Exactly. I haven't seen this specific show, but every other crime drama on TV seems to portray the cops as being able to go snatch information from just about anything they can get into, through any means, without any discussion of a warrant. These shows are training our young people that cops can do just about anything they want in the online world as long as they are chasing an alleged bad guy. Law enforcement may play pretty fast and loose in reality, but it isn't good to teach the public that it's standard procedure to hack into whatever they please and grab data from all sorts of sources that a reasonable person would consider private.
I was also bothered by this coverage. Not all attention is good attention in this case. To turn this into a joke isn't helpful to the cause in the slightest. I don't think the public is as stupid as Oliver makes them out to be, though studies have shown that far too many are too stupid to understand why government surveillance is an issue. I'd site the Pew Study from 2013, but most of the links fail for me currently. We certainly do have to keep discussing the issues as a nation and we have to keep finding new ways to frame the issues to get more people to understand the harm that is caused by overreaching surveillance, but turning it into a dick joke isn't very helpful. On the other hand one of the keys to getting the public to give a shit is demonstrating real world harm. If the sanctity of our collective dick pics is really what fucking matters then fine, as long as those people actually start paying attention and vocalizing their opposition to unconstitutional surveillance. Somehow yet, I doubt our elected officials will be getting many letters about the importance of dick pic privacy.
Sometimes doing the right thing is illegal. I don't expect the government to look the other way. Doing the right thing in spite of the consequences is what makes it heroic. I know they won't give him amnesty, I'll be happy enough if they just don't capture him abroad or have him killed.
Maybe we could just convince content providers to voluntarily substitute reported revenge porn images with nude photos of Al Franken. That would be punishment for all would be observers.
Darn Snowden and his outdated sense of patriotism. I guess he didn't get the memo that the Bill of Right's was downgraded the legal status of "Just a suggestion". It should have been clear to him that the American people couldn't be trusted with knowing what the government is doing to them. Good thing they already got all that money budgeted, because if there is one thing we know it's that once a program is a line item on the budget it can't be stopped.
License plates are visible and a single check at a point in time isn't very telling, but if you write a query that says "show me all the license plates that have been in the vicinity of this intersection by this church on Sunday between 9AM and 5PM more than 3 times in past 60 days", I bet you'd have a pretty good idea of who attends. You can apply the same logic to find residence, employer, or just about anything that is a consistent pattern. You can treat anyone who was present around the time of an incident as a potential suspect. The argument gets made that it is legal to follow a car on the street without a warrant so this is no different, but while cops can follow one car, they don't have resources to follow everyone and in this case the technology allows them to follow everyone all the time. All they have to do is ask the database the right question and they can find out just about anything they want about people's habits or about which people are likely connected to a specific location.
Valuing device longevity rather than having all devices being disposable after 2-3 years seems like low hanging fruit from an environmental perspective that gets very little attention. Especially now that things like Blueray players and other devices are getting embedded apps like Netflix and a variety of other applications, it is getting harder to have devices with reasonable lifespans. The manufacturers in general are driven to produce products with the lowest possible price right now, and have little incentive to build in longevity. Devices containing internet connected software applications make this worse because manufacturers don't want to develop and support updates for something sold five years ago. My experience too often is that manufactures force firmware updates and eventually one of the updates breaks the functionality of the device. There is no incentive to maintain a stable code base that can exist indefinitely without intervention. How many appliances purchased in decades past lasted for twenty years or better? How many of the things we buy today will be in use 7 years from now? I think we are in a period of rapid innovation where stable higher longevity products are not going to be the norm, but I really hope in a few years we can adapt to a more sustainable model where the things we buy can have a longer expected service life. Rapid innovation and extreme devaluing of commodity items comes at cost, despite the benefits to the consumer.
Employers should prefer you not to be on Facebook. My employers expect me to maintain their security and not to blab about their business to the world. Interviewers who knock people for not having a social media profile or a "fully developed" Linkedin profile are idiots. Unless you are in marketing or PR fields it shouldn't matter at all. Socially, you can compromise your own personal values to blend in, or you can live as you choose and not give a shit. The idea that someone without a social media presence is suspicious is an over generalization of human existence and a very unfortunate trend in society.
I'll add, you should actually keep the stuff he says is important to hold onto. I've spent a lot of time in the past collecting historical documents and organizing stuff so my employers can retain it after I'm gone. Three times now I've returned to companies where instead of keeping my data they wipe the laptop, delete my email and destroy years of valuable data. I've learned that companies cannot be trusted to keep valuable data and they will often not keep you on long enough to do proper knowledge transfer. Now I prepare docs ahead of resignation and hand them off to my peers and stuff it on shared servers, because management doesn't seem to consider employees might have had data of any value.
As much as I'd hate to see a circus of lawsuits around this issue, it's clear there is an ethical obligation of sites to warranty their advertisements to do no harm. A user willingly goes to www.reputablesite.com, but they have no informed consent over all the advertisements and other links that site displays, they just load along with the requested page. If the requested page is loading third party content and getting paid to do so, then clearly they should make every effort to screen for malware or abuse.
Amazon is the Wal-Mart of the internet. We should build a drone large enough to deliver Jeff Bezos to a remote island where he can no longer harm anyone.
Good thing they have all that metadata to parse so it's easy to know who the journalist are, you know, so they can get a warrant before accessing their data.
My preference is for public execution by gun to the back of the head, to be completed exactly three months after conviction. Paying for lengthy appeals and decades of sitting on death row costing the tax payers money is not effective. It should be swift and without apology or undue spectacle. Either, do it and do it quickly out in the open, or abolish it completely and stop wasting resources.
A Pony is a tiny horse, but a Clony is a tiny horse and an abomination. The four horsemen of the apocalypse may yet arrive on four genetically identical steeds.
I understand this article to mean that we have simply given up on having any agreed upon proper English. I'll admit I'm a pretty sloppy writer, but I'd rather that the true academics guide the course of what is considered proper English, than allow language to be whatever general society decides. Rather than saying there isn't one definition of proper English we can simply acknowledge there are regional differences and varying tolerances for lack of strict usage and percentage of slang. In common speech we may accept that with is considered normal, but when the occasion arises that more formal language is expected, the need for proper English becomes evident.
The password could still be saved in the client and 2FA added as an additional layer. I personally won't be using Yahoo! mail for mobile much longer as their new versions require extensive additional permissions. Currently the app has no objectionable permissions, but the new version wants much more, namely: Device & App History, Identity, Contacts, Location, SMS, Wi-Fi connection info, Device ID and Call info. My current app functions as needed, WTF would I enable all that additional access? I pay for premium services on Yahoo mail, I expect better.
How are the ISPs responding currently? Is there any current international cooperation for shutting down offenders based on good faith evidence?
I would tend to agree the ISP responsible for allowing a user to transmit traffic on the internet has the ethical obligation to squash malicious criminal action that is harming other internet users. I'd also like them to be the first line, but I think the government or better yet an independent international team should have abilities that would go beyond those of the ISP as just shutting down access isn't always going to be the first best path toward analysis and prosecution of the attack coordinator.
Yes, I've been to California lately and those of us like myself that support efforts to stop the constant waterfall of idiotic, burdensome, ineffective gun laws have our hands full trying to keep gun phobic citizens and legislators in check. Having police going on television stating that they estimate there are 500K unserialized AR type guns in California alone and that some of them are showing up at high profile crime scenes is not helping the cause. Any action that creates more public fear related to firearms is counter-productive to maintaining our rights. I'm not citing that 500K number, because I don't believe it's true, but that is what the nightly news is allowing the public to hear. I do understand that Cody Wilson is not responsible for a high number of recently produced weapons; he hasn't been able to offer that many milling machines. It's more independent machine shops that are cranking out volume. I just have to pick on Cody, because he's been the vocal public face trying to legitimize homemade guns as a movement. It's perfectly legal to make a firearm for yourself in the manner Cody's machine is intended, but none the less, the idea of "Ghostguns" is all it takes to get the "Think of the Children" banners flying. If I had my way we'd have shall issue CCW in every state with national right to carry, open carry, stand your ground and castle doctrine in every state in the land. As it stands though our legislators and a good many of the citizens they serve are clueless and fearful of guns and the best I know how to do is play defense in the states that suffer with such ignorance.
While I would much like legislators to understand that no matter what laws they make that guns will always be available, I feel this approach is doomed to fail. Guns are old technology, so as long as humans have the means to combine propellant with a projectile and an ignition source in a tube of sufficient strength, guns will be available in society. That said, please stop making homemade unserialized weapons. All that is going to result from that is that they will make new laws and those laws may be written so poorly as to put controls not only on serialized parts considered to be the "firearm", but on many common components. The spread of unserialized weapons may also cause more states to require gun registration. Cody, your actions will have harmful unintended consequences for gun owners. I'm sure you mean well, but it is a flawed strategy.
IT jobs are one area where there is demand for workers, it's so helpful that the government would like to fix that. Companies lacking for workers to hire is what keeps upward pressure on wages. If the jobs are there and pay well, then the workers will follow because there is incentive to develop the marketable skills. If the government keeps trying to fix this situation they are going to seriously fuck it up for everyone. It's good that they have a large number of openings to fill because they need to cut down on the hyper judgmental selection process in HR. If business hadn't shut out so many workers they pitched in the garbage pile in the dot-com bust and had more proactively trained and internally promoted people to manage the labor supply they would be in better shape today.
If government officials are using personal mail on public mail servers from the network at the State Dept they also have some serious security issues. Most corporate security policies prohibit that behavior for good reason, even if they don't enforce it. It generally bypasses your email antivirus protection.
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly. I haven't seen this specific show, but every other crime drama on TV seems to portray the cops as being able to go snatch information from just about anything they can get into, through any means, without any discussion of a warrant. These shows are training our young people that cops can do just about anything they want in the online world as long as they are chasing an alleged bad guy. Law enforcement may play pretty fast and loose in reality, but it isn't good to teach the public that it's standard procedure to hack into whatever they please and grab data from all sorts of sources that a reasonable person would consider private.
I was also bothered by this coverage. Not all attention is good attention in this case. To turn this into a joke isn't helpful to the cause in the slightest. I don't think the public is as stupid as Oliver makes them out to be, though studies have shown that far too many are too stupid to understand why government surveillance is an issue. I'd site the Pew Study from 2013, but most of the links fail for me currently. We certainly do have to keep discussing the issues as a nation and we have to keep finding new ways to frame the issues to get more people to understand the harm that is caused by overreaching surveillance, but turning it into a dick joke isn't very helpful. On the other hand one of the keys to getting the public to give a shit is demonstrating real world harm. If the sanctity of our collective dick pics is really what fucking matters then fine, as long as those people actually start paying attention and vocalizing their opposition to unconstitutional surveillance. Somehow yet, I doubt our elected officials will be getting many letters about the importance of dick pic privacy.
Sometimes doing the right thing is illegal. I don't expect the government to look the other way. Doing the right thing in spite of the consequences is what makes it heroic. I know they won't give him amnesty, I'll be happy enough if they just don't capture him abroad or have him killed.
Maybe we could just convince content providers to voluntarily substitute reported revenge porn images with nude photos of Al Franken. That would be punishment for all would be observers.
Darn Snowden and his outdated sense of patriotism. I guess he didn't get the memo that the Bill of Right's was downgraded the legal status of "Just a suggestion". It should have been clear to him that the American people couldn't be trusted with knowing what the government is doing to them. Good thing they already got all that money budgeted, because if there is one thing we know it's that once a program is a line item on the budget it can't be stopped.
License plates are visible and a single check at a point in time isn't very telling, but if you write a query that says "show me all the license plates that have been in the vicinity of this intersection by this church on Sunday between 9AM and 5PM more than 3 times in past 60 days", I bet you'd have a pretty good idea of who attends. You can apply the same logic to find residence, employer, or just about anything that is a consistent pattern. You can treat anyone who was present around the time of an incident as a potential suspect. The argument gets made that it is legal to follow a car on the street without a warrant so this is no different, but while cops can follow one car, they don't have resources to follow everyone and in this case the technology allows them to follow everyone all the time. All they have to do is ask the database the right question and they can find out just about anything they want about people's habits or about which people are likely connected to a specific location.
Valuing device longevity rather than having all devices being disposable after 2-3 years seems like low hanging fruit from an environmental perspective that gets very little attention. Especially now that things like Blueray players and other devices are getting embedded apps like Netflix and a variety of other applications, it is getting harder to have devices with reasonable lifespans. The manufacturers in general are driven to produce products with the lowest possible price right now, and have little incentive to build in longevity. Devices containing internet connected software applications make this worse because manufacturers don't want to develop and support updates for something sold five years ago. My experience too often is that manufactures force firmware updates and eventually one of the updates breaks the functionality of the device. There is no incentive to maintain a stable code base that can exist indefinitely without intervention. How many appliances purchased in decades past lasted for twenty years or better? How many of the things we buy today will be in use 7 years from now? I think we are in a period of rapid innovation where stable higher longevity products are not going to be the norm, but I really hope in a few years we can adapt to a more sustainable model where the things we buy can have a longer expected service life. Rapid innovation and extreme devaluing of commodity items comes at cost, despite the benefits to the consumer.
Employers should prefer you not to be on Facebook. My employers expect me to maintain their security and not to blab about their business to the world. Interviewers who knock people for not having a social media profile or a "fully developed" Linkedin profile are idiots. Unless you are in marketing or PR fields it shouldn't matter at all. Socially, you can compromise your own personal values to blend in, or you can live as you choose and not give a shit. The idea that someone without a social media presence is suspicious is an over generalization of human existence and a very unfortunate trend in society.
Staples creates Easy Button for marketing purposes, Amazon makes it actually do something in real life.
I'll add, you should actually keep the stuff he says is important to hold onto. I've spent a lot of time in the past collecting historical documents and organizing stuff so my employers can retain it after I'm gone. Three times now I've returned to companies where instead of keeping my data they wipe the laptop, delete my email and destroy years of valuable data. I've learned that companies cannot be trusted to keep valuable data and they will often not keep you on long enough to do proper knowledge transfer. Now I prepare docs ahead of resignation and hand them off to my peers and stuff it on shared servers, because management doesn't seem to consider employees might have had data of any value.
As much as I'd hate to see a circus of lawsuits around this issue, it's clear there is an ethical obligation of sites to warranty their advertisements to do no harm. A user willingly goes to www.reputablesite.com, but they have no informed consent over all the advertisements and other links that site displays, they just load along with the requested page. If the requested page is loading third party content and getting paid to do so, then clearly they should make every effort to screen for malware or abuse.
Amazon is the Wal-Mart of the internet. We should build a drone large enough to deliver Jeff Bezos to a remote island where he can no longer harm anyone.
Good thing they have all that metadata to parse so it's easy to know who the journalist are, you know, so they can get a warrant before accessing their data.
My preference is for public execution by gun to the back of the head, to be completed exactly three months after conviction. Paying for lengthy appeals and decades of sitting on death row costing the tax payers money is not effective. It should be swift and without apology or undue spectacle. Either, do it and do it quickly out in the open, or abolish it completely and stop wasting resources.
A Pony is a tiny horse, but a Clony is a tiny horse and an abomination. The four horsemen of the apocalypse may yet arrive on four genetically identical steeds.
I understand this article to mean that we have simply given up on having any agreed upon proper English. I'll admit I'm a pretty sloppy writer, but I'd rather that the true academics guide the course of what is considered proper English, than allow language to be whatever general society decides. Rather than saying there isn't one definition of proper English we can simply acknowledge there are regional differences and varying tolerances for lack of strict usage and percentage of slang. In common speech we may accept that with is considered normal, but when the occasion arises that more formal language is expected, the need for proper English becomes evident.
The password could still be saved in the client and 2FA added as an additional layer. I personally won't be using Yahoo! mail for mobile much longer as their new versions require extensive additional permissions. Currently the app has no objectionable permissions, but the new version wants much more, namely: Device & App History, Identity, Contacts, Location, SMS, Wi-Fi connection info, Device ID and Call info. My current app functions as needed, WTF would I enable all that additional access? I pay for premium services on Yahoo mail, I expect better.
How are the ISPs responding currently? Is there any current international cooperation for shutting down offenders based on good faith evidence?
I would tend to agree the ISP responsible for allowing a user to transmit traffic on the internet has the ethical obligation to squash malicious criminal action that is harming other internet users. I'd also like them to be the first line, but I think the government or better yet an independent international team should have abilities that would go beyond those of the ISP as just shutting down access isn't always going to be the first best path toward analysis and prosecution of the attack coordinator.
...and the villagers rejoice.
Yes, I've been to California lately and those of us like myself that support efforts to stop the constant waterfall of idiotic, burdensome, ineffective gun laws have our hands full trying to keep gun phobic citizens and legislators in check. Having police going on television stating that they estimate there are 500K unserialized AR type guns in California alone and that some of them are showing up at high profile crime scenes is not helping the cause. Any action that creates more public fear related to firearms is counter-productive to maintaining our rights. I'm not citing that 500K number, because I don't believe it's true, but that is what the nightly news is allowing the public to hear. I do understand that Cody Wilson is not responsible for a high number of recently produced weapons; he hasn't been able to offer that many milling machines. It's more independent machine shops that are cranking out volume. I just have to pick on Cody, because he's been the vocal public face trying to legitimize homemade guns as a movement. It's perfectly legal to make a firearm for yourself in the manner Cody's machine is intended, but none the less, the idea of "Ghostguns" is all it takes to get the "Think of the Children" banners flying. If I had my way we'd have shall issue CCW in every state with national right to carry, open carry, stand your ground and castle doctrine in every state in the land. As it stands though our legislators and a good many of the citizens they serve are clueless and fearful of guns and the best I know how to do is play defense in the states that suffer with such ignorance.
While I would much like legislators to understand that no matter what laws they make that guns will always be available, I feel this approach is doomed to fail. Guns are old technology, so as long as humans have the means to combine propellant with a projectile and an ignition source in a tube of sufficient strength, guns will be available in society. That said, please stop making homemade unserialized weapons. All that is going to result from that is that they will make new laws and those laws may be written so poorly as to put controls not only on serialized parts considered to be the "firearm", but on many common components. The spread of unserialized weapons may also cause more states to require gun registration. Cody, your actions will have harmful unintended consequences for gun owners. I'm sure you mean well, but it is a flawed strategy.
Maybe this robot laundry problem is why people in the future are always wearing the same silver jumpsuit.
Science makes Jesus sad.
IT jobs are one area where there is demand for workers, it's so helpful that the government would like to fix that. Companies lacking for workers to hire is what keeps upward pressure on wages. If the jobs are there and pay well, then the workers will follow because there is incentive to develop the marketable skills. If the government keeps trying to fix this situation they are going to seriously fuck it up for everyone. It's good that they have a large number of openings to fill because they need to cut down on the hyper judgmental selection process in HR. If business hadn't shut out so many workers they pitched in the garbage pile in the dot-com bust and had more proactively trained and internally promoted people to manage the labor supply they would be in better shape today.
If government officials are using personal mail on public mail servers from the network at the State Dept they also have some serious security issues. Most corporate security policies prohibit that behavior for good reason, even if they don't enforce it. It generally bypasses your email antivirus protection.