The CEO of a mobile ad startup has been arrested and charged with sexually abusing his three-year-old son and one-year-old daughter and three other felonies.
This is egg on their face. It means that they cannot guarantee diplomatic safety in their own capitol, and if it's their own people doing it behind their back it means they cannot control their own intelligence services. Those are the sort of things that make a dictator get cold sweats at 2AM. It's a major crack in the facade of their power.
Let's say that it turns out to be "The Russians" and we catch them in the act. The obvious solution for the Cubans is to let us take the foreign operatives back to the US. It would even be justifiable for the Cubans to arrest the diplomatic mission of the foreign power and turn them over to US. Diplomatic immunity my ass. Doing this to a foreign embassy is an act of war because it is extremely serious non-lethal violence against a diplomatic mission. All bets are off at that point.
You can't get civil libertarians to even agree that people should be required to open up devices when presented with a warrant. Whenever the courts think it might be a fifth amendment right, a lot of people here cheer, even though that is ultimately self-defeating. If you can defeat a valid warrant by asserting the 5th, you have just made the 5th an enemy of the 4th amendment. That is not a healthy place for the Bill of Rights to be.
I have a simpler idea:
1. We pass a law making people responsible for remembering their encryption keys on devices they own. 2. We give law enforcement the power to have people prosecuted if they refuse to open a device that is mentioned in a search warrant as a particular thing to be searched for a particular offense. 3. We allow vendors to keep their products at full strength and instead focus on the users.
Also, it will take a century of full-bore apologizing to even begin to make up for Microsoft's past (and current) behavior.
Facebook carries out mass psychological experiments aimed at finding out, among other things, if they can make people depressed. Google is now accused of trade secret behavior on par with Microsoft back in the 1990s. Apple has now pioneered turning expensive computers into unfixable appliances. IBM, among other things, has basically gutted its American workforce and keeps a token presence stateside so they can avoid political pressure to delist their federal services component.
And Oracle? If you feel that way about Microsoft, I suspect you think nothing less than ordering STRATCOM to carpet bomb Oracle's campuses with tactical nukes is appropriate for how they behave.
This isn't the 90s. An entire generation has come and gone at Microsoft since the anti-trust trial. Give it a rest.
Exhibit A:.NET Core. Exhibit B: VS Code Exhibit C: SQL Server for Linux--in a Docker container. Exhibit D: Ubuntu for Windows. Exhibit E: Microsoft happily sells well-supported Linux to cloud customers and contributes back to ensure Linux provides what their customers need.
10 years ago, Ballmer would have probably fired an executive who proposed this plan. Today, being a second coming of Gates or Ballmer would probably be a "career limiting move." Microsoft has pretty much "gotten with the program."
I just wish that Nadella would aggressively pursue the phone market again, but this time by making Windows installable on Android phones a la Sailfish X. Unlike Jolla, they have the resources to pay and/or strong-arm most Android vendors to permanently unlock their bootloaders. And what's the government going to say to that? It's bad for consumers to have Microsoft aggressively pursuing opening up the hardware? A federal judge would look at Microsoft's opponent like they're nuts.
But I think it's pretty clear from some of the stories about Chinese espionage that the only way we can disincentivize civilians from doing stuff like this is to completely upend their existence. Ex charge this guy with economic espionage, violating the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and whatever else, then throw everything from criminal trespass to theft of services (if he's on the company's network).
Now let's be serious. Do you honestly think a partner at such a firm wouldn't automatically fire someone for pursuing cases like this without a source of funding? This is damn near SLAPP territory (and probably will be in the case of Cernovich, who is based in CA). There's money behind this because big law firms don't just pursue for altruistic reasons Daily Stormer readers who shitpost and post dank memes.
Didn't the Supreme Court just rule that you can refuse to do business with someone for any reason you want?
Sorta, but here's the kicker. Their specific reasons were "Gab allows hate" and then a lot of images showing Twitter openly tolerating hate speech came up. So now Google has to explain why they hold a startup to a MUCH higher standard than Twitter, particularly in light of a lot of people noticing that Twitter doesn't even bother to apply its rules fairly.
So TL;DR this is now a potential case of collusion under anti-trust law to suppress competition to Twitter which puts it in a far more serious, long term possibly criminal, light.
Screening out new hires. We had a candidate say he'd use Struts for a new project, and that was 2015. Needless to say, he never dug out of that rut in the interview. Any non-junior Java application developer who doesn't have Grails, Play, Spring Boot or DropWizard experience is an automatic "don't hire, next" for every Java team I have met that was halfway decent or better.
it is still an inferior way of switching apps, compared to what you could do on WebOS eight years ago.
Amiga and BeOS users feel the same way. BB10 was better than Android or iOS in many ways like this too, particularly in integrating so many ways of communicating into a single place with Blackberry Hub.
His first action should be to file a criminal complaint for fraud and whatever they can make stick like some sort of "reckless endangerment" charge if he was on the road when it happened. "I'll see you in court" should start with the criminal and then go into the civil here if at all possible.
Let's say that that partner agency is the FBI and the FBI takes this to mean that the CIA was illegally grabbing domestic data in direct violation of laws governing "US Persons Data" and the FBI's own guidelines (that were referenced in the memorandum of understanding). You better bet that someone in their leadership is at least raising the issue of prosecuting the CIA folks responsible, if for no other reason than "we're the FBI and you don't fucking spy on the FBI without consequences."
I have a feeling that the DoJ is doing this primarily to bring some sort of conspiracy charges against particular people that haven't already been charged. They're not going to charge random visitors to the site who went there once or two and that was it because it would be an unwinnable case.
might be that Sony just doesn't want to partially give away its sizable advantage in console sales by letting Microsoft hook into that vast network of players
The XBox X has them scared because it represents a new step toward merging console and PC gaming for average buyers. That means you get into Microsoft's orbit and suddenly you find that you're part of a much bigger ecosystem than Sony can put together now.
A MP from Labour had to step down because she wanted to have an uncomfortable conversation about incidents like Rotterham and then was forced to do the ritualized "so sorry, I'm such a racist, I'll go live in a secular convent while I do penance." All because she had the audacity to notice that apparently Rotterham is a large data point in a bigger trend.
Suppressing speech like this with force may make you feel noble, but it's not going to go away. Others will notice, others will talk. Eventually, the pendulum will swing back and the force it swings back on the smug, self-righteous inquisitors will be a function of how much force they put into the swing when it was on their side. The leaders celebrating this today could very well find themselves facing serious retribution.
Integrate a one click purchase into the Netflix apps so that you can buy a physical copy from them directly. My wife and I have seen some shows there that we'd buy a blu ray copy to give away to relatives who don't want Netflix.
it contains the same moral and intellectual certainty that afflicts programmers generally
I have news for you, and you probably don't want to hear it. If we put every one of his critics there who supported his firing into a big room, you could swing a dead cat in any direction and not hit someone who is less than 200% more certain that they are absolutely following the righteous path in burning this little heretic. In fact, the actual Spanish Inquisition was kinder and more compassionate to real heretics than they are; it gave you a chance to be spared punishment by confessing and repenting. These people don't. You could crawl over broken glass while telling them how right they are and most of them would still treat you as less than fully human.
eBay, Amazon Marketplace, etc. have more in common with a flea market than a big box retailer. This shows a wildly idiotic misunderstanding of what they really are:
If a consumer is returning an electronic device because it's difficult to use
I am with the sellers here. Totally inappropriate to go the marketplace route (which is often cheaper) and expect the benefits of paying more from Amazon.
Then these sites, Facebook, etc. will have absolutely no ambiguity about your identity. Log into Facebook and then load their code on another side and they'll know **exactly** and unambiguously that you visit that site.
Oh the flip side, even the average US Senator is likely to be so creeped out by that side of IPv6 that we might see privacy-promoting legislation in the US.
The group will also assess new technologies (including blockchain) to secure elections
The most ingenious idea I have ever seen for securing ballots follows a few simple steps:
1. Assign a unique serial number to all ballots printed. 2. Use a scantron system to record the choices and serial number. 3. Let the voter either keep the ballot or a carbon copy. 4. As the votes are tallied, the serial numbers and choices are posted online on a government website so that voters can verify their vote.
Motor voter laws are probably the single biggest threat to our process aside from the lack of a solid ID requirement at the precincts. Set aside any views you have on politics and culture for a moment and just consider these facts:
1. In some states, illegal immigrants--by state policy--can get driver's licenses. 2. You can register to vote at the DMV without any form of ID showing you are a US citizen.
If any system dealing with PII, finances, etc. in your life had such a low barrier on security, would you use it? I don't think you would.
One of the consequences of accepting a lot of third world immigrants will be the destruction of their high trust culture because those immigrants come from cultures where the culture of a high trust society is completely alien to them. There are societies which can still rise to greatness without that high trust culture, but you see them mainly in Asia, not Africa and the Middle East.
Assimilation doesn't ever really happen in a one-directional way. That's why the melting pot, despite being multicultural propaganda, is entirely correct. What does a melting pot do? It makes an alloy. It does not remove impurities. That means that even as makes the foreign stronger by adulteration with the native, it makes the native more foreign by adulteration by the foreign elements.
Within a generation, Norway will either choose to maintain this culture at all costs or will have to abandon these policies. That's assuming that the criminal elements, which are much more prevalent among the "refugees" than the native society, don't realize that this list exists and it provides an accurate breakdown of who to rob and precisely what assets they can give you.
1. Slavery. 2. Non-competes for 99.95% of workers. 3. H1B and H2B visas and the current fight over them (see "we won't let you get your immigration service pick until you acquiesce to more cheap labor" as exhibit A). 4. Outsourcing. 5. "Free trade" by which we mean, companies are allowed to move production to other countries and leave easily the moment the workers get uppity.
At the end of the day, it comes down to a simple fact: the elite doesn't want to pay a fair wage, so they'll use state power to drive it down. Some methods are more extreme than others, but it is a more extreme or less extreme on the straight forward sin of treating workers like property that works for you.
I'm sure some pedantic ass or triggered SJW is going to shriek "muh racism" or "muh free marketz," but the fact remains that the mentality and motives are related.
The Press is part of the checks and balances of the government.
The press referenced in the first amendment is the printing press, which refers to the concept of being free to publish your speech. There is absolutely not one iota of protection in the first amendment for journalism as a profession. Their "rights" are the same as yours and nothing more: to speak and publish freely without prior restraint. The professional behavior of journalists is very much a matter of public scrutiny as issues such as corporate behavior and protecting sources are extra-constitutional matters of statutory and common law, not constitutional rights.
Slashdot Mirror
Source.
Google is accused of the same thing on a large scale. I guess the Apple doesn't fall far from the tree, does it?
This is egg on their face. It means that they cannot guarantee diplomatic safety in their own capitol, and if it's their own people doing it behind their back it means they cannot control their own intelligence services. Those are the sort of things that make a dictator get cold sweats at 2AM. It's a major crack in the facade of their power.
Let's say that it turns out to be "The Russians" and we catch them in the act. The obvious solution for the Cubans is to let us take the foreign operatives back to the US. It would even be justifiable for the Cubans to arrest the diplomatic mission of the foreign power and turn them over to US. Diplomatic immunity my ass. Doing this to a foreign embassy is an act of war because it is extremely serious non-lethal violence against a diplomatic mission. All bets are off at that point.
You can't get civil libertarians to even agree that people should be required to open up devices when presented with a warrant. Whenever the courts think it might be a fifth amendment right, a lot of people here cheer, even though that is ultimately self-defeating. If you can defeat a valid warrant by asserting the 5th, you have just made the 5th an enemy of the 4th amendment. That is not a healthy place for the Bill of Rights to be.
I have a simpler idea:
1. We pass a law making people responsible for remembering their encryption keys on devices they own.
2. We give law enforcement the power to have people prosecuted if they refuse to open a device that is mentioned in a search warrant as a particular thing to be searched for a particular offense.
3. We allow vendors to keep their products at full strength and instead focus on the users.
This is "common sense encryption control."
Facebook carries out mass psychological experiments aimed at finding out, among other things, if they can make people depressed. Google is now accused of trade secret behavior on par with Microsoft back in the 1990s. Apple has now pioneered turning expensive computers into unfixable appliances. IBM, among other things, has basically gutted its American workforce and keeps a token presence stateside so they can avoid political pressure to delist their federal services component.
And Oracle? If you feel that way about Microsoft, I suspect you think nothing less than ordering STRATCOM to carpet bomb Oracle's campuses with tactical nukes is appropriate for how they behave.
This isn't the 90s. An entire generation has come and gone at Microsoft since the anti-trust trial. Give it a rest.
Exhibit A: .NET Core.
Exhibit B: VS Code
Exhibit C: SQL Server for Linux--in a Docker container.
Exhibit D: Ubuntu for Windows.
Exhibit E: Microsoft happily sells well-supported Linux to cloud customers and contributes back to ensure Linux provides what their customers need.
10 years ago, Ballmer would have probably fired an executive who proposed this plan. Today, being a second coming of Gates or Ballmer would probably be a "career limiting move." Microsoft has pretty much "gotten with the program."
I just wish that Nadella would aggressively pursue the phone market again, but this time by making Windows installable on Android phones a la Sailfish X. Unlike Jolla, they have the resources to pay and/or strong-arm most Android vendors to permanently unlock their bootloaders. And what's the government going to say to that? It's bad for consumers to have Microsoft aggressively pursuing opening up the hardware? A federal judge would look at Microsoft's opponent like they're nuts.
But I think it's pretty clear from some of the stories about Chinese espionage that the only way we can disincentivize civilians from doing stuff like this is to completely upend their existence. Ex charge this guy with economic espionage, violating the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and whatever else, then throw everything from criminal trespass to theft of services (if he's on the company's network).
Mike Cernovich is one of the parties being sued, and he pointed out that it's a rather big law firm that charges an arm and a leg that is suing him.
Now let's be serious. Do you honestly think a partner at such a firm wouldn't automatically fire someone for pursuing cases like this without a source of funding? This is damn near SLAPP territory (and probably will be in the case of Cernovich, who is based in CA). There's money behind this because big law firms don't just pursue for altruistic reasons Daily Stormer readers who shitpost and post dank memes.
Sorta, but here's the kicker. Their specific reasons were "Gab allows hate" and then a lot of images showing Twitter openly tolerating hate speech came up. So now Google has to explain why they hold a startup to a MUCH higher standard than Twitter, particularly in light of a lot of people noticing that Twitter doesn't even bother to apply its rules fairly.
So TL;DR this is now a potential case of collusion under anti-trust law to suppress competition to Twitter which puts it in a far more serious, long term possibly criminal, light.
No boss, I'm not uncreative and incompetent. I just spend too much time listening to Scandinavian death metal. I'm an addict. Don't judge me.
Screening out new hires. We had a candidate say he'd use Struts for a new project, and that was 2015. Needless to say, he never dug out of that rut in the interview. Any non-junior Java application developer who doesn't have Grails, Play, Spring Boot or DropWizard experience is an automatic "don't hire, next" for every Java team I have met that was halfway decent or better.
Amiga and BeOS users feel the same way. BB10 was better than Android or iOS in many ways like this too, particularly in integrating so many ways of communicating into a single place with Blackberry Hub.
His first action should be to file a criminal complaint for fraud and whatever they can make stick like some sort of "reckless endangerment" charge if he was on the road when it happened. "I'll see you in court" should start with the criminal and then go into the civil here if at all possible.
Let's say that that partner agency is the FBI and the FBI takes this to mean that the CIA was illegally grabbing domestic data in direct violation of laws governing "US Persons Data" and the FBI's own guidelines (that were referenced in the memorandum of understanding). You better bet that someone in their leadership is at least raising the issue of prosecuting the CIA folks responsible, if for no other reason than "we're the FBI and you don't fucking spy on the FBI without consequences."
I have a feeling that the DoJ is doing this primarily to bring some sort of conspiracy charges against particular people that haven't already been charged. They're not going to charge random visitors to the site who went there once or two and that was it because it would be an unwinnable case.
The XBox X has them scared because it represents a new step toward merging console and PC gaming for average buyers. That means you get into Microsoft's orbit and suddenly you find that you're part of a much bigger ecosystem than Sony can put together now.
A MP from Labour had to step down because she wanted to have an uncomfortable conversation about incidents like Rotterham and then was forced to do the ritualized "so sorry, I'm such a racist, I'll go live in a secular convent while I do penance." All because she had the audacity to notice that apparently Rotterham is a large data point in a bigger trend.
Suppressing speech like this with force may make you feel noble, but it's not going to go away. Others will notice, others will talk. Eventually, the pendulum will swing back and the force it swings back on the smug, self-righteous inquisitors will be a function of how much force they put into the swing when it was on their side. The leaders celebrating this today could very well find themselves facing serious retribution.
Integrate a one click purchase into the Netflix apps so that you can buy a physical copy from them directly. My wife and I have seen some shows there that we'd buy a blu ray copy to give away to relatives who don't want Netflix.
... of his critics at Google...
I have news for you, and you probably don't want to hear it. If we put every one of his critics there who supported his firing into a big room, you could swing a dead cat in any direction and not hit someone who is less than 200% more certain that they are absolutely following the righteous path in burning this little heretic. In fact, the actual Spanish Inquisition was kinder and more compassionate to real heretics than they are; it gave you a chance to be spared punishment by confessing and repenting. These people don't. You could crawl over broken glass while telling them how right they are and most of them would still treat you as less than fully human.
eBay, Amazon Marketplace, etc. have more in common with a flea market than a big box retailer. This shows a wildly idiotic misunderstanding of what they really are:
I am with the sellers here. Totally inappropriate to go the marketplace route (which is often cheaper) and expect the benefits of paying more from Amazon.
Then these sites, Facebook, etc. will have absolutely no ambiguity about your identity. Log into Facebook and then load their code on another side and they'll know **exactly** and unambiguously that you visit that site.
Oh the flip side, even the average US Senator is likely to be so creeped out by that side of IPv6 that we might see privacy-promoting legislation in the US.
The most ingenious idea I have ever seen for securing ballots follows a few simple steps:
1. Assign a unique serial number to all ballots printed.
2. Use a scantron system to record the choices and serial number.
3. Let the voter either keep the ballot or a carbon copy.
4. As the votes are tallied, the serial numbers and choices are posted online on a government website so that voters can verify their vote.
Motor voter laws are probably the single biggest threat to our process aside from the lack of a solid ID requirement at the precincts. Set aside any views you have on politics and culture for a moment and just consider these facts:
1. In some states, illegal immigrants--by state policy--can get driver's licenses.
2. You can register to vote at the DMV without any form of ID showing you are a US citizen.
If any system dealing with PII, finances, etc. in your life had such a low barrier on security, would you use it? I don't think you would.
One of the consequences of accepting a lot of third world immigrants will be the destruction of their high trust culture because those immigrants come from cultures where the culture of a high trust society is completely alien to them. There are societies which can still rise to greatness without that high trust culture, but you see them mainly in Asia, not Africa and the Middle East.
Assimilation doesn't ever really happen in a one-directional way. That's why the melting pot, despite being multicultural propaganda, is entirely correct. What does a melting pot do? It makes an alloy. It does not remove impurities. That means that even as makes the foreign stronger by adulteration with the native, it makes the native more foreign by adulteration by the foreign elements.
Within a generation, Norway will either choose to maintain this culture at all costs or will have to abandon these policies. That's assuming that the criminal elements, which are much more prevalent among the "refugees" than the native society, don't realize that this list exists and it provides an accurate breakdown of who to rob and precisely what assets they can give you.
1. Slavery.
2. Non-competes for 99.95% of workers.
3. H1B and H2B visas and the current fight over them (see "we won't let you get your immigration service pick until you acquiesce to more cheap labor" as exhibit A).
4. Outsourcing.
5. "Free trade" by which we mean, companies are allowed to move production to other countries and leave easily the moment the workers get uppity.
At the end of the day, it comes down to a simple fact: the elite doesn't want to pay a fair wage, so they'll use state power to drive it down. Some methods are more extreme than others, but it is a more extreme or less extreme on the straight forward sin of treating workers like property that works for you.
I'm sure some pedantic ass or triggered SJW is going to shriek "muh racism" or "muh free marketz," but the fact remains that the mentality and motives are related.
The press referenced in the first amendment is the printing press, which refers to the concept of being free to publish your speech. There is absolutely not one iota of protection in the first amendment for journalism as a profession. Their "rights" are the same as yours and nothing more: to speak and publish freely without prior restraint. The professional behavior of journalists is very much a matter of public scrutiny as issues such as corporate behavior and protecting sources are extra-constitutional matters of statutory and common law, not constitutional rights.