Currently in New York City it is law that cops can stop you and search "backpacks or other large containers"
Well no, that's incorrect. Cops are not pulling you over walking down the street and demanding to search your bags or backpacks. This search is of people going into the subway or going into enclosed events where if a bomb went off it would kill hundreds of people, like a baseball game or to an airplane. And this was a response to the very real bombing of the London subways. This is hardly an erosion of rights. You have a choice--you don't have to use the subway or go to the baseball game or when you do go, don't carry bags. An inconvenience, yes, but not a loss of rights.
Well that's some good driving tips, however, I don't think the orig. poster was exercising in his car (never mind--I'm not going there!) He's obviously jogging--even so, he may want to listen more closely to those "road noises" so he can hear the brakes locking up behind him and jump out of the way before he becomes road kill!
Actually...it was probably more because the personal computer didn't really come on the scene until after I was an adult and the internet as it's known today much later. I may not have had the '1337 skills' (and most people who say they are '1337' in anything usually aren't.) But I would have had the interest and the time to see what I could get into. I'm still interested in security issues although from a different viewpoint. I find computer forensics fascinating.
Yes, I took that into account, but you can't use the flat part of your feet, you'd have to put the adhesive on the tips of the toes (of the shoes) and even then--how easy would that be without footholds as well as hand holds? Face it, man is not made for climbing like a chimpanzee, much less a gecko! Our legs are too long and our feet don't bend the right way to do this easily--at least not on a flat surface.
I doubt this is anything you'd want to put on your skin. I'm assuming it would go on gloves/shoes. My only question is, if it can hold so much weight, how can it peel off?
They mention the cost, but surely that will come down. Anything breakthrough like that is going to be expensive to create until the figure out a way to mass produce it.
I wonder, however, the type of strength you'd have to have to actually "do a Spiderman" up the building. Yes it will hold you to the building, but you'll still have to have the upper body strength to advance your way up without handholds to help if it's a flat surface.
Sci-Fi fun aside, there will no doubt be a lot of uses for this product. And a few years down the road we will have infomercial guru, Billy Mays shouting at us to try new and improved "Gecko Glue" to hang pictures and fix broken mugs.:)
Yes, I think there's a whoosh going over your (and the second poster below's) head. Because I specifically mentioned meta-moderation as helping to correct unfair modding. What I don't know is if anything is done about someone who consistantly mods people down unfairly. I don't think there's something in place to keep score and stop giving mod points to those who abuse them.
Only it really doesn't provide protection because it pops up so mind-numbingly often that the user is just going to click 'OK' after a while without thinking. It doesn't warn you because a program is bad, it's just warning that you're about to run a program. Better to have a good virus checker and a firewall that warns of attempt to connect the internet from your computer as well as from the outside. I have no need of UAC and have never had a problem of a rogue program or trojan taking over on either my Vista or XP systems.
As one who has been on both the receiving of mods and moderating sides: Trolls are often in the eye of the beholder. There are a lot of modders who mod down opinions they simply disagree with--especially political ones--as trolls, flamebait and overrated.
I think there needs to be someone modding the modders. Can the overseers not discover who's consistently moderating unfairly and just not give them moderating points? I know meta-modding sometimes helps correct unfair mods. But is anything done if a person who is unfairly modding people down? Can they find out who and not allow them to have modding points?
Trolls and flamebaiters are generally those who are posting totally off-topic and/or vile, bigoted rhetoric, not simply disagreeing. And they're usually anonymous. Posting the reason(s) you disagree with someone's opinion whether it's another slashdotter or the person, place or thing discussed is NOT trolling or flamebaiting. I know, I've had to mod or meta-mod people back up--even some I disagree with, because they made a legitimate point. And I've had some of my posts fluctuate similarly.
There's the flaw. You can NOT "threaten." What if the guy runs to grab your gun instead of out of the house? You must be willing to kill someone to save your own life. If you cannot do that then by all means, do NOT buy a gun. Those are the people who's gun is taken away by the perpetrator and used on them.
When a person breaks in your house, you don't know why he's there. You don't know if he's a rapist, someone wanting to just grab something and run so they can get a drug fix, or a cold-blooded killer. You don't know if he's high on PCP or other narcotic or not. And what do you do if it's not just you? What if you have a family...what if you see that person heading to your daughter's room? Hope your kids will stay calm and not startle him into shooting?
I hope I never have to use my gun. Just the fact that I have large, loud barking dogs has at least once or twice deterred someone from a possible break-in that I know of. I don't plan or obsess about it. But it's there and I know how to use it. And I will if I have to.
And that's the problem...you've got to HOPE you're still alive to call the insurance and that the guy that just kicked your door in doesn't rape you or your family members and/or kill you and your family. Police are rarely on the scene to catch the perp in the action. They only arrive in time to pick up the pieces....
No one wants to have to kill someone, but, especially if you have loved ones to protect, you'd rather rip the person apart with your bare hands rather than them harming a hair on your child's head. Obviously if you can get out, you should, but a lot of times you don't have that choice.
Yes well, THANKS for that stereotype that we're all rootin-tootin-shootin cowboys and all. It's completely false, but thanks for playing.
Meanwhile, in the UK you guys are sooo safety conscious that you've even banned certain dog breeds for being too dangerous. (BTW, did you know that only ONE of former football player Michael Vick's fighting pit bulls that were seized had to be put down for being too vicious? And one is now a licensed therapy dog?) Then you've put cameras everywhere. If it's all that safe, why do you need all the security cameras? And if someone breaks in to your home, you're at their mercy because it's illegal to shoot the burglar.
Thanks mate, but I'll keep my dogs (which include 2 Rottweilers) and my handgun safely tucked in the nightstand. I'd rather be able to be alive and show the police the body of a criminal I shot when he kicked the door in than cower in the bathroom with the phone or hope the police can locate my killer or attacker with their surveillance cameras.
Read the linked article. She was using a Yahoo account for official business. Just not the account that was hacked.
And you need to re-read it. It doesn't say she has more than one Yahoo account. She has a personal Yahoo account and the official, government account. Two accounts, only the personal one is on Yahoo. The reporter also makes the unproven allegation, "Palin routinely uses a private Yahoo e-mail account to conduct state business. Others in the governor's office sometimes use personal e-mail accounts too."
But later in the article they admit they don't know what's in the emails. So they don't know what emails are being sent and if those emails are inappropriately being sent via a personal account or vice-versa--there are emails she's not supposed to send on her government account too. And it's not illegal to have a personal email for personal business. So the idea the reporter can claim she's conducting state business on her Yahoo account is bogus. It's an unfounded accusation.
While I have no doubt there is dirt to be found, spreading misinformation implying that dirt was found (which is what we're seeing now) is almost as good.
No...it's not. This is the problem is there are people who if they can't find real dirt don't care if they just print boldface lies for the gullible. That is wrong and if that's the way those of you want to live, I feel sorry for you. Because the only people believing your lies already WANT to believe the worst in that person and/or are too stupid to work a voting machine.
I care a lot more that there's a candidate who has had long associations with people who are terrorists (Ayers) and who hate this country (Louis Farrakhan, Wright). Birds of a feather. Those ARE proven facts.
Well, what some are claiming was that she was illegally using a personal account to do city business and avoid freedom of information act or some such. This guy probably was looking more for just plain dirt or gossip rather than trying to perform some public service as it's being painted. Turns out there wasn't anything in there and now he's in big trouble.
Well she's hardly doing the work of an "average couple." A govoner probably has a *tad* more responsibility than you do. I was just pointing out that her salary wasn't out of line for her profession. And if you look up the cost of living for Alaska, $80K probably isn't that different as it costs a lot more to live there depending on where you come from.
The indictment alleges that after posting Palin's personal information online, Kernell "removed, altered, concealed and covered up files on his laptop computer" to throw off a possible investigation.
Beyond the crime, why are we giving this doofus the lofty title of "Hacker"? This is no hacker. This guy just hit the "I forgot my Yahoo password" button and guessed or researched personal details to get in so he could change it. And now he thinks he did enough to remove files on his computer. What an idiot. He didn't even think to use a public computer. And then he blabs on a website about what he did.
Not a hacker. Not even a kiddie scripter. Just a doofus.
Media publication of this information has nothing to do with whether or not the data was obtained illegally. News organizations publish information obtained from criminals about their criminal acts on a regular basis, and most of them are willing to shield their sources against investigation.
If it's illegal to break in and publish someone's email without their permission, it's just as illegal for the press to publish something obtained illegally. And I don't know about the news you read or view, but I don't recall any criminals reporting crimes they have committed unless they've already been tried or have some sort of deal worked out. Because even if the reported doesn't reveal their source, the invesigators will find out who committed the crime and that report can be used against them. Most information obtained by reporters is through someone they know on the police or investigation force, not the person committing the crime.
The fact that Palin was using non-state-sanctioned e-mail for purposes of administering the state is, if not outright illegal under either federal or Alaskan law, certainly underhanded and something that the people should know about.
Actually that's NOT a fact. There's no evidence that anything there was anything illegal in her emails. There's a thread in here that reveals a link to a public post from the alleged hacker who said he was looking for dirt, but didn't find anything. And even if there were, the ends do NOT justify the means. In fact, even if there were anything illegal about the emails, it's now tainted and could not be used for prosecution.
Sorry, privacy is nice and all but when you find they took a few hundred grand or a house in bribes (previous congressmen) then the hack was well justified. Its the same as hacking/investigating people when you have a warrant.
Yeah and OJ hoped that defense would work too, but found out otherwise. Ends justifies the means and all.... But thanks for playing.
That's not even mid-range. In the rest of your the article you linked:
New York Gov. George Pataki is the highest paid governor in the nation with a salary of $179,000, California Gov. Gray Davis is second at $157,143, Michigan's John Engler follows at $151,245, Illinois Gov. George Ryan is fourth with $145,877 and Gov. Tom Ridge of Pennsylvania rounds out the top five. He gets $138,270.
The lowest-paid governor in the country is Mike Johanns of Nebraska, whose salary is $65,000 a year. Arkansas, with a governor's salary of $69,920, is next lowest in terms of stinginess followed by Maine, Connecticut and Montana. Those three states pay their governors $70,000, $78,000 and $81,459 respectively.
And considering the cost of living in Alaska, which is very expensive, it's not THAT big of a salary.
"A University of Tennessee student who is the son of a Memphis Democrat legislator has been indicted by a federal grand jury on charges of hacking Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin's personal e-mail."
But my guess is that nothing will happen to Palin and this guy will get punished. Sorry, I'm just your typical American who has lost a great deal of faith in our government, economy, and legal system.
YES...he SHOULD punished if he did this. And so should ANY web site that published the email--including media websites. If this was someone else's email...say Obama's, a lot of you would be screaming about privacy rights, illegal search and seizure, etc....and rightfully so! You cannot (as OJ just found out) commit a crime while claiming to be exposing a criminal act. And if there were anything criminal in the email (and I'm dubious about that claim), it would be thrown out because it was obtained illegally. Fruit of the poisoned vine. And the media KNEW this was illegal and yet some also disclosed what was in them.
Slashdot Mirror
Currently in New York City it is law that cops can stop you and search "backpacks or other large containers"
Well no, that's incorrect. Cops are not pulling you over walking down the street and demanding to search your bags or backpacks. This search is of people going into the subway or going into enclosed events where if a bomb went off it would kill hundreds of people, like a baseball game or to an airplane. And this was a response to the very real bombing of the London subways. This is hardly an erosion of rights. You have a choice--you don't have to use the subway or go to the baseball game or when you do go, don't carry bags. An inconvenience, yes, but not a loss of rights.
Well that's some good driving tips, however, I don't think the orig. poster was exercising in his car (never mind--I'm not going there!) He's obviously jogging--even so, he may want to listen more closely to those "road noises" so he can hear the brakes locking up behind him and jump out of the way before he becomes road kill!
Actually...it was probably more because the personal computer didn't really come on the scene until after I was an adult and the internet as it's known today much later. I may not have had the '1337 skills' (and most people who say they are '1337' in anything usually aren't.) But I would have had the interest and the time to see what I could get into. I'm still interested in security issues although from a different viewpoint. I find computer forensics fascinating.
I exercise a lot and I need loud music to distract me from pain as well as road noises.
Yes...well, in a few years, you won't have to worry about those distracting noises any more.
While the rest of us were going to college, this guy had the formula to quick success.
Hack into large company web sites
Get a slap on the wrist
Become a reformed hacker/security expert
Write book on exploits
$PROFIT!
Yes, I took that into account, but you can't use the flat part of your feet, you'd have to put the adhesive on the tips of the toes (of the shoes) and even then--how easy would that be without footholds as well as hand holds? Face it, man is not made for climbing like a chimpanzee, much less a gecko! Our legs are too long and our feet don't bend the right way to do this easily--at least not on a flat surface.
I doubt this is anything you'd want to put on your skin. I'm assuming it would go on gloves/shoes. My only question is, if it can hold so much weight, how can it peel off?
They mention the cost, but surely that will come down. Anything breakthrough like that is going to be expensive to create until the figure out a way to mass produce it.
I wonder, however, the type of strength you'd have to have to actually "do a Spiderman" up the building. Yes it will hold you to the building, but you'll still have to have the upper body strength to advance your way up without handholds to help if it's a flat surface.
Sci-Fi fun aside, there will no doubt be a lot of uses for this product. And a few years down the road we will have infomercial guru, Billy Mays shouting at us to try new and improved "Gecko Glue" to hang pictures and fix broken mugs. :)
Yes, I think there's a whoosh going over your (and the second poster below's) head. Because I specifically mentioned meta-moderation as helping to correct unfair modding. What I don't know is if anything is done about someone who consistantly mods people down unfairly. I don't think there's something in place to keep score and stop giving mod points to those who abuse them.
Only it really doesn't provide protection because it pops up so mind-numbingly often that the user is just going to click 'OK' after a while without thinking. It doesn't warn you because a program is bad, it's just warning that you're about to run a program. Better to have a good virus checker and a firewall that warns of attempt to connect the internet from your computer as well as from the outside. I have no need of UAC and have never had a problem of a rogue program or trojan taking over on either my Vista or XP systems.
As one who has been on both the receiving of mods and moderating sides: Trolls are often in the eye of the beholder. There are a lot of modders who mod down opinions they simply disagree with--especially political ones--as trolls, flamebait and overrated.
I think there needs to be someone modding the modders. Can the overseers not discover who's consistently moderating unfairly and just not give them moderating points? I know meta-modding sometimes helps correct unfair mods. But is anything done if a person who is unfairly modding people down? Can they find out who and not allow them to have modding points?
Trolls and flamebaiters are generally those who are posting totally off-topic and/or vile, bigoted rhetoric, not simply disagreeing. And they're usually anonymous. Posting the reason(s) you disagree with someone's opinion whether it's another slashdotter or the person, place or thing discussed is NOT trolling or flamebaiting. I know, I've had to mod or meta-mod people back up--even some I disagree with, because they made a legitimate point. And I've had some of my posts fluctuate similarly.
There's the flaw. You can NOT "threaten." What if the guy runs to grab your gun instead of out of the house? You must be willing to kill someone to save your own life. If you cannot do that then by all means, do NOT buy a gun. Those are the people who's gun is taken away by the perpetrator and used on them.
When a person breaks in your house, you don't know why he's there. You don't know if he's a rapist, someone wanting to just grab something and run so they can get a drug fix, or a cold-blooded killer. You don't know if he's high on PCP or other narcotic or not. And what do you do if it's not just you? What if you have a family...what if you see that person heading to your daughter's room? Hope your kids will stay calm and not startle him into shooting?
I hope I never have to use my gun. Just the fact that I have large, loud barking dogs has at least once or twice deterred someone from a possible break-in that I know of. I don't plan or obsess about it. But it's there and I know how to use it. And I will if I have to.
And that's all I have to say on this subject.
And that's the problem...you've got to HOPE you're still alive to call the insurance and that the guy that just kicked your door in doesn't rape you or your family members and/or kill you and your family. Police are rarely on the scene to catch the perp in the action. They only arrive in time to pick up the pieces....
No one wants to have to kill someone, but, especially if you have loved ones to protect, you'd rather rip the person apart with your bare hands rather than them harming a hair on your child's head. Obviously if you can get out, you should, but a lot of times you don't have that choice.
Yes well, THANKS for that stereotype that we're all rootin-tootin-shootin cowboys and all. It's completely false, but thanks for playing.
Meanwhile, in the UK you guys are sooo safety conscious that you've even banned certain dog breeds for being too dangerous. (BTW, did you know that only ONE of former football player Michael Vick's fighting pit bulls that were seized had to be put down for being too vicious? And one is now a licensed therapy dog?) Then you've put cameras everywhere. If it's all that safe, why do you need all the security cameras? And if someone breaks in to your home, you're at their mercy because it's illegal to shoot the burglar.
Meanwhile (from 2004), violent crime is up 14%
Thanks mate, but I'll keep my dogs (which include 2 Rottweilers) and my handgun safely tucked in the nightstand. I'd rather be able to be alive and show the police the body of a criminal I shot when he kicked the door in than cower in the bathroom with the phone or hope the police can locate my killer or attacker with their surveillance cameras.
Actually I think he only posted some screen shots just to show he did it. But even he admitted that he didn't find any dirt.
Read the linked article. She was using a Yahoo account for official business. Just not the account that was hacked.
And you need to re-read it. It doesn't say she has more than one Yahoo account. She has a personal Yahoo account and the official, government account. Two accounts, only the personal one is on Yahoo. The reporter also makes the unproven allegation, "Palin routinely uses a private Yahoo e-mail account to conduct state business. Others in the governor's office sometimes use personal e-mail accounts too."
But later in the article they admit they don't know what's in the emails. So they don't know what emails are being sent and if those emails are inappropriately being sent via a personal account or vice-versa--there are emails she's not supposed to send on her government account too. And it's not illegal to have a personal email for personal business. So the idea the reporter can claim she's conducting state business on her Yahoo account is bogus. It's an unfounded accusation.
While I have no doubt there is dirt to be found, spreading misinformation implying that dirt was found (which is what we're seeing now) is almost as good.
No...it's not. This is the problem is there are people who if they can't find real dirt don't care if they just print boldface lies for the gullible. That is wrong and if that's the way those of you want to live, I feel sorry for you. Because the only people believing your lies already WANT to believe the worst in that person and/or are too stupid to work a voting machine.
I care a lot more that there's a candidate who has had long associations with people who are terrorists (Ayers) and who hate this country (Louis Farrakhan, Wright). Birds of a feather. Those ARE proven facts.
Well, what some are claiming was that she was illegally using a personal account to do city business and avoid freedom of information act or some such. This guy probably was looking more for just plain dirt or gossip rather than trying to perform some public service as it's being painted. Turns out there wasn't anything in there and now he's in big trouble.
Well she's hardly doing the work of an "average couple." A govoner probably has a *tad* more responsibility than you do. I was just pointing out that her salary wasn't out of line for her profession. And if you look up the cost of living for Alaska, $80K probably isn't that different as it costs a lot more to live there depending on where you come from.
In one story, it says:
The indictment alleges that after posting Palin's personal information online, Kernell "removed, altered, concealed and covered up files on his laptop computer" to throw off a possible investigation.
Beyond the crime, why are we giving this doofus the lofty title of "Hacker"? This is no hacker. This guy just hit the "I forgot my Yahoo password" button and guessed or researched personal details to get in so he could change it. And now he thinks he did enough to remove files on his computer. What an idiot. He didn't even think to use a public computer. And then he blabs on a website about what he did.
Not a hacker. Not even a kiddie scripter. Just a doofus.
Media publication of this information has nothing to do with whether or not the data was obtained illegally. News organizations publish information obtained from criminals about their criminal acts on a regular basis, and most of them are willing to shield their sources against investigation.
If it's illegal to break in and publish someone's email without their permission, it's just as illegal for the press to publish something obtained illegally. And I don't know about the news you read or view, but I don't recall any criminals reporting crimes they have committed unless they've already been tried or have some sort of deal worked out. Because even if the reported doesn't reveal their source, the invesigators will find out who committed the crime and that report can be used against them. Most information obtained by reporters is through someone they know on the police or investigation force, not the person committing the crime.
The fact that Palin was using non-state-sanctioned e-mail for purposes of administering the state is, if not outright illegal under either federal or Alaskan law, certainly underhanded and something that the people should know about.
Actually that's NOT a fact. There's no evidence that anything there was anything illegal in her emails. There's a thread in here that reveals a link to a public post from the alleged hacker who said he was looking for dirt, but didn't find anything. And even if there were, the ends do NOT justify the means. In fact, even if there were anything illegal about the emails, it's now tainted and could not be used for prosecution.
Sorry, privacy is nice and all but when you find they took a few hundred grand or a house in bribes (previous congressmen) then the hack was well justified. Its the same as hacking/investigating people when you have a warrant.
Yeah and OJ hoped that defense would work too, but found out otherwise. Ends justifies the means and all.... But thanks for playing.
That's not even mid-range. In the rest of your the article you linked:
New York Gov. George Pataki is the highest paid governor in the nation with a salary of $179,000, California Gov. Gray Davis is second at $157,143, Michigan's John Engler follows at $151,245, Illinois Gov. George Ryan is fourth with $145,877 and Gov. Tom Ridge of Pennsylvania rounds out the top five. He gets $138,270.
The lowest-paid governor in the country is Mike Johanns of Nebraska, whose salary is $65,000 a year. Arkansas, with a governor's salary of $69,920, is next lowest in terms of stinginess followed by Maine, Connecticut and Montana. Those three states pay their governors $70,000, $78,000 and $81,459 respectively.
And considering the cost of living in Alaska, which is very expensive, it's not THAT big of a salary.
"A University of Tennessee student who is the son of a Memphis Democrat legislator has been indicted by a federal grand jury on charges of hacking Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin's personal e-mail."
There...fixed that for you.
But my guess is that nothing will happen to Palin and this guy will get punished. Sorry, I'm just your typical American who has lost a great deal of faith in our government, economy, and legal system.
YES...he SHOULD punished if he did this. And so should ANY web site that published the email--including media websites. If this was someone else's email...say Obama's, a lot of you would be screaming about privacy rights, illegal search and seizure, etc....and rightfully so! You cannot (as OJ just found out) commit a crime while claiming to be exposing a criminal act. And if there were anything criminal in the email (and I'm dubious about that claim), it would be thrown out because it was obtained illegally. Fruit of the poisoned vine. And the media KNEW this was illegal and yet some also disclosed what was in them.