Maybe not April 1st, but still, it says that it uses AAA batteries. There does not appear to be a wire stretching from ball to manacle. The manacle is incredibly thin -- where are the batteries going to fit? Or for that matter, where is the electrically actuated lock works going to fit? I'm skeptical that it is a real product.
I would have guessed it was some right-wingnut complaining about how disrespectful it is to turn such a thing into a game.
Perhaps the problem is the extremists on both sides. What we need more than anything are some real freedom loving elected officials with a backbone. Except for one or two outliers, the notion that anyone in DC, right or left, is there for the good of America is fat ass pipe dream. It's all about what they can steal.
I wish there FPSs called "Rampage Through Congress", "Lobotomize the Lobbyist", "Make the President Eat His Words" etc. etc.
Pick up a book on reading comprehension and context. GP said healthcare will be bad if govt runs it. I pointed out that govt won't run it, govt will simply force taxpayers to subsidize the insurance industry and that politicians and salesmen (insurance industry) will thereby reap trillions. Obviously, I think the whole thing sucks. It's almost as bad as stealing my money to give it away to banks. Or to blow shit up in lands far away.
Won't happen. Rather, we'll continue to have healthcare run by insurance companies, the only difference being that government will force everyone who pay taxes to cover the cost of covering everyone else. The result, massive government enforced subsidization of private enterprise, with trillions funneled into the pockets of politicians and insurance middlemen.
Never confuse "can't" with "not supposed to". One represents an impossibility, the other a mere legal impediment that may or may not be followed or enforced.
If the challenge was more than $500 they might have some takers. I'm not saying that overwriting with zeros is insufficient for most purposes -- I sold an old laptop yesterday and I did just that -- but hot shot data recoverers aren't likely to be tempted by a pittance.
Stone is brittle an subject to breakage. If not well protected, erosion is an issue (think of gravestones only a couple hundred years old that can hardly be read with the unaided eye).
Jury nullification may be real, but it isn't a defense one can use and the odds of it happening in any particular case are probably so close to zero that one shouldn't ever expect it to save the day. This is America after all, populated largely by hordes of people who will gladly trade liberty for temporary safety from anything, including geeks looking to get laid.
I remember Q&A for DOS -- I may even still have the book hanging around unless it fell victim in my last purge of "things I paid a lot for and won't ever use again." It would be fun to give it a whirl again, though I'd have to buy a USB floppy drive.
What I really want to try out though, is Deathtrack. I played that for hours with the guy next door to me in my dorm in the late 80s, and I've never found a satisfying shoot-em-up race game since.
He should have just overwritten the MBR. He'd still get the work, but the computer manufacturer would not have pointed out the impossibility of recovering data from a non-existent drive.
I haven't actually seen it in use, so I can't say what it will look like, but if the quality is equivalent to that of carbon based toner, then there is no reason not to use it, and a few small reasons TO use it.
It is not inconceivable that soy toner would be less green when you figure in the energy costs of farming, the fact that stripped earth grawing a monocrop is far less effective at absorbing carbon than forest or grassland, the fact that fertilizer is made from natural gas, fact that the soy is likely transported great distances to where the processing plant exists, the fossil fuel cost of creating all the equipment for farming which may surpass that required to set up an oil well and pipe the oil to its destination, etc. etc. That 0.1% of crude oil use for toner might well be less favorable once the fossil fuel costs of soy, and the potentially environmentally degrading impact of farming are plugged into the equation, offset by the energy costs required to produce oil.
Besides, wouldn't make more sense to attack the problem by printing less or finding a substitute for plastic? I'm just guessing, but on weight basis drums and cartridge bodies probably contain a heck of a lot more oil.
That was interesting -- the ad your brother links to says that a basic model was $825, more depending on memory and options. Going to an inflation calculator ( http://www.westegg.com/inflation/infl.cgi ) shows that it would have cost $3266.19 in 2008 dollars. That was once upon a time, quite a pricey machine.
I'm an employer and let me tell you this, I get pretty ticked off when people I hire come to work sick. I give paid personal days for this exact reason, not to save them up for an extra vacation. The nature of my work involves things that are often calendared six months in advance between numerous parties on tight schedules, and involves deadlines that are immobile and devastating if missed. I really hate to work while I'm sick and I'd rather avoid the unneeded exposure -- I have no problem telling someone to go home if they can't figure that out on their own.
Even if it went to trial with a full defense, it would not be generate a precedential decision. To be a precedent, the case must be reviewed by a higher court and the opinion published. In my state, there are two levels above Superior Court (trial court): Court of Appeals and Supreme Court (names may be different in different states). All Supreme Court cases are published and thus become precedent. The Court of Appeals decides on a case by case basis which of its cases to formally publish. Formally published Ct. of Appeals cases are precedential for that court's district. In my state, it is considered a serious no-no to cite to an"unpublished" Ct. of Appeals decision in briefing.
It might be less confusing to call the unpublished decisions, "informal decisions", and the published decisions "formal", because all the decisions are available for public consumption. That's not the way it is though, so realize that "published" and "unpublished" have special meanings in this context.
Non-creative outnumber creative people by an enormous margin. Huge numbers of people are greedy and don't care at all about other people, and as a result, the non-creative-greedy class has always outnumbered and abused creative people. TPB is just the latest example.
I love Star Trek, but to be fair, there are some unrealistic parts. For example, everyone in Star Fleet has no money, no need for it, and no desire for it. That's just a bit too utopian.
I suppose it should be noted that the comment to the rule isn't exactly on point, but I feel like it does give some guidance on data storage. I don't think a lawyer would be disciplined for someone breaking into his safe to retrieve a document anymore than the lawyer would be if a third party opened a letter to spy on the communications between lawyer and client. But, I can't say that for sure either, and of course, I'm only thinking about WA. And of course, this isn't legal advice.
IAAL too, and I wouldn't feel comfortable with any particular service in which the service owner could have access to my files or the keys/passwords for decryption. I simply won't entrust my data to a third party, not even my calendar to Google Calendar. I do however perform nightly automated backups to a remote server.
My system works like this: - in my office, tar the data into a single file, encoding the date into the filename. - mcrypt that tar file. - transfer the encrypted tar to a virtual private server via ssh. (*) - on the VPS, I have a script that keeps a set of my backup files: the last 7 days are kept, and then mondays for the previous 7 weeks.
The risk is that my VPS or another VPS on the remote machine might be hacked and my data files exposed. However, because the data files are encrypted as well as can be by present standards, it is highly unlikely that the actual data will be exposed even if my account was hacked. The person would simply get a set of encrypted files. I suppose it would be possible for a person to grab my files, and 20 years later decrypt them. I think that worry starts to get a bit foil-hatish in that I don't work with terribly sensitive information -- at least not the kind that someone will wait decades to be able to decrypt.
Even if my data was somehow decrypted, I feel that I have performed sufficient due diligence under the rules in my state (**). In fact, there is no data existing anywhere that cannot through some highly contrived set of circumstances, cannot be revealed. I do feel I'm doing a better job than if I merely stored the files in a locked storage closet. Taking a bolt cutter to a masterlock and then trundling off CDs, papers, or thumb drives is way easier than decrypting my files. Any safe I can afford can probably be picked in 30 seconds by some 13 year old kid looking for cred on YouTube. Lastly, I have no doubt my encrypted files on the VPS are more secure than files located on a computer through which the internet is accessed by a web browser.
Anyway, I do feel I'm going beyond what most lawyers do with backup security. Of course there are certain unlikely possible breaches -- but I'm not required to protect against all of them. For example, I don't need to personally hand deliver all paper documents because I'm allowed to use the mail. What could be less secure than documents protected by a paper envelope?
As an added bonus, because my backups are nearly 3000 miles away (I'm on the Pacific, my VPS is on the Atlantic), even a devastating regional disaster will not cause me to lose data. If a disaster is so bad as to stretch from sea to shining sea -- my files will be the least of anyone's concern.
(*) I only get 15gb of space, but it only costs $10/month. It's running CentOS 5, no webserver or anything else, just ssh.
(**) Comment to WA State RPC 1.6 (confidentiality and information): [17] When transmitting a communication that includes information relating to the representation of a client, the lawyer must take reasonable precautions to prevent the information from coming into the hands of unintended recipients. This duty, however, does not require that the lawyer use special security measures if the method of communication affords a reasonable expectation of privacy. Special circumstances, however, may warrant special precautions. Factors to be considered in determining the reasonableness of the lawyer's expectation of confidentiality include the sensitivity of the information and the extent to which the privacy of the communication is protected by law or by a confidentiality agreement. A client may require the lawyer to implement special security measures not required by this Rule or may give informed consent to the use of a means of communication that would otherwise be prohibited by this Rule.
I have no doubt that it goes back way before Bush. For all his faults, Bush seemed rather upfront about his powergrabs so I don't really feel bad naming the road after him. But you are quite correct -- we've been on this road for longer than we likely know.
When you say "shift the battlefield" -- where? Right now, the government has to show it has a reasonable reason to think someone is doing something naughty. It isn't a ridiculously hard standard -- warrants are issued daily and routinely. You want to make it even less difficult to get a warrant. That means less privacy, more interference with people and businesses. Then once everyone has accepted that powergrab, we come to the next one.
We inherited "sovereign immunity" from a monarchy, not a democracy. Secondly, the government can be sued for acts of negligence on the state and federal level -- it has been understood for a very long time that a government that is above the law is destructive and unhealthy. As evidence of how destructive and unhealthy our government has become in recent years, one need only look at how it wishes to expand sovereign immunity rather than weaken it.
It is my position that Bush was a horrible president because he weakened our constitution, was an ugly warmonger, and spent money like it was water.
It is my position that Obama is about the same with the only difference being who gets some of the wastefully spent money.
Both "sides" treat the populace like we're their own public goatse waiting patiently to get stretched just a bit wider by some Republican prick or a Democratic cock.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe not April 1st, but still, it says that it uses AAA batteries. There does not appear to be a wire stretching from ball to manacle. The manacle is incredibly thin -- where are the batteries going to fit? Or for that matter, where is the electrically actuated lock works going to fit? I'm skeptical that it is a real product.
Hardcore liberal sheriff. Sounds like a basis for a stranger-than-fiction movie!
I would have guessed it was some right-wingnut complaining about how disrespectful it is to turn such a thing into a game.
Perhaps the problem is the extremists on both sides. What we need more than anything are some real freedom loving elected officials with a backbone. Except for one or two outliers, the notion that anyone in DC, right or left, is there for the good of America is fat ass pipe dream. It's all about what they can steal.
I wish there FPSs called "Rampage Through Congress", "Lobotomize the Lobbyist", "Make the President Eat His Words" etc. etc.
Pick up a book on reading comprehension and context. GP said healthcare will be bad if govt runs it. I pointed out that govt won't run it, govt will simply force taxpayers to subsidize the insurance industry and that politicians and salesmen (insurance industry) will thereby reap trillions. Obviously, I think the whole thing sucks. It's almost as bad as stealing my money to give it away to banks. Or to blow shit up in lands far away.
Won't happen. Rather, we'll continue to have healthcare run by insurance companies, the only difference being that government will force everyone who pay taxes to cover the cost of covering everyone else. The result, massive government enforced subsidization of private enterprise, with trillions funneled into the pockets of politicians and insurance middlemen.
Never confuse "can't" with "not supposed to". One represents an impossibility, the other a mere legal impediment that may or may not be followed or enforced.
If the challenge was more than $500 they might have some takers. I'm not saying that overwriting with zeros is insufficient for most purposes -- I sold an old laptop yesterday and I did just that -- but hot shot data recoverers aren't likely to be tempted by a pittance.
Stone is brittle an subject to breakage. If not well protected, erosion is an issue (think of gravestones only a couple hundred years old that can hardly be read with the unaided eye).
Jury nullification may be real, but it isn't a defense one can use and the odds of it happening in any particular case are probably so close to zero that one shouldn't ever expect it to save the day. This is America after all, populated largely by hordes of people who will gladly trade liberty for temporary safety from anything, including geeks looking to get laid.
I remember Q&A for DOS -- I may even still have the book hanging around unless it fell victim in my last purge of "things I paid a lot for and won't ever use again." It would be fun to give it a whirl again, though I'd have to buy a USB floppy drive.
What I really want to try out though, is Deathtrack. I played that for hours with the guy next door to me in my dorm in the late 80s, and I've never found a satisfying shoot-em-up race game since.
He should have just overwritten the MBR. He'd still get the work, but the computer manufacturer would not have pointed out the impossibility of recovering data from a non-existent drive.
It is not inconceivable that soy toner would be less green when you figure in the energy costs of farming, the fact that stripped earth grawing a monocrop is far less effective at absorbing carbon than forest or grassland, the fact that fertilizer is made from natural gas, fact that the soy is likely transported great distances to where the processing plant exists, the fossil fuel cost of creating all the equipment for farming which may surpass that required to set up an oil well and pipe the oil to its destination, etc. etc. That 0.1% of crude oil use for toner might well be less favorable once the fossil fuel costs of soy, and the potentially environmentally degrading impact of farming are plugged into the equation, offset by the energy costs required to produce oil.
Besides, wouldn't make more sense to attack the problem by printing less or finding a substitute for plastic? I'm just guessing, but on weight basis drums and cartridge bodies probably contain a heck of a lot more oil.
That was interesting -- the ad your brother links to says that a basic model was $825, more depending on memory and options. Going to an inflation calculator ( http://www.westegg.com/inflation/infl.cgi ) shows that it would have cost $3266.19 in 2008 dollars. That was once upon a time, quite a pricey machine.
I'm an employer and let me tell you this, I get pretty ticked off when people I hire come to work sick. I give paid personal days for this exact reason, not to save them up for an extra vacation. The nature of my work involves things that are often calendared six months in advance between numerous parties on tight schedules, and involves deadlines that are immobile and devastating if missed. I really hate to work while I'm sick and I'd rather avoid the unneeded exposure -- I have no problem telling someone to go home if they can't figure that out on their own.
You mean "taco hell" right?
Made with half and half, but close: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caffè_breve
Not a little half and half, replace the volume of milk with it. Very good and very bad.
Even if it went to trial with a full defense, it would not be generate a precedential decision. To be a precedent, the case must be reviewed by a higher court and the opinion published. In my state, there are two levels above Superior Court (trial court): Court of Appeals and Supreme Court (names may be different in different states). All Supreme Court cases are published and thus become precedent. The Court of Appeals decides on a case by case basis which of its cases to formally publish. Formally published Ct. of Appeals cases are precedential for that court's district. In my state, it is considered a serious no-no to cite to an"unpublished" Ct. of Appeals decision in briefing.
It might be less confusing to call the unpublished decisions, "informal decisions", and the published decisions "formal", because all the decisions are available for public consumption. That's not the way it is though, so realize that "published" and "unpublished" have special meanings in this context.
Non-creative outnumber creative people by an enormous margin. Huge numbers of people are greedy and don't care at all about other people, and as a result, the non-creative-greedy class has always outnumbered and abused creative people. TPB is just the latest example.
I love Star Trek, but to be fair, there are some unrealistic parts. For example, everyone in Star Fleet has no money, no need for it, and no desire for it. That's just a bit too utopian.
I suppose it should be noted that the comment to the rule isn't exactly on point, but I feel like it does give some guidance on data storage. I don't think a lawyer would be disciplined for someone breaking into his safe to retrieve a document anymore than the lawyer would be if a third party opened a letter to spy on the communications between lawyer and client. But, I can't say that for sure either, and of course, I'm only thinking about WA. And of course, this isn't legal advice.
IAAL too, and I wouldn't feel comfortable with any particular service in which the service owner could have access to my files or the keys/passwords for decryption. I simply won't entrust my data to a third party, not even my calendar to Google Calendar. I do however perform nightly automated backups to a remote server.
My system works like this:
- in my office, tar the data into a single file, encoding the date into the filename.
- mcrypt that tar file.
- transfer the encrypted tar to a virtual private server via ssh. (*)
- on the VPS, I have a script that keeps a set of my backup files: the last 7 days are kept, and then mondays for the previous 7 weeks.
The risk is that my VPS or another VPS on the remote machine might be hacked and my data files exposed. However, because the data files are encrypted as well as can be by present standards, it is highly unlikely that the actual data will be exposed even if my account was hacked. The person would simply get a set of encrypted files. I suppose it would be possible for a person to grab my files, and 20 years later decrypt them. I think that worry starts to get a bit foil-hatish in that I don't work with terribly sensitive information -- at least not the kind that someone will wait decades to be able to decrypt.
Even if my data was somehow decrypted, I feel that I have performed sufficient due diligence under the rules in my state (**). In fact, there is no data existing anywhere that cannot through some highly contrived set of circumstances, cannot be revealed. I do feel I'm doing a better job than if I merely stored the files in a locked storage closet. Taking a bolt cutter to a masterlock and then trundling off CDs, papers, or thumb drives is way easier than decrypting my files. Any safe I can afford can probably be picked in 30 seconds by some 13 year old kid looking for cred on YouTube. Lastly, I have no doubt my encrypted files on the VPS are more secure than files located on a computer through which the internet is accessed by a web browser.
Anyway, I do feel I'm going beyond what most lawyers do with backup security. Of course there are certain unlikely possible breaches -- but I'm not required to protect against all of them. For example, I don't need to personally hand deliver all paper documents because I'm allowed to use the mail. What could be less secure than documents protected by a paper envelope?
As an added bonus, because my backups are nearly 3000 miles away (I'm on the Pacific, my VPS is on the Atlantic), even a devastating regional disaster will not cause me to lose data. If a disaster is so bad as to stretch from sea to shining sea -- my files will be the least of anyone's concern.
(*) I only get 15gb of space, but it only costs $10/month. It's running CentOS 5, no webserver or anything else, just ssh.
(**) Comment to WA State RPC 1.6 (confidentiality and information):
[17] When transmitting a communication that includes information relating to the representation of a client, the lawyer must take reasonable precautions to prevent the information from coming into the hands of unintended recipients. This duty, however, does not require that the lawyer use special security measures if the method of communication affords a reasonable expectation of privacy. Special circumstances, however, may warrant special precautions. Factors to be considered in determining the
reasonableness of the lawyer's expectation of confidentiality include the sensitivity of the information and the extent to which the privacy of the communication is protected by law or by a confidentiality agreement. A client may require the lawyer to implement special security measures not required by this Rule or may give informed consent to the use of a means of communication that would otherwise be prohibited by this Rule.
I have no doubt that it goes back way before Bush. For all his faults, Bush seemed rather upfront about his powergrabs so I don't really feel bad naming the road after him. But you are quite correct -- we've been on this road for longer than we likely know.
When you say "shift the battlefield" -- where? Right now, the government has to show it has a reasonable reason to think someone is doing something naughty. It isn't a ridiculously hard standard -- warrants are issued daily and routinely. You want to make it even less difficult to get a warrant. That means less privacy, more interference with people and businesses. Then once everyone has accepted that powergrab, we come to the next one.
We inherited "sovereign immunity" from a monarchy, not a democracy. Secondly, the government can be sued for acts of negligence on the state and federal level -- it has been understood for a very long time that a government that is above the law is destructive and unhealthy. As evidence of how destructive and unhealthy our government has become in recent years, one need only look at how it wishes to expand sovereign immunity rather than weaken it.
It is my position that Bush was a horrible president because he weakened our constitution, was an ugly warmonger, and spent money like it was water.
It is my position that Obama is about the same with the only difference being who gets some of the wastefully spent money.
Both "sides" treat the populace like we're their own public goatse waiting patiently to get stretched just a bit wider by some Republican prick or a Democratic cock.