Oh, and didn't the FBI investigate the Orlando shooter TWICE, and found nothing to justify further interest? So, how would passing this amendment have prevented Orlando?
I can think of a plausible way to track you, based on cookies, your wifi MAC address and the store's wifi network (whether or not you choose to join it).
Facebook app grabs your wifi MAC and checks your phone's cookies, then transfers that info to someplace in the cloud, which is later aggregated with a list of MACs seen by the store's wifi network.
"wifi Probe Requests" -- they include your MAC and it seems every smartphone sends them when it's looking for APs to connect to. http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/w...
I can think of a plausible way to track you, based on cookies, your wifi MAC address and the store's wifi network (whether or not you choose to join it).
Facebook app grabs your wifi MAC and checks your phone's cookies, then transfers that info to someplace in the cloud, which is later aggregated with a list of MACs seen by the store's wifi network.
Good luck with the Multi-Dwelling Units. You can run fiber to the building (an Optical Network Terminator (ONT)), but running it to the unit is pretty damn difficult. Most MDUs don't have conduit suitable for fiber, most just have old telephone cable (no CAT5/e/6/etc),.
Speaking from personal experience (I wired my new house as it was being built with CAT3), you don't need CAT5 for short runs. 100BASET runs just fine over CAT3 at my house (100ft or so)
Do NOT f*ck with librarians. They are passionate defenders of your right to read whatever you chose, and will come down hard on any school board or town council that tries to limit that right.
The ISIS "hacking crew" has met their match.// ALA =/= Allah...lost in translation:-)
Recently, my copy of Skype for Business has been terminating abruptly. This is on my PC at work, maintained by my company. I can understand Microsoft not maintaining the Linux or "home" version of Skype, but I would expect their business version to be robust and reliable.
Guess not. I wish I could say I'm surprised by this.
Yes, an old fashioned dongle that makes them require a 20-year-old laptop.
Hey, we've all been there. Old dongle, software only runs on Win95, all it does it something simple, but the hassle factor (company out of business, particular software no longer supported, feature removed from newer version) makes using the old system the only viable option.
First, spend money on paying teachers, repairing buildings, buying computers and internet access for students who can't afford it (like many in the inner city schools), since all the books, etc are now e-books (not necessarily a bad thing). Hell, many of the kids in the poorer schools need breakfast and lunch. Tech and programming education is a distant second to competency in English, Math and History. Our schools (especially the ones in poor areas) are crying out for money, just to competently teach the basics, never mind tech education.
Oh, and special ed, ELL for new immigrants, alternative tracks for low level learners, all those should also be getting funding before we start trying to teach everyone to be a programmer.
Remember folks, everyone working for Google, Facebook, Microsoft and Apple learned to code WITHOUT a nationwide secondary school program.
I've heard this number before but that number is actually $7/month per 1 mbit/s. Multiply that by the amount of mbit/s they get from their upstream connection. That said, it's still probably far far less than the total number of mbit/s they sold each of their users so they are making a huge profit.
I don't understand how the cost can be related to the maximum throughput. The major expenses are infrastructure and personnel (and I bet payroll is the biggest). For a given infrastructure over a given geographic area, there's a max supportable bandwidth, then you have a big infrastructure cost to support anything higher. Once you pay that, though, you have another maximum bandwidth (say 10 or 100 times the previous)
So, to say it's linear ($7/mbit/s) doesn't seem right. It's more a function of population density and coverage area, I would think. I suspect the Comcast network in eastern Massachusetts is far from being saturated, unless there's a snowstorm, maybe. Would be interesting to see their network utilization graphs.
It's not "self imposed" but cost imposed. Data caps are a proxy for bandwidth use. If everyone used too much bandwidth, they'd have to buy more. So caps impose usage penalties designed to reduce overall bandwidth usage, to decrease cost.
Except that Comcast has explicitly said that the caps are not about resource management. They are solely a money-making scheme. And they are not uniform across Comcast's network. For example, I live in Eastern MA, where Comcast competes with Verizon FIOS (whiich has no caps). Guess what? Comcast has a 250G cap which is "not currently enforced".
Or something. Crypto, by Stephen Levy, chronicles the first crypto war. Worth reading, for background, because this time, it's not "national security", it's kiddie porn and terrorists that are going to win if we don't give the Security Services the keys to everything. And, we should TOTALLY trust them to keep us safe. Yeah, right. http://www.stevenlevy.com/inde...
You are overlooking that some of the emails that may not have been marked were classified by definition based on where the information they contained came from. A fact which Hillary would have been aware of.
Covered in case #3 - not marked but should have been. I don't think it's a slam dunk that she (or whoever wrote the email) should have known these emails should have been marked...AND sent over a secure channel (see below)
In any case, we are told the number of emails in this category is small. I suspect this is where reasonable people differ on how to classify them.
Let's say, for the sake of argument, that some emails which should not have been sent, were. Makes no difference if it's a personal email server or an unclassified State Department server, they should not have been sent over an unclassified channel. That's a whole separate issue from the private email server.
if it's MARKED classified, it shouldn't have gone over her email server. To date, news reports indicate that this happened rarely, perhaps never.
If it WAS marked classified, and those markings were removed, that's a whole 'nother problem, separate and distinct (and far more serious) from Clinton running a private email server.
If it WASN'T marked classified, and should have been, that's also a bigger issue, but one on which reasonable people might differ. So, there should be more latitude if this was the case with a few messages. Reports indicate that re-examination of all the messages indicate that some of them were in this category.
So...did Clinton knowingly and deliberately violate the law? Depends if you want her to have done so or not, because whether a message should have been classified or not seems to be a debatable point. It's hard to see a crime here.
Probably true, but the order itself is illegal, so the President would need to have a defense against that, because Congress and the Attorney General are going to want an answer.
Nothing in that article you referenced says anything about likely outing of CIA agents in Hillary's emails. The closest they come is a definition of a particular classification that covers information relating to programs or sources.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, and didn't the FBI investigate the Orlando shooter TWICE, and found nothing to justify further interest? So, how would passing this amendment have prevented Orlando?
Hard to argue with that statement.
I am sick and tired of our elected representatives passing laws like this and the USA PATRIOT ACT, claiming they "make us safer".
It's easy to pass these, hard to repeal them. We as a country are going to be living with this erosion of our rights for years to come.
the U.S. banned Intel from supplying Xeon chips to four of China's top supercomputing research centers
That's OK...they'll just use pulls from all the e-waste we ship over there.
I can think of a plausible way to track you, based on cookies, your wifi MAC address and the store's wifi network (whether or not you choose to join it).
Facebook app grabs your wifi MAC and checks your phone's cookies, then transfers that info to someplace in the cloud, which is later aggregated with a list of MACs seen by the store's wifi network.
"wifi Probe Requests" -- they include your MAC and it seems every smartphone sends them when it's looking for APs to connect to.
http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/w...
I can think of a plausible way to track you, based on cookies, your wifi MAC address and the store's wifi network (whether or not you choose to join it).
Facebook app grabs your wifi MAC and checks your phone's cookies, then transfers that info to someplace in the cloud, which is later aggregated with a list of MACs seen by the store's wifi network.
Good luck with the Multi-Dwelling Units. You can run fiber to the building (an Optical Network Terminator (ONT)), but running it to the unit is pretty damn difficult. Most MDUs don't have conduit suitable for fiber, most just have old telephone cable (no CAT5/e/6/etc), .
Speaking from personal experience (I wired my new house as it was being built with CAT3), you don't need CAT5 for short runs. 100BASET runs just fine over CAT3 at my house (100ft or so)
Do NOT f*ck with librarians. They are passionate defenders of your right to read whatever you chose, and will come down hard on any school board or town council that tries to limit that right.
The ISIS "hacking crew" has met their match. // ALA =/= Allah ...lost in translation :-)
Boy this is at the scale of the Ken Thompson attack. Compilers that insert backdoors
http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?TheKenT...
No, I think that requires one more level of indirection -- reinserting the backdoor in the compiler when it is recompiled without the backdoor.
I know, troll.
But this whole Win7 -> Win10 upgrade thing has caused me to lose any residual trust I had for Microsoft.
---> into a Linux box
I know, troll.
But this whole Win7 -> Win10 upgrade thing has caused me to lose any residual trust I had for Microsoft.
For some reason, this whole fiasco reminds me of this scene from Office Space.
With the part of the printer played by Mr. Zavodnik?
Recently, my copy of Skype for Business has been terminating abruptly. This is on my PC at work, maintained by my company. I can understand Microsoft not maintaining the Linux or "home" version of Skype, but I would expect their business version to be robust and reliable.
Guess not. I wish I could say I'm surprised by this.
... I wonder if the driver survived the aftermath when her father saw what she did to his car. I doubt if the insurers are going to cover the loss.
In other news...she is SO grounded.
Trump 2016
TRUMP / PALIN 2016
Twice the crazy -- twice the fun!
Yes, an old fashioned dongle that makes them require a 20-year-old laptop.
Hey, we've all been there. Old dongle, software only runs on Win95, all it does it something simple, but the hassle factor (company out of business, particular software no longer supported, feature removed from newer version) makes using the old system the only viable option.
First, spend money on paying teachers, repairing buildings, buying computers and internet access for students who can't afford it (like many in the inner city schools), since all the books, etc are now e-books (not necessarily a bad thing). Hell, many of the kids in the poorer schools need breakfast and lunch.
Tech and programming education is a distant second to competency in English, Math and History. Our schools (especially the ones in poor areas) are crying out for money, just to competently teach the basics, never mind tech education.
Oh, and special ed, ELL for new immigrants, alternative tracks for low level learners, all those should also be getting funding before we start trying to teach everyone to be a programmer.
Remember folks, everyone working for Google, Facebook, Microsoft and Apple learned to code WITHOUT a nationwide secondary school program.
Priorities, people.
How interesting.
I would have thought the blackfly or mosquito would have made an appearance in Maine or New Hampshire, but they seem to have chosen otherwise.
I've heard this number before but that number is actually $7/month per 1 mbit/s. Multiply that by the amount of mbit/s they get from their upstream connection. That said, it's still probably far far less than the total number of mbit/s they sold each of their users so they are making a huge profit.
I don't understand how the cost can be related to the maximum throughput. The major expenses are infrastructure and personnel (and I bet payroll is the biggest). For a given infrastructure over a given geographic area, there's a max supportable bandwidth, then you have a big infrastructure cost to support anything higher. Once you pay that, though, you have another maximum bandwidth (say 10 or 100 times the previous)
So, to say it's linear ($7/mbit/s) doesn't seem right. It's more a function of population density and coverage area, I would think. I suspect the Comcast network in eastern Massachusetts is far from being saturated, unless there's a snowstorm, maybe. Would be interesting to see their network utilization graphs.
It's not "self imposed" but cost imposed. Data caps are a proxy for bandwidth use. If everyone used too much bandwidth, they'd have to buy more. So caps impose usage penalties designed to reduce overall bandwidth usage, to decrease cost.
Except that Comcast has explicitly said that the caps are not about resource management. They are solely a money-making scheme. And they are not uniform across Comcast's network. For example, I live in Eastern MA, where Comcast competes with Verizon FIOS (whiich has no caps). Guess what? Comcast has a 250G cap which is "not currently enforced".
http://time.com/money/4143682/...
A well placed water balloon filled with paint, or spraypaint, would render it impossible to use the cameras.
A paintball gun would be more fun...
Or something. Crypto, by Stephen Levy, chronicles the first crypto war. Worth reading, for background, because this time, it's not "national security", it's kiddie porn and terrorists that are going to win if we don't give the Security Services the keys to everything. And, we should TOTALLY trust them to keep us safe.
Yeah, right.
http://www.stevenlevy.com/inde...
You're thinking of Boost Mobile.
My first thought.
Boost Mobile: "Whea you at?"
Hey, it's a market, can't fault them for going after it.
You are overlooking that some of the emails that may not have been marked were classified by definition based on where the information they contained came from. A fact which Hillary would have been aware of.
Covered in case #3 - not marked but should have been. I don't think it's a slam dunk that she (or whoever wrote the email) should have known these emails should have been marked...AND sent over a secure channel (see below)
In any case, we are told the number of emails in this category is small. I suspect this is where reasonable people differ on how to classify them.
Let's say, for the sake of argument, that some emails which should not have been sent, were. Makes no difference if it's a personal email server or an unclassified State Department server, they should not have been sent over an unclassified channel. That's a whole separate issue from the private email server.
Well, yes, but...
if it's MARKED classified, it shouldn't have gone over her email server. To date, news reports indicate that this happened rarely, perhaps never.
If it WAS marked classified, and those markings were removed, that's a whole 'nother problem, separate and distinct (and far more serious) from Clinton running a private email server.
If it WASN'T marked classified, and should have been, that's also a bigger issue, but one on which reasonable people might differ. So, there should be more latitude if this was the case with a few messages. Reports indicate that re-examination of all the messages indicate that some of them were in this category.
So...did Clinton knowingly and deliberately violate the law? Depends if you want her to have done so or not, because whether a message should have been classified or not seems to be a debatable point. It's hard to see a crime here.
Probably true, but the order itself is illegal, so the President would need to have a defense against that, because Congress and the Attorney General are going to want an answer.
Hillary! had real intel data on her server that likely "outed" REAL agents and, with the big fat fucking D after her name, the media sweeps it under the rug.
Nothing in that article you referenced says anything about likely outing of CIA agents in Hillary's emails. The closest they come is a definition of a particular classification that covers information relating to programs or sources.
That's a pretty big reach on your part.