They lie about everything. Sometimes I think China is run by 5 year olds.
NK is killing unicorns?!?! OMG those evil scumbags!!:P
Everyone who has experimented with High Voltage 30-40KV+ will tell you that there is a thrust effect, observed. Clearly, this is due to the push against the dielectric particles of air, here on earth, but the same is true for the interplanetary space, just there the particle are fewer but of course the speeds they accelerate to a lot higher. If one reads Tesla's publications in "The Electrical Engineer" from June 10, 1892 ( and several others form the same train of publications), (s)he will realize the concepts and see that this is naturally possible phenomena, just requites clear understanding without common misconceptions.
That's called an ion drive, you're ionizing the free air around you (or in space perhaps a very thin amount of particles for much smaller thrust), You are still a 'reaction' drive, just not carrying the 'fuel' - not a 'reactionless' drive which this is claiming.
The aliens won't be happy when a box full of radioactive stuff collides with their spaceship and doses them with radiation 1000 years from now.
We might be extinct by then, of course... and if they don't have FTL travel it'll be another 1000 years+ after that for them to get here, to blow us all to extinction anyways for our negligence in launching toxic radioactive crap into space at them.
What has he done to change anything beyond stupid platitudes that tons of ignorant liberals lapped up? We charge people who drive by the scene of an accident as negligible so why should Obama not be held to the same standard?
I might consider them negligent, but I'm not really sure what considering them "negligible" means in this context, nor why they would be able to be charged with anything for it.
"Negligible: so small, trifling, or unimportant that it may safely be neglected or disregarded."
We quite honestly do need to improve our educational system, since it seems to produce lots of people who accuse others of ignorance, while at the same time showing their own ignorance of the English language.
You want to let the NSA get a full 3D representation of your face, from multiple angles, just to make sure the citywide cameras can track you everywhere, so their job is far easier for them?
Everyone else, every law-abiding citizen, may move on, nothing to see here...
So you're a law-abiding citizen? I'll correct you on that the next time I see you on the roads doing even 1mph over the speed limit - you'll be 'breaking the law' y'know?
Studies show normal ordinary people 'break the law' at least 3x/day on average. Heck, getting a BJ from your wife is illegal in some states (as far as 'a law on the books') still. So, they may not be 'strictly enforced' laws, but I'm willing to bet every 'law abiding citizen' (so they think) has broken the law, and does so quite often really.
Slashdot Mirror
Ignorance is Strength.
War is Peace.
Freedom is Slavery.
The Ministry of Truth watches everything you do. Please report to room 101 at the Ministry of Love for your reconditioning.
So what was the allegedly classified information?
If this is all able to made public now, what specific thing did the government want deleted from the record of what the attorney had said?
That's classified. :-P
The drug is NOT ready. That's the whole point of this. They were given experimental "serum" which had not even reached Human trials (years away from them in fact, they had just recently reached simian trials after the mouse models which is essentially the very first step towards human trials). This stuff could have outright killed them. These two people subjected themselves to essentially untested experimentation in the hope of a miracle. They got lucky.
Had they tested this stuff on a bunch of Africans and they died can you imagine the bad press it would have generated? I can see the headlines now. "America tests drugs on poor Africans in unethical medical experimentation".
While I agree, if you're dying already... I mean, here's a wavier form to sign before we give you this, but... your options are a 60% chance of death (I think that's what this strain is at so far) and you seem to be deteriorating fast into that 60%; *or* an experimental drug that might cure you, or kill you, and we're not really sure what the odds are - but it's worked in mice and monkeys so far.
What would you choose?
I'm reminded of trying to tweak VM parameters back in Linux 2.4.x kernel days, and finding out that "vm.fooparam" worked in 2.4.6, was deprecated by 2.4.12, and then brought back in 2.4.18... while "vm.barparam" didn't exist in 2.4.6, was new for 2.4.12, and probably did nothing by 2.4.18... it was just silly to have to dig around just to find out what parameters actually did anything in what really was a "patch release".
They will come up with this:
Step 1: configure an IGP. For more information on how to configure an IGP, see chapter 12, section 3.
Step 2: enable the appropriate interfaces for MPLS. For more information on how to enable interfaces for MPLS, see chapter 2, section 1.
Step 3: create an LSP between the two PE nodes. For more information an how to configure LSPs, see chapter 2, section 10.
Step 4: enable a signaling protocol such as BGP or LDP. For more information on how to configure BGP as an L3VPN signaling protocol, see chapter 10, section 9. For more information on how to configure (targeted) LDP as your L3VPN signaling protocol, see chapter 7, section 1.
Step 5: configure the route-target: set route-target 12345:1. For more information on route-target configuration, see chapter 8, section 2.
Step 6: configure the route-distinguisher: set route-distinguisher 12345:100. For more information on route-distinguisher configuration, see chapter 8, section 3.
And that, my friend, is why commercial documentation sucks a monkey's ass.
Damn, you just described the O'Reilly Sendmail book perfectly! (LMFAO)
It's an excellent reference for someone who knows a good amount about Sendmail already, but even as a fairly advanced admin I find it really convoluted in a lot of ways.
And if you know ed, you know edlin for windows/dos.
Believe it or not, I've had some machines so messed up at times, or on such slow connections, knowing ed/edlin came in handy.
I would have gone for "ed" maybe. ;)
Yeah, I've worked on everything from BSD SunOS4.x, Solaris, DEC Ultrix, SGI Irix, HPUX, Apollo Domain(BSD), UniPlus 68K stuff, Linux, Net/Free/OpenBSD, and I'm sure I'm missing something(s) in there, the one constant has been ed/vi. I can hop on pretty much any flavor of "unix" and get things done, not sure why I'd want to learn a new one when I'm pretty proficient in what I know now.
I'm sure there's some nice features in some of them, I just really haven't needed them (or not often enough to really care if it takes me a bit longer once in a blue moon to do something they might make easier).
Not at all. According to this ruling, the entity accused of committing a crime *in the US* can be required to turn over the existing evidence of the activity which is *illegal* in the US. Documents showing you smoked pot in Amsterdam would be immaterial to prosecuting for smoking pot in the US. (If you were dumb enough to claim that you *never* smoked pot, however, it would completely and utterly destroy your credibility.)
Actually, if you were dumb enough to claim *in court* that you never smoked pot, you could be held in contempt for lying in court and tossed in jail until the judge decides to let you out, regardless of if you ever smoked anything in the US.
Our government has jurisdiction over its citizens, and businesses that operate within its borders.
Basically, what you're saying is that you think that if someone on US soil does something illegal, and hides the evidence offshore, the government shouldn't be able to get to said evidence without jumping through a crapton of legal hoops?
There is no more of a 'crapton' of legal hoops than there is here... if the data is in the US, they go to a US judge with their evidence for a warrant,and once they have the warrant they get the information. If the data is in the EU/UK, they take their evidence for the warrant to a EU/UK judge/court and ask for authorization to get the data, and if the EU/UK judge ok's it as being within the laws of their country, they get approval to get the data.
No more "hoops" then they have to go through here, just a different judge.
OK, thought of a good counter analogy:
- You've hidden bombs on public transit all over the country, and the list of where you hid them is stored on a server in the UK; should the government be able to get a warrant for that information?
And a not so appropriate, yet still thought provoking one:
- You're a serial killer in the US, but every time you murder someone you drive to your Canadian cabin in the woods to hide the body; should the US be able to get search warrants for said cabin?
First case, yes, since we have treaties with the UK for such things they should be able to contact GCHQ or whoever in the UK and get a warrant for them to get that information and turn it over to the US authorities (assuming they have actual evidence that the server in question actually contains that information).
And yes to the second, again the US has treaties and a 'working relationship' with Canada and I'm sure they could get the RCMP to work with them to raid the Canadian cabin and search the woods for hidden bodies - again, assuming they have some actual evidence to warrant such a request.
Note that if it's a server in North Korea, or a cabin in North Korea the guy is somehow getting the bodies back to, this may be a moot point since we have no real diplomatic relations with NK - they may, however, comply anyways if requested, who knows - point being that it is up to the country in question to comply with our request, they are not "bound" by our laws, but in the interest of cooperation they might agree.
The legal situation has already been cleaned up, though Microsoft isn't happy about it. Microsoft has already published on this since the last ruling. What they are asserting is that the foreign customer (business) that uses Azure is knowingly transferring their data to the USA (regardless of where the physical servers are) when they use Azure and thus they are the ones legally responsible. So far that seems to be pasting muster with the EU.
I.e. Azure sells to company X in France. Company X has data that is subject to privacy laws. By company X using Azure they are the ones moving the data to the USA violating French law. Which turns this into a France / French company issue and not an Microsoft / France issue. Better for everyone to regulate.
So, in essence, everyone in the world should stop using US services entirely.
I'm sure that helps the US economy greatly. (/sarcasm)
Yes. Microsoft USA has a legal obligation to get it from Microsoft UK even if the data is in the London office. Microsoft UK may not care but Microsoft USA must.
So if MSUSA gets the demand for the data, and they ask MSUK for it, and MSUK says "no, it's against UK law for us to give you that" - does MSUSA sue MSUK in a UK court, spending MS money on lawyers on both sides (US & UK) to basically sue themselves for access? Or should they simply tell the government "MSUK says it's against UK law, you'll have to take it up in the UK courts" and the US govt then takes MSUK to UK court to try and get it?
If a US court subpoena business records from a US entity, that entity must produce those records or provide a reason why they can not comply. Simply saying that the requested records are with an overseas subsidiary isn't going to fly as the US entity has control of the subsidiary, and thus the US entity can direct the subsidiary to produce the records and the subsidiary cannot say no.
If subpoenas were that easy to evade all multinationals would do it.
Perhaps, but what if producing said records is against the law in the other country?
For instance, what if the US requests health care records for an EU employee in a subsidiary? Or, in the reverse, what if an EU company wants the health care records for an employee in a US subsidiary? Does HIPAA apply or EU laws? What if a company headquartered in Saudi Arabia has a US subsidiary, and they catch your GF/wife driving to her job at their subsidiary... do they have the right to give her 50 lashes because women driving is against the law in S.A.?
What if someone stored child pr0n on overseas servers? You want them to get out of jail because the data is in a different country? Of course not. Where the data is stored should not matter, not in that case or in any other case.
Let me know how that works out when your GF gets beaten/stoned to death for not wearing her burka in public, because it's against the law in some Islamic countries and by your rationale those laws should apply here too, right?
So now we're going to create virtual plasma from virtual particles to drive our virtual spacecraft to virtually anywhere?
If you believe Chinese test results then you probably are busy taking photos of the North Korean unicorn burial site as well. They lie about everything. Sometimes I think China is run by 5 year olds.
NK is killing unicorns?!?! OMG those evil scumbags!! :P
Everyone who has experimented with High Voltage 30-40KV+ will tell you that there is a thrust effect, observed. Clearly, this is due to the push against the dielectric particles of air, here on earth, but the same is true for the interplanetary space, just there the particle are fewer but of course the speeds they accelerate to a lot higher. If one reads Tesla's publications in "The Electrical Engineer" from June 10, 1892 ( and several others form the same train of publications), (s)he will realize the concepts and see that this is naturally possible phenomena, just requites clear understanding without common misconceptions.
That's called an ion drive, you're ionizing the free air around you (or in space perhaps a very thin amount of particles for much smaller thrust), You are still a 'reaction' drive, just not carrying the 'fuel' - not a 'reactionless' drive which this is claiming.
The aliens won't be happy when a box full of radioactive stuff collides with their spaceship and doses them with radiation 1000 years from now.
We might be extinct by then, of course... and if they don't have FTL travel it'll be another 1000 years+ after that for them to get here, to blow us all to extinction anyways for our negligence in launching toxic radioactive crap into space at them.
Tea. Earl Grey.
It's easy to fix, all you have to do is reverse the polarity of the neutron flow and you'll save the day.
"Obama's America"? Really? Fucking moron.
What has he done to change anything beyond stupid platitudes that tons of ignorant liberals lapped up? We charge people who drive by the scene of an accident as negligible so why should Obama not be held to the same standard?
I might consider them negligent, but I'm not really sure what considering them "negligible" means in this context, nor why they would be able to be charged with anything for it.
"Negligible: so small, trifling, or unimportant that it may safely be neglected or disregarded."
We quite honestly do need to improve our educational system, since it seems to produce lots of people who accuse others of ignorance, while at the same time showing their own ignorance of the English language.
You want to let the NSA get a full 3D representation of your face, from multiple angles, just to make sure the citywide cameras can track you everywhere, so their job is far easier for them?
Everyone else, every law-abiding citizen, may move on, nothing to see here...
So you're a law-abiding citizen?
I'll correct you on that the next time I see you on the roads doing even 1mph over the speed limit - you'll be 'breaking the law' y'know?
Studies show normal ordinary people 'break the law' at least 3x/day on average.
Heck, getting a BJ from your wife is illegal in some states (as far as 'a law on the books') still.
So, they may not be 'strictly enforced' laws, but I'm willing to bet every 'law abiding citizen' (so they think) has broken the law, and does so quite often really.
Is it? Maybe the precursor to Janus (Utopia TV series) or Inferno (Dan Brown)...
Utopia