As an example; technical education in India is about US$1000 per year (http://qz.com/445500/the-cost-of-getting-a-decent-education-in-india-is-now-staggering/).
According to GP, that would be roughly 35 times cheaper at the very least.
Technical "education", in India, is also hardly worth the ink written to spell those words.
If that were true, American companies (and universities) wouldn't be outsourcing their IT to India, because the Indian workers would be incompetent due to their poor education. Clearly that's not the case.
This is faulty logic. When your accountant makes a mistake with your taxes it does not make your accountant liable for paying the difference. This is always true: when someone else who is acting on your behalf makes a mistake it never absolves you of legal responsibility.
Ireland was not acting on Apple's behalf. Ireland was the taxation authority, not the E.U.
It's Apple's responsibility to check with all applicable laws and make sure things are on the up-and-up, regardless of what Ireland may have offered them.
The laws in question were Irish tax laws, and Apple was abiding by them. If Ireland's laws violated some E.U. meta-laws, that should be Ireland's problem, not Apple's.
Its also about what would happen to you, the private citizen if you pulled this shit. HUGE penalties on top of what was owed and decades in jail in most countries....
Really? Private citizens would get in trouble if their government gave them tax breaks? Ireland and Apple entered into a voluntary agreement whereby Apple would keep jobs in Ireland in exchange for more favorable tax treatment. If this violates EU regulations, then it is the Irish government, not Apple, that is in the wrong, and it is the Irish government which should pay the back taxes.
No he wasn't. He was simply providing a platform to host online files. All he did was not bend to US media cartels the way YouTube or Dropbox did nor give the US government control over the systems the way Amazon or Microsoft does. At one point his system was considered the best file upload facility as it was fully encrypted so no company or government could see what actually was on it.
The US government wanted him, a company not even based out of the US, to implement DMCA controls similar to YouTube's (where any one could claim infringement and the content taken down), he refused and his site was taken offline and he was arrested.
If what he was doing was so above board, why didn't he sell advertising on his site in an open and honest way? Why all the money laundering and hidden transactions? He made it clear from the way he handled money from his advertisers that he knew he was doing something wrong.
And that's a reliable proof of destination or origin?
Well, it pretty much is since if your Bittorrent client has the wrong IP address of the computer with which it is exchanging data, it is kind of hard to exchange data. That's kinda how the Internet works.
They don't just sell empty syringes over the counter and most schools here in the US would probably freak out over "drug paraphernalia" if they spotted your kid with a bag of pre-filled syringes.
So kids with diabetes aren't allowed to go to school then?
"It's no possible for there to be misidentification"
It'll only take one false positive to introduce reasonable doubt..
This is a civil lawsuit, not a criminal proceeding. The standard is proof by a preponderance of the evidence, not proof beyond a reasonable doubt. All the plaintiff has to show is that it is more likely than not, given the evidence, that the defendant was engaged in the conduct alleged. It's a fairly low standard, and an IP address in a log file might well meet that standard, even if there are multiple reasons why it may lead to the wrong person being identified.
How did they "connect directly to the IP address"?
Did they place a wiretap on each of the 84 IP address to siphon the data?
Most Bittorrent software shows the IP addresses where the data is coming from. Generally different parts of the file will come from different sources, but those sources are usually available.
LaTeX is a document preparation system, not a database or spreadsheet. It would make perfect sense to say that people should be using LaTeX instead of Microsoft Word, but it makes no sense to say people should be using LaTeX instead of Excel. Perhaps those using Excel should be using PostgreSQL for database type work, and perhaps they should be using R for data analysis, but it makes no sense to use LaTeX as a substitute.
I'm 22 and I don't have any social media account and no account anywhere that uses my real name (possibly excluding my bank account and/or any government-related services if you count that).
Nothing in the article says they're only interested in real-name accounts.
I have yet to see a single one that can decrypt SSL. I tried. A lot.
The only way to 'decrypt' is to force your own cert, which must be trusted on the devices (WPAD or manually) before it can actually do it without a browser throwing a fit.
Yes, obviously that is what is meant by an SSL decryptor. I'm not suggesting that firewalls can crack SSL. It decrypts the traffic by acting as a MITM. You do need to install certs on the various browsers for it to work, or they'll complain.
Virtually all modern firewall/IDP systems have SSL decryption. Given that virtually all websites use SSL nowadays, it makes no sense at all to even have an IDP if it can't handle SSL traffic.
Well for one thing, the police took your phone - it is reasonable to assume you know how to turn it on.
On the other hand, the police SUSPECT you killed someone and hid the body - yet without proof that you did it is not reasonable to assume you know where the body is.
Suppose you admitted you know where the body is. There are many reasons you may know this that don't involve you being a killer. Maybe you witnessed someone else dispose of the body, maybe you ran across the body after it was deceased, maybe the killer told you where the body was buried, etc. Now, supposing you actually DID happen to kill the person and you know there is evidence on the body (DNA, fingernail marks, ballistics that match your gun, etc.) that would lead to you most likely being convicted if the body were found. Suppose you are asked by police or a judge where the body is. You've already admitted to knowing where it is. Are you compelled to reveal where it is, if such a revelation will incriminate you?
If you threaten the safe harbor status of the ISPs you are going to get stomped.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the safe harbor statute require you to do something if you receive a notice of infringement? According to the article, Rightscorp has been sending notices of infringement and the ISPs haven't been doing anything.
In the U.S., cars will unlock with the mechanical motion of pulling the handle from the inside or must have the ability to be unlocked mechanically without electrical power. It's an NHTSA requirement for safety.
Have you ever tried opening a car door under water with the windows shut?
Wow, seems people really misunderstood my post. I should have used the tag! I was trying to point out that this court was kind of stating the obvious. I mean, other than the plaintiff in this case, did anyone think Twitter was really responsible for the rise of ISIS?
They need TOR for when they are watching kiddie porn, in between cases.
Yeah, that's why we all use TOR, but that isn't part of their professional duties. Since a DOJ official is recommending TOR to a room full of judges, I assume it is somehow tied to their work and I'm just curious why judges would need that.
Slashdot Mirror
They should do over-the-air updates like Tesla does. Then there would be no need for a recall.
Over the air updates of your seat belt and airbag operations? Yeah, no possible safety problems with that!
As an example; technical education in India is about US$1000 per year (http://qz.com/445500/the-cost-of-getting-a-decent-education-in-india-is-now-staggering/). According to GP, that would be roughly 35 times cheaper at the very least.
Technical "education", in India, is also hardly worth the ink written to spell those words.
If that were true, American companies (and universities) wouldn't be outsourcing their IT to India, because the Indian workers would be incompetent due to their poor education. Clearly that's not the case.
This is faulty logic. When your accountant makes a mistake with your taxes it does not make your accountant liable for paying the difference. This is always true: when someone else who is acting on your behalf makes a mistake it never absolves you of legal responsibility.
Ireland was not acting on Apple's behalf. Ireland was the taxation authority, not the E.U.
It's Apple's responsibility to check with all applicable laws and make sure things are on the up-and-up, regardless of what Ireland may have offered them.
The laws in question were Irish tax laws, and Apple was abiding by them. If Ireland's laws violated some E.U. meta-laws, that should be Ireland's problem, not Apple's.
ISIS (and other terrorist groups) killed 19 Americans last year. Total.
That figure sounds a bit low. Does it include all the service men killed in action fighting ISIS overseas?
Its also about what would happen to you, the private citizen if you pulled this shit. HUGE penalties on top of what was owed and decades in jail in most countries....
Really? Private citizens would get in trouble if their government gave them tax breaks? Ireland and Apple entered into a voluntary agreement whereby Apple would keep jobs in Ireland in exchange for more favorable tax treatment. If this violates EU regulations, then it is the Irish government, not Apple, that is in the wrong, and it is the Irish government which should pay the back taxes.
No he wasn't. He was simply providing a platform to host online files. All he did was not bend to US media cartels the way YouTube or Dropbox did nor give the US government control over the systems the way Amazon or Microsoft does. At one point his system was considered the best file upload facility as it was fully encrypted so no company or government could see what actually was on it.
The US government wanted him, a company not even based out of the US, to implement DMCA controls similar to YouTube's (where any one could claim infringement and the content taken down), he refused and his site was taken offline and he was arrested.
If what he was doing was so above board, why didn't he sell advertising on his site in an open and honest way? Why all the money laundering and hidden transactions? He made it clear from the way he handled money from his advertisers that he knew he was doing something wrong.
And that's a reliable proof of destination or origin?
Well, it pretty much is since if your Bittorrent client has the wrong IP address of the computer with which it is exchanging data, it is kind of hard to exchange data. That's kinda how the Internet works.
They don't just sell empty syringes over the counter and most schools here in the US would probably freak out over "drug paraphernalia" if they spotted your kid with a bag of pre-filled syringes.
So kids with diabetes aren't allowed to go to school then?
It'll only take one false positive to introduce reasonable doubt. .
This is a civil lawsuit, not a criminal proceeding. The standard is proof by a preponderance of the evidence, not proof beyond a reasonable doubt. All the plaintiff has to show is that it is more likely than not, given the evidence, that the defendant was engaged in the conduct alleged. It's a fairly low standard, and an IP address in a log file might well meet that standard, even if there are multiple reasons why it may lead to the wrong person being identified.
How did they "connect directly to the IP address"? Did they place a wiretap on each of the 84 IP address to siphon the data?
Most Bittorrent software shows the IP addresses where the data is coming from. Generally different parts of the file will come from different sources, but those sources are usually available.
If anyone at Google gets arrested for linking to infringing content, it will be the end of the Internet as we know it.
TFA doesn't say why this would be legally fuzzy.
I don't see what's legally fuzzy about this either. Since when did privacy rights of thieves trump owner's rights to recover their property?
LaTeX is a document preparation system, not a database or spreadsheet. It would make perfect sense to say that people should be using LaTeX instead of Microsoft Word, but it makes no sense to say people should be using LaTeX instead of Excel. Perhaps those using Excel should be using PostgreSQL for database type work, and perhaps they should be using R for data analysis, but it makes no sense to use LaTeX as a substitute.
I'm 22 and I don't have any social media account and no account anywhere that uses my real name (possibly excluding my bank account and/or any government-related services if you count that).
Nothing in the article says they're only interested in real-name accounts.
I have yet to see a single one that can decrypt SSL. I tried. A lot.
The only way to 'decrypt' is to force your own cert, which must be trusted on the devices (WPAD or manually) before it can actually do it without a browser throwing a fit.
Yes, obviously that is what is meant by an SSL decryptor. I'm not suggesting that firewalls can crack SSL. It decrypts the traffic by acting as a MITM. You do need to install certs on the various browsers for it to work, or they'll complain.
Virtually all modern firewall/IDP systems have SSL decryption. Given that virtually all websites use SSL nowadays, it makes no sense at all to even have an IDP if it can't handle SSL traffic.
Well for one thing, the police took your phone - it is reasonable to assume you know how to turn it on.
On the other hand, the police SUSPECT you killed someone and hid the body - yet without proof that you did it is not reasonable to assume you know where the body is.
Suppose you admitted you know where the body is. There are many reasons you may know this that don't involve you being a killer. Maybe you witnessed someone else dispose of the body, maybe you ran across the body after it was deceased, maybe the killer told you where the body was buried, etc. Now, supposing you actually DID happen to kill the person and you know there is evidence on the body (DNA, fingernail marks, ballistics that match your gun, etc.) that would lead to you most likely being convicted if the body were found. Suppose you are asked by police or a judge where the body is. You've already admitted to knowing where it is. Are you compelled to reveal where it is, if such a revelation will incriminate you?
Amazing to think that US civil forfeiture laws apply even if the alleged crimes were committed by a German/Finnish citizen, living in New Zealand.
And the assets seized were not even in the U.S. New Zealand and Hong Kong bank accounts as well as various physical goods including a mansion!
Comcast, Verizon, AT&T, Cox, TW, all sued into bankruptcy, then the government steps in and nationalizes the last mile infrastructure. FTW!
<sarcasm>Yeah, that's exactly what I want: the government controlling my Internet!</sarcasm>
If you threaten the safe harbor status of the ISPs you are going to get stomped.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the safe harbor statute require you to do something if you receive a notice of infringement? According to the article, Rightscorp has been sending notices of infringement and the ISPs haven't been doing anything.
In the U.S., cars will unlock with the mechanical motion of pulling the handle from the inside or must have the ability to be unlocked mechanically without electrical power. It's an NHTSA requirement for safety.
Have you ever tried opening a car door under water with the windows shut?
But there is nothing illegal about buying milk... so why does this message need to be encrypted?
Unless the government does not like that brand of milk...
There's nothing illegal about pooping, so why don't you leave the bathroom door open and let everyone watch?
Wow, seems people really misunderstood my post. I should have used the tag! I was trying to point out that this court was kind of stating the obvious. I mean, other than the plaintiff in this case, did anyone think Twitter was really responsible for the rise of ISIS?
Cause I thought the general consensus was that Twitter is responsible for the rise of Isis, and terrorism in general.
They need TOR for when they are watching kiddie porn, in between cases.
Yeah, that's why we all use TOR, but that isn't part of their professional duties. Since a DOJ official is recommending TOR to a room full of judges, I assume it is somehow tied to their work and I'm just curious why judges would need that.