Individually, those things you describe as "not foolproof" don't in fact have to be foolproof. Collectively, they are foolproof.
Again, I urge you to RTFA completely.
As of today, the capabilities of Graph Search probably won't hurt you. Unless you become a "person of interest" and the authorities start serving National Security letters and warrants on facebook for your account info. Then the sky is the limit, because all of those "not foolproof" things add up, and anything you mentioned in passing or your friends said or posted will be linked. So behave yourself, ya hear!?
The TFA points out that this capability to link all of Facebook's mined data will be filtered into the API. Perhaps little by little at first. But, following facebooks normal mode of operation, paying customers will soon be able to know everything about you, not just the stuff you posted, but things the friends of your ex-girlfriend said about you.
Ignore it as you wish. You sold your life to them, and they aren't going to forget anything about you.
This is so stupid. I use Facebook weekly, to keep in touch with a few relatives and real-life friends. I've never used the "Share" function; it never made any sense to me. If I want to include a link in a post, I paste it. I've certainly never done what TFA talks about; sharing something inappropriate then changing my mind and deleting it. I really don't know what invasions of privacy I'm supposed to fear here.
Go back and re-read TFA. If changing your mind and deleting something you posted is all you got out of the article you have TOTALLY missed the point.
Re:photoshop USED to be obvious.
on
The Book of GIMP
·
· Score: 5, Funny
Pretty much spot on.
The Book of Gimp should probably have been released as 4 or 5 books, which you have to open all at once, with all the page numbers in one book, the example images in another and the text, in no particular order, heaped in yet another book.
Too bad. They know exactly who you really are, and your current, (and probably all past) addresses. Your spouse and family log in from the same public facing IP addresses, you all visit the same restaurants together with your portable devices. Your friends have your pictures, and facial recognition will peg you.
I have been peppering my FB check-ins with places that I have been to, noting events that never took place, mixed in with real check-ins. I have set my "Lives in" city to somewhere different every day this year. Unless you know me, good luck figuring out what on my FB page is real and what isn't.
The thing about Graph search, is your friends know you, and they, (presumably), are not engaged in such useless attempts at deception. So regardless of what YOU say or do, Facebook will not be fooled. They will know exactly who you are and where you are, just by mining your friends, your IP address, etc. (I mean, seriously, you can't have imagined this would really work, did you)?
Even if you never signed up for facebook, you are likely already in their database.
They already have the helicopters, and it's a multi mission machine. You can pick people out of rivers, drop officers and supplies in inaccessible places, chase cars, and evacuate officers, and land on roofs.
It can do everything the drone can do and twenty additional things.
So yes, it's probably less expensive in the long run.
I suppose it's a victory, but it feels like a Pyrrhic one.
True, If the nut job running that country does manage to lob something our way, or toward Japan or Seoul, we are going to look pretty stupid waving the DMCA at them. Especially when it has already been seen by the people it was aimed at, (North Korean TV viewers). The sad part is, that Kim family has pretty well made his own country the dunderheads of the far east. Even Vietnam could whip up a better sim than stealing one out of a common game.
How about: we can patrol more space more efficiently? How about we can save money? How about we can track someone without engaging in a high speed chase?
invasive? it is a camera that watcher public space. let me know when they want to fly them into your home.
You can't patrol more space flying a silly drone around. The ones you can afford don't have the range. The ones the have the range cost too much. You can't save money by having cops play with RC drones. You still need guys in cars. Only an Iraqi would surrender to a drone. You can't track someone with a drone that your typical city can afford. It will never be where you want it to be when you need it. They don't have the range. It doesn have the speed, even to keep up with OJ. They want to fly them to look into your home (regardless of what they say).
Some would say you are doing a disservice to your customers by continuing a practice that is hurting their business in an effort to promote a technology standard that is not working.
Others would say you are doing a disservice to your pocketbook by turning away mail just because your customers aren't always up to speed, or have contracted their mail handling to someone else.
Spamassassin handles SPF, reasonably intelligently, that is, not trusting it completely, not giving it more weight than it deserves. Hanging your spam fighting hat on any single hook is problematic. and SA uses a wealth of tools with constantly updating itself via scripts. Its been largely trouble free, and we have it set up so that it will learn false positives and false negatives when users move these to the corresponding folders.
I've been well served by Spamassassin for some time now, it runs quietly on our mail server. SA does not block mail. It flags it. Our mail server will evaluate these flags and trash outright the most egregious spam, but we have the limits set low enough such that we will allow the questionable things through.
We error on the side of caution, but we still dump a lot of mail right after SA flags it. (Our business can do that, your business may not be able to do that.)
A City of a State is subjective to the State. If they State law states that Drones are okay, then the City must allow them. The Cities are supposed to be represented in the State just as the States are subjective to the US Government.
What you say may be technically true, but on the ground in day to day business, local law enforcement pretty much carries the load, and state and federal law enforcement act strictly as support, unless they are called in by local authorities, or ordered in by the Governor. You do not generally see a city swarmed by US Marshals doing day to day law enforcement tasks. Turf is quite rigorously defended.
You might have DEA running around with Drones, but seldom unknown to local police, and usually only if there is inter-state aspect.
Just because state laws say drones are ok, doesn't mean they are going to be "ok" in any City. It depends on the subject area under discussion. Home Rule cities have wide authority in policing in many states.
The Government can ignore this just like they ignore a sovereign States authority (See DIA raids in CA on marijuana shops and farms). In fairness, the town must abide by State law which may invalidate the City law.
Until more people wake up and shake off the cobwebs, the police state will continue to grow. I hope like hell we catch it in time, but looking at media and education I have strong doubts.
Well, they may not be able to prevent Federal Drones, but State and County drones may be banned, especially if this City has a home-rule charter (giving them local law enforcement authority).
In Seattle, there is currently an uproar over drone use by Seattle PD. The Police have them, but haven't used them yet. They want to put them into use, but the public is pretty much opposed, and SPD hasn't made a convincing use case, or even cited any recent incident where these might have been useful. (They carry small cameras, and by the looks of them do not provide any telemetry.)
The idea is to prevent your own law enforcement units from wasting their time peeping into back yards and windows. By the time State Authorities and the Feds arrive, the situation is totally out of hand anyway. The demand on state and fed resources is probably such that their arrival with drones in hand is less likely.
So just keeping your local PD/Sheriff from acquiring invasive tools goes a long way.
They never intend to be a big player, as best as I can tell, merely another option for corporate phones that don't end up being play things with untrustworthy software installed.
I think another option in the market is a good idea. Google is getting a bit too big for their britches and the carriers have way too much control of what you can do with your own phone.
We don't all run Apple or Microsoft computers, so why should we run only Apple or Google phones?
True, but that is just one more argument for going to Linux or something.
Even if the users inserted on of these companies disks, the spyware on those disks is heavily dependent on Windows. Its doubtful they even have a linux version. If they do, the community will discover it in short order even if they try to install via binary blobs. Word will spread.
In which case, the only option is to not buy the spyware-infested product. Since the spyware is secret, there's no way to tell which disks are infected and which are not. The only safe alternative is to avoid buying any official content what so ever.
I suspect Antivirus/anti-spyware companies (smaller ones, foreign ones) will provide methods of de-installing the spyware. With fewer and fewer software packages being delivered on disk, you just about have to install downloaded software in a clean room to to inspect it.
Yup. Its rarer than most people tend to think. Even though Mercury is close to being locked (and maybe becoming more so) its not locked, nor is Venus.
In fact, I've seen it postulated that only satellites with a common origin (our moon for example) are likely to be locked, as are moons (any body, really) which has a diameter of significant size relative to the body it orbits.
It isn't like they can tell if it has a magnetic field. If it does, and it's Earth's mass more or less, it should have an atmosphere.
Its not a given that a magnetic field is necessary for a planet to have an atmosphere. Venus has a pretty dense atmosphere, but virtually no magnetic field.
Its not just the summary, the linked article is equally confusing.
They started out by saying "looked at 95 candidate planets", which implies some selection process before any analysis, but it never is defined what constitutes a "candidate".
That's the problem with a Journalist (with no formal training in either Journalism or Astronomy) writing stories about complex issues.
On the other hand, being (necessarily, due to temperature issues) much closer to their star, these planets are likely to be tidally locked, which is *not* a good thing for complex life trying to evolve.
Do we know of any tidally locked planets? If not, why raise this supposition?
Most of these as well as a couple dozen others are available very cheaply. Even Costco stocks surveillance systems.
The problem might come with this requirement:
Of course, it is possible to use a human to fast forward through video using a DVR-type FF function for short video sequences
If these short sequence are the ONLY activity in the landscape, than any commercial system (under $500) will do. With the cheapness of these it really does not make sense to homebrew them.
On the other hand, if there is a lot of activity and you are only interested in finding a small segment where something is happening, these, as well as any homebrew leave you with a lot of video to watch. For instance, if watching for a certain person to walk down a busy street (stocking someone) or a certain light to flash in a sea of lights, its a much bigger problem.
Isolating a certain portion of a frame and monitoring it for activity is available in some commercial packages.
Slashdot Mirror
Individually, those things you describe as "not foolproof" don't in fact have to be foolproof.
Collectively, they are foolproof.
Again, I urge you to RTFA completely.
As of today, the capabilities of Graph Search probably won't hurt you.
Unless you become a "person of interest" and the authorities start serving National Security letters and warrants on facebook for your account info. Then
the sky is the limit, because all of those "not foolproof" things add up, and anything you mentioned in passing or your friends said or posted will be linked.
So behave yourself, ya hear!?
The TFA points out that this capability to link all of Facebook's mined data will be filtered into the API. Perhaps little by little at first. But, following facebooks normal mode of operation, paying customers will soon be able to know everything about you, not just the stuff you posted, but things the friends of your ex-girlfriend said about you.
Ignore it as you wish. You sold your life to them, and they aren't going to forget anything about you.
This is so stupid. I use Facebook weekly, to keep in touch with a few relatives and real-life friends.
I've never used the "Share" function; it never made any sense to me. If I want to include a link in a post, I paste it.
I've certainly never done what TFA talks about; sharing something inappropriate then changing my mind and deleting it.
I really don't know what invasions of privacy I'm supposed to fear here.
Go back and re-read TFA.
If changing your mind and deleting something you posted is all you got out of the article you have TOTALLY missed the point.
Exactly.
Fake all you want to, they still have you nailed.
People who doubt this should RTFA.
Pretty much spot on.
The Book of Gimp should probably have been released as 4 or 5 books, which you have to open all at once,
with all the page numbers in one book, the example images in another and the text, in no particular order, heaped in yet another book.
Too bad. They know exactly who you really are, and your current, (and probably all past) addresses. Your spouse and family log in from the same public facing IP addresses, you all visit the same restaurants together with your portable devices. Your friends have your pictures, and facial recognition will peg you.
You are fooling no one but yourself.
I have been peppering my FB check-ins with places that I have been to, noting events that never took place, mixed in with real check-ins. I have set my "Lives in" city to somewhere different every day this year. Unless you know me, good luck figuring out what on my FB page is real and what isn't.
The thing about Graph search, is your friends know you, and they, (presumably), are not engaged in such useless attempts at deception. So regardless of what YOU say or do, Facebook will not be fooled. They will know exactly who you are and where you are, just by mining your friends, your IP address, etc. (I mean, seriously, you can't have imagined this would really work, did you)?
Even if you never signed up for facebook, you are likely already in their database.
With SPD's history, I'd say you are right.
They already have the helicopters, and it's a multi mission machine. You can pick people out of rivers, drop officers and supplies in inaccessible places, chase cars, and evacuate officers, and land on roofs.
It can do everything the drone can do and twenty additional things.
So yes, it's probably less expensive in the long run.
I suppose it's a victory, but it feels like a Pyrrhic one.
True,
If the nut job running that country does manage to lob something our way, or toward Japan or Seoul, we are going to look pretty stupid waving the DMCA at them.
Especially when it has already been seen by the people it was aimed at, (North Korean TV viewers). The sad part is, that Kim family has pretty well made his own country the dunderheads of the far east. Even Vietnam could whip up a better sim than stealing one out of a common game.
How about: we can patrol more space more efficiently?
How about we can save money?
How about we can track someone without engaging in a high speed chase?
invasive? it is a camera that watcher public space. let me know when they want to fly them into your home.
You can't patrol more space flying a silly drone around. The ones you can afford don't have the range. The ones the have the range cost too much.
You can't save money by having cops play with RC drones. You still need guys in cars. Only an Iraqi would surrender to a drone.
You can't track someone with a drone that your typical city can afford. It will never be where you want it to be when you need it. They don't have the range. It doesn have the speed, even to keep up with OJ.
They want to fly them to look into your home (regardless of what they say).
Some would say you are doing a disservice to your customers by continuing a practice that is hurting their business in an effort to promote a technology standard that is not working.
Others would say you are doing a disservice to your pocketbook by turning away mail just because your customers aren't always up to speed, or have contracted their mail handling to someone else.
Spamassassin handles SPF, reasonably intelligently, that is, not trusting it completely, not giving it more weight than it deserves.
Hanging your spam fighting hat on any single hook is problematic. and SA uses a wealth of tools with constantly updating itself via
scripts. Its been largely trouble free, and we have it set up so that it will learn false positives and false negatives when users
move these to the corresponding folders.
I've been well served by Spamassassin for some time now, it runs quietly
on our mail server. SA does not block mail. It flags it. Our mail server will evaluate these flags and trash outright the most
egregious spam, but we have the limits set low enough such that we will allow the questionable things through.
We error on the side of caution, but we still dump a lot of mail right after SA flags it. (Our business can do that, your business
may not be able to do that.)
A City of a State is subjective to the State. If they State law states that Drones are okay, then the City must allow them. The Cities are supposed to be represented in the State just as the States are subjective to the US Government.
What you say may be technically true, but on the ground in day to day business, local law enforcement pretty much carries the load, and state and federal law enforcement act strictly as support, unless they are called in by local authorities, or ordered in by the Governor.
You do not generally see a city swarmed by US Marshals doing day to day law enforcement tasks. Turf is quite rigorously defended.
You might have DEA running around with Drones, but seldom unknown to local police, and usually only if there is inter-state aspect.
Just because state laws say drones are ok, doesn't mean they are going to be "ok" in any City.
It depends on the subject area under discussion. Home Rule cities have wide authority in policing in many states.
See some references on this subject:
http://legisource.net/2011/11/03/when-can-a-local-government-override-state-law-home-rule-cities-in-colorado/
http://www.mrsc.org/subjects/governance/locgov12.aspx#3
The Government can ignore this just like they ignore a sovereign States authority (See DIA raids in CA on marijuana shops and farms). In fairness, the town must abide by State law which may invalidate the City law.
Until more people wake up and shake off the cobwebs, the police state will continue to grow. I hope like hell we catch it in time, but looking at media and education I have strong doubts.
Well, they may not be able to prevent Federal Drones, but State and County drones may be banned, especially if this City has a home-rule charter (giving them local law enforcement authority).
In Seattle, there is currently an uproar over drone use by Seattle PD. The Police have them, but haven't used them yet. They want to put them into use, but the public is pretty much opposed, and SPD hasn't made a convincing use case, or even cited any recent incident where these might have been useful. (They carry small cameras, and by the looks of them do not provide any telemetry.)
The idea is to prevent your own law enforcement units from wasting their time peeping into back yards and windows. By the time State Authorities and the Feds arrive, the situation is totally out of hand anyway. The demand on state and fed resources is probably such that their arrival with drones in hand is less likely.
So just keeping your local PD/Sheriff from acquiring invasive tools goes a long way.
Then they'll pass a law where providing tools to remove spyware will get you a 5 year prison sentence.
But preventing the installation of spyware is a totally different thing. Beside, you are talking about Canada here, not Australia.
Until she can copy off someone else's letter of appeal.
No problem, shes studying for her law degree right now.
Started yesterday, should be done tomorrow.
They never intend to be a big player, as best as I can tell, merely another option for corporate phones that don't end up being play things with untrustworthy software installed.
I think another option in the market is a good idea. Google is getting a bit too big for their britches and the carriers have way too much control of what you can do with your own phone.
We don't all run Apple or Microsoft computers, so why should we run only Apple or Google phones?
True, but that is just one more argument for going to Linux or something.
Even if the users inserted on of these companies disks, the spyware on those disks is heavily dependent on Windows.
Its doubtful they even have a linux version. If they do, the community will discover it in short order even if they try to install
via binary blobs. Word will spread.
In which case, the only option is to not buy the spyware-infested product. Since the spyware is secret, there's no way to tell which disks are infected and which are not. The only safe alternative is to avoid buying any official content what so ever.
I suspect Antivirus/anti-spyware companies (smaller ones, foreign ones) will provide methods of de-installing the spyware. With fewer and fewer software packages being delivered on disk, you just about have to install downloaded software in a clean room to to inspect it.
Yup. Its rarer than most people tend to think.
Even though Mercury is close to being locked (and maybe becoming more so) its not locked, nor is Venus.
In fact, I've seen it postulated that only satellites with a common origin (our moon for example) are likely
to be locked, as are moons (any body, really) which has a diameter of significant size relative to the body it orbits.
It isn't like they can tell if it has a magnetic field. If it does, and it's Earth's mass more or less, it should have an atmosphere.
Its not a given that a magnetic field is necessary for a planet to have an atmosphere.
Venus has a pretty dense atmosphere, but virtually no magnetic field.
Do we know of any tidally locked planets?
Yes.
>
Name one.
Its not just the summary, the linked article is equally confusing.
They started out by saying "looked at 95 candidate planets", which implies some selection process before any analysis, but it never is defined what constitutes a "candidate".
That's the problem with a Journalist (with no formal training in either Journalism or Astronomy) writing stories about complex issues.
On the other hand, being (necessarily, due to temperature issues) much closer to their star, these planets are likely to be tidally locked, which is *not* a good thing for complex life trying to evolve.
Do we know of any tidally locked planets?
If not, why raise this supposition?
Most of these as well as a couple dozen others are available very cheaply. Even Costco stocks surveillance systems.
The problem might come with this requirement:
Of course, it is possible to use a human to fast forward through video using a DVR-type FF function for short video sequences
If these short sequence are the ONLY activity in the landscape, than any commercial system (under $500) will do. With the cheapness of these it really does not make sense to homebrew them.
On the other hand, if there is a lot of activity and you are only interested in finding a small segment where something is
happening, these, as well as any homebrew leave you with a lot of video to watch. For instance, if watching for a certain person
to walk down a busy street (stocking someone) or a certain light to flash in a sea of lights, its a much bigger problem.
Isolating a certain portion of a frame and monitoring it for activity is available in some commercial packages.