But if you want to collect tax dollars from companies that operate in the.U.S.A., you might want to assess their global revenues, period. Global companies paying global rates makes perfect sense.
Problem is, many of the large companies that operate in the U.S.A. operate in many countries. If all of them followed the same policy and taxed global revenues, the total tax rates they'd have to pay would exceed 100% pretty rapidly.
Additionally, such a policy would make it extremely unattractive to operate in the U.S. at all. So Facebook, Google, etc., would simply close their U.S. campuses and move them into Canada. The U.S. would not only lose the employment those companies provide, but also the income tax revenues from the individuals who work there.
It's amazing to read that Space: 1999 had a small budget. The sets, in the first season in particular, were quite amazing, a big step up from Star Trek in my opinion. (Though the writing and acting in Star Trek were far superior.) But there were some very good episodes of Space: 1999, some of them quite dark. I have them all on DVD and I do still enjoy watching them.
If and only if the SCOTUS ruling on GPS tracking applies to cell phone tracking. In the GPS tracking ruling, the police physically affixed a GPS tracker to the exterior of the suspects vehicle without a warrant. With cell phones, you voluntarily carry the bug. That's a significant difference which might make the GPS ruling inapplicable.
Exactly. If you're going somewhere you don't want to be tracked, you can always turn your cellphone off. But a hidden GPS tracking device attached to your car by police is harder to turn off.
Personally I don't care about that kind of "privacy". I'd say the time I stopped caring was around the time I lost my virginity. I do care about getting cancer though.
You're forgetting this is Slashdot. Most of us still have our virginity!
Scotus is only supposed to hear a small number of cases that will have major political and constitutional impacts
Actually, that's not what the majority of the cases they hear deal with. One of the main reasons the SCOTUS will hear a case is that there is a split decision on an issue of federal law among the circuit courts of appeal. I.e. if one circuit court has decided a federal law means one thing, and another circuit court has decided the same federal law means something else, then the US Supreme Court would likely hear an appeal on that issue.
That's not quite the ultimate solution that many believe it to be. There are firewalls and routers on the market now that have man in the middle programming right in the hardware, and decryption is a basic part of the DPI system. How many people actually check that the certificates match who their supposed to, and how do we know which root authorities can be trusted? I imagine the vast majority of people don't even look at the certificate information. And how many ssh users actually check the key fingerprints and verify they match those stored on the remote host? Is that even possible in most circumstances? And if you do discover something's up, what then? If a router is doing man in the middle DPI, your choices are pretty much accept it, or don't communicate with the remote host at all. Most people just sigh and go on doing what they're doing.
And that doesn't even take into account hacks on your computer, like browser attacks which quietly install new trusted certificate authorities, or more aggressive malware like keyloggers and such. Encryption is much harder to use properly than most people realize, and it is highly unlikely that people on BOTH ends of the connection are using it properly.
I won't lie: any day one of these child porn scumbags is caught is a good day. Even so, the story makes no sense. The FBI doesn't know how to remove Spyware? Any technician worth their salt would run DBAN and that would be the end of it.
The current version of DBAN does not wipe the host protected area (HPA) of a hard drive and that is a perfect spot for spyware to hide.
A disk wipe is a disk wipe. If your properly DOD-wipe a hard drive, nothing should remain.
That's simply not true anymore. Many hard drives contain something called a "host protected area" which CANNOT be erased without a password, no matter how hard you try. And there are many other places in a computer that spyware can hide: the BIOS, graphics or sound firmware (most of which is flash upgradable), or firmware on any card plugged into the computer. And whenever you boot, it can replicate itself in all the other hiding places you may have deleted it from. So, if you do have spyware like this on your computer, it really can be virtually impossible to get rid of.
These programs are malware and spyware and use the same methods to stay on as virii. The difference is they are legit so AV programs do not flag them.
That raises an interesting question: legitimacy is in the eyes of the beholder. I can think of many instance where spyware might be installed on a computer in a situation where it is NOT legitimate. Does the AV software deliberately turn a blind eye? Is there any software I can download that will scan my computer for "legitimate" spyware? If I suspected my computer had this eBLASTER software installed, how would I go about finding out?
The agent shouldn't have needed to take it to a repair shop in the first place. SpectorSoft's own FAQ section states "eBLASTER... cannot be uninstalled without the eBLASTER password YOU specify..."
Sounds like the guy forgot the password AND the shop didn't do its job.
Well, if the shop didn't know the password either then they couldn't have wiped it out, so you can't really blame them.
Your citation is incomplete. Key reuse is one way to weaken the encoding without forking over the key itself, though this needs multiple messages encoded with the same key.
If you've re-used a key, you're no longer using a one time pad. (Hint: Why do you think it's called a one time pad? [emphasis mine])
The day there's an unified tax law over Europe some non-European company will step up to replace Ireland.
That's fine. But there will be import taxes and duties, same as with anything that comes from say, China.
Import duties and taxes work fine when there's physical goods involved. When a ship arrives at a harbor full of cars, or stereos, or sweaters, or whatever, the customs officers can do an inventory, fill out the paperwork, and bill the importer for the taxes and duties owed. But the present case is over Google whose commodity is information that flows over the Internet. How do you apply such a scheme there? Put customs officers at all the international routers? What if we're using SSL or some other form of encryption? How do you keep track of the digital "imports"?
Actually, there an even more recent and relevant SCOTUS precedent: Gonzales v. Raich. It was directly on the issue of federal vs. state law when it comes to marijuana criminalization, and by a 6-3 decision, it was decided federal law trumps state's rights on this matter. Ironically, the opinion was written by Justice Scalia, who is usually on the side of state's rights. Justices O'Connor, Thomas, and Chief Justice Rehnquist dissented.
How does a blind person cast a private and secret ballot?
For blind people, there is a sleeve the ballot can be inserted into which has Braille markings with the candidate's names and openings through which the voter can mark the "X". Also an election official can, if the voter wishes, read the names of the candidates while guiding the voters hand down the openings in the sleeve to acquaint the voter with the options. Then the official leaves the area behind the voting screen so the voter can vote in secret. At his/her option, a voter can designate an assistant to help them with voting, who is required to sign a declaration that they will assist the voter in voting the way they intended, and not disclose the candidate whom the voter selected to anyone. A voter, if he/she wishes can have an election official assist with the voting in a similar way, and of course, such officials are sworn to assist correctly.
You had no 'power'. You would have to prove the watermarked file was willfully provided by the owner, and a watermarked file fished out of the sea of the internet is not going to cut it.
We would happily pay DirecTV for the service, but there is simply no way to do so. CRTC won't allow it
And how exactly does the CRTC prevent it? Do they rifle through everyone's outgoing mail to see if anyone is sending a check to DirecTV to pay their bill?
First, I don't live in the US. Second, I believe I'm entitled to have complete fictional, made up, bogus documents stored in the privacy of my computer. People write fiction all the time, right? And if some idiot breaks into my machine and believes the shit, how's that my fault, exactly?
Intent is a large component of US Law. Not sure about Dutch. If you have a fictional document on your computer which is part of a novel you've been writing, you would not be guilty of obstruction of justice because there is no intent. If you have a honeypot on your computer or fake data which is there primarily for the purpose of thwarting police investigations, then you would almost certainly be guilty of obstruction of justice.
The law says (**PDF warning) "All schools located within Minnesota and all schools located outside Minnesota which offer degree programs or courses within Minnesota shall register annually with the office."
I think what's really at issue here then is not whether Coursera is violating this law, but rather whether or not this law is compatible with the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Slashdot Mirror
Metric != SI
Exactly right. Torr is a metric unit: it's MILLIMETERS of mercury. Millimeters are metric. Torr isn't SI, but it is metric.
how about laws limiting capital flight?
Companies will just start keeping their money in foreign banks.
When those companies start heading for the exit, citizens eventually will ask for and get government action to halt that.
What are you suggesting? A big electric fence?
But if you want to collect tax dollars from companies that operate in the .U.S.A., you might want to assess their global revenues, period. Global companies paying global rates makes perfect sense.
Problem is, many of the large companies that operate in the U.S.A. operate in many countries. If all of them followed the same policy and taxed global revenues, the total tax rates they'd have to pay would exceed 100% pretty rapidly.
Additionally, such a policy would make it extremely unattractive to operate in the U.S. at all. So Facebook, Google, etc., would simply close their U.S. campuses and move them into Canada. The U.S. would not only lose the employment those companies provide, but also the income tax revenues from the individuals who work there.
It's amazing to read that Space: 1999 had a small budget. The sets, in the first season in particular, were quite amazing, a big step up from Star Trek in my opinion. (Though the writing and acting in Star Trek were far superior.) But there were some very good episodes of Space: 1999, some of them quite dark. I have them all on DVD and I do still enjoy watching them.
If and only if the SCOTUS ruling on GPS tracking applies to cell phone tracking. In the GPS tracking ruling, the police physically affixed a GPS tracker to the exterior of the suspects vehicle without a warrant. With cell phones, you voluntarily carry the bug. That's a significant difference which might make the GPS ruling inapplicable.
Exactly. If you're going somewhere you don't want to be tracked, you can always turn your cellphone off. But a hidden GPS tracking device attached to your car by police is harder to turn off.
Personally I don't care about that kind of "privacy". I'd say the time I stopped caring was around the time I lost my virginity. I do care about getting cancer though.
You're forgetting this is Slashdot. Most of us still have our virginity!
Conflict of law is a fascinating area.
Fascinating to those who aren't victimized by such conflicts, I suppose.
Scotus is only supposed to hear a small number of cases that will have major political and constitutional impacts
Actually, that's not what the majority of the cases they hear deal with. One of the main reasons the SCOTUS will hear a case is that there is a split decision on an issue of federal law among the circuit courts of appeal. I.e. if one circuit court has decided a federal law means one thing, and another circuit court has decided the same federal law means something else, then the US Supreme Court would likely hear an appeal on that issue.
End-to-end encryption. Problem solved.
That's not quite the ultimate solution that many believe it to be. There are firewalls and routers on the market now that have man in the middle programming right in the hardware, and decryption is a basic part of the DPI system. How many people actually check that the certificates match who their supposed to, and how do we know which root authorities can be trusted? I imagine the vast majority of people don't even look at the certificate information. And how many ssh users actually check the key fingerprints and verify they match those stored on the remote host? Is that even possible in most circumstances? And if you do discover something's up, what then? If a router is doing man in the middle DPI, your choices are pretty much accept it, or don't communicate with the remote host at all. Most people just sigh and go on doing what they're doing.
And that doesn't even take into account hacks on your computer, like browser attacks which quietly install new trusted certificate authorities, or more aggressive malware like keyloggers and such. Encryption is much harder to use properly than most people realize, and it is highly unlikely that people on BOTH ends of the connection are using it properly.
I won't lie: any day one of these child porn scumbags is caught is a good day. Even so, the story makes no sense. The FBI doesn't know how to remove Spyware? Any technician worth their salt would run DBAN and that would be the end of it.
The current version of DBAN does not wipe the host protected area (HPA) of a hard drive and that is a perfect spot for spyware to hide.
A disk wipe is a disk wipe. If your properly DOD-wipe a hard drive, nothing should remain.
That's simply not true anymore. Many hard drives contain something called a "host protected area" which CANNOT be erased without a password, no matter how hard you try. And there are many other places in a computer that spyware can hide: the BIOS, graphics or sound firmware (most of which is flash upgradable), or firmware on any card plugged into the computer. And whenever you boot, it can replicate itself in all the other hiding places you may have deleted it from. So, if you do have spyware like this on your computer, it really can be virtually impossible to get rid of.
These programs are malware and spyware and use the same methods to stay on as virii. The difference is they are legit so AV programs do not flag them.
That raises an interesting question: legitimacy is in the eyes of the beholder. I can think of many instance where spyware might be installed on a computer in a situation where it is NOT legitimate. Does the AV software deliberately turn a blind eye? Is there any software I can download that will scan my computer for "legitimate" spyware? If I suspected my computer had this eBLASTER software installed, how would I go about finding out?
The agent shouldn't have needed to take it to a repair shop in the first place. SpectorSoft's own FAQ section states "eBLASTER ... cannot be uninstalled without the eBLASTER password YOU specify..."
Sounds like the guy forgot the password AND the shop didn't do its job.
Well, if the shop didn't know the password either then they couldn't have wiped it out, so you can't really blame them.
Your citation is incomplete. Key reuse is one way to weaken the encoding without forking over the key itself, though this needs multiple messages encoded with the same key.
If you've re-used a key, you're no longer using a one time pad. (Hint: Why do you think it's called a one time pad? [emphasis mine])
The day there's an unified tax law over Europe some non-European company will step up to replace Ireland.
That's fine. But there will be import taxes and duties, same as with anything that comes from say, China.
Import duties and taxes work fine when there's physical goods involved. When a ship arrives at a harbor full of cars, or stereos, or sweaters, or whatever, the customs officers can do an inventory, fill out the paperwork, and bill the importer for the taxes and duties owed. But the present case is over Google whose commodity is information that flows over the Internet. How do you apply such a scheme there? Put customs officers at all the international routers? What if we're using SSL or some other form of encryption? How do you keep track of the digital "imports"?
Actually, there an even more recent and relevant SCOTUS precedent: Gonzales v. Raich. It was directly on the issue of federal vs. state law when it comes to marijuana criminalization, and by a 6-3 decision, it was decided federal law trumps state's rights on this matter. Ironically, the opinion was written by Justice Scalia, who is usually on the side of state's rights. Justices O'Connor, Thomas, and Chief Justice Rehnquist dissented.
- blu-ray, DVD, VHS (!), Xbox 360, Wii, etc., whatever you and your family needs, it's there
You forgot Beta.
In the mean time please leave the TV on.
Depending on what channel it's set to, that could be a fate far worse than death.
How does a blind person cast a private and secret ballot?
For blind people, there is a sleeve the ballot can be inserted into which has Braille markings with the candidate's names and openings through which the voter can mark the "X". Also an election official can, if the voter wishes, read the names of the candidates while guiding the voters hand down the openings in the sleeve to acquaint the voter with the options. Then the official leaves the area behind the voting screen so the voter can vote in secret. At his/her option, a voter can designate an assistant to help them with voting, who is required to sign a declaration that they will assist the voter in voting the way they intended, and not disclose the candidate whom the voter selected to anyone. A voter, if he/she wishes can have an election official assist with the voting in a similar way, and of course, such officials are sworn to assist correctly.
You had no 'power'. You would have to prove the watermarked file was willfully provided by the owner, and a watermarked file fished out of the sea of the internet is not going to cut it.
Apparently it is, as the main article proves.
We would happily pay DirecTV for the service, but there is simply no way to do so. CRTC won't allow it
And how exactly does the CRTC prevent it? Do they rifle through everyone's outgoing mail to see if anyone is sending a check to DirecTV to pay their bill?
Are photons that expensive that they need to be recycled? I can understand aluminum cans, but photons are taking it a bit far, I think.
First, I don't live in the US. Second, I believe I'm entitled to have complete fictional, made up, bogus documents stored in the privacy of my computer. People write fiction all the time, right? And if some idiot breaks into my machine and believes the shit, how's that my fault, exactly?
Intent is a large component of US Law. Not sure about Dutch. If you have a fictional document on your computer which is part of a novel you've been writing, you would not be guilty of obstruction of justice because there is no intent. If you have a honeypot on your computer or fake data which is there primarily for the purpose of thwarting police investigations, then you would almost certainly be guilty of obstruction of justice.
The law says (**PDF warning) "All schools located within Minnesota and all schools located outside Minnesota which offer degree programs or courses within Minnesota shall register annually with the office."
I think what's really at issue here then is not whether Coursera is violating this law, but rather whether or not this law is compatible with the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.