If you are renting would the landlord be targetted?
If the plaintiffs thought they had a chance of prevailing... absolutely. Similarly, if they thought it would work, they'd also sue your ISP, computer manufacturer, parents, doctor and fifth grade teacher.
I dare say that the lack of cell towers would make a triangulation through said cell towers a bit difficult.
Of course, it would also make talking to the iPhone difficult if the iPhone can't reach any cell phone towers.
The iPhone may know exactly where it is thanks to it's GPS... but without cell phone towers, it can't tell anybody. Except the owner, but he already knows.
If I look up the relevant definition at dictionary.com --
Irrelevant or inappropriate messages sent on the Internet to a large number of recipients
Yes, if you requested it, it's not really irrelevant, but perhaps you didn't realize exactly what you were getting? Or perhaps what you wanted changed over time? (And I'm not even talking about the possibilities of people being tricked into signing up for these emails...)
Ultimately, to many users, "spam" is email they don't want, whatever the story behind it reaching them is. You might be amazed at how many people have intentionally subscribed to a mailing list -- then reported it as spam over the years, much to the dismay of people running legitimate mailing lists.
Sorry, but your "unsolicited commercial email" definition (I assume that's what you're after) is far more specific than many people ascribe to, and is far too simple to properly cover the issue.
How many people actually legitimately "opt-in" for spam? Probably pretty close to 0.
Quite a few, actually.
Like ge7 said... history has proven that people *will* opt into spam if you give them something in return. Give them a free ringtone, a mp3, some porn. Or a coupon for free food, and they'll agree to almost anything. It's not like anybody actually reads what they're agreeing to.
Of course, the flip side is that many of these people will scream bloody murder when these companies start spamming them "for no reason".
And many people do opt-in to spam -- spam that's highly targeted. As ge7 said... GroupOn deals in your area? Often quite valuable, but once you stop caring -- it's spam.
To my (somewhat) trained eye, this looks like any other R/C airplane run by amateurs who fly them strictly within line of sight (though many have been putting FPV equipment so they can fly them with a first person view, often a few miles away.)
From time to time our R/C planes do malfunction and will fly off out of our control, or something will go wrong and they'll crash and we won't be able to find and recover them. Perhaps it's just some hobbyist's plane that got away from him? It certainly looks like something a hobbyist made rather than an expensive commercial/military model.
Though I guess this does bode poorly for the hobby -- ham radio operators don't bring their radios with them when they go to many countries because people often equate radios with spies... I guess the next step is to equate people flying R/C planes with spies?
How many parking lot surfers are you really going to see?
Who knows? It's easy to discourage them, and there is another advantage...
If you use WPA2 with a password, each user has their own connection encrypted separately from everybody else's, even if everybody is using the same WPA2 password. So people cannot sniff each other's traffic.
(With WEP, if you knew the shared password, you could use it to decrypt everybody's traffic that used the same password. This isn't related to how WEP was cracked, it's just a part of how it works. But WPA2 is smarter and everything is encrypted independently.)
Anything which replaces officer "hunches" with something more probabilistically sound* is fine by me.
I have a "hunch" that this black man over here is about to commit a crime...
"Hunches" very often lead to profiling. Unfortunately, profiling is fairly effective -- it's just really, really unfair to those who are profiled and yet innocent.
I doubt they would be liable on a system that is not guaranteed to work since it is underground in a difficult place to get wireless communications.
And that's exactly why they added antennas and repeaters underground for it.
At least in the US, if this was done and somebody was seriously injured or died and couldn't summon medical attention because of it... there would be lawsuits. As for if they would succeed or not, that would depend on the specifics of the cases.
I imagine that nobody is writing new applications in COBOL.
You could be wrong, you know
Fair enough. COBOL has never been my area of expertise.
I do occasional work for a company that still develops heavily in Fortran, so it's not dead either.
But while Fortran and COBOL may be "niche" languages nowadays with little (but not no) new work done in them... java so very isn't. Just because there's something newer and hipper (what is the hot flavor of the week? Is it still Ruby on Rails, or did I blink?), that doesn't mean that java isn't still hot.
> but so many legacy systems are built on it [Java] that it's basically guaranteed to live for quite a while longer
I imagine that nobody is writing new applications in COBOL. New applications are written in Java every day.
Java may not be the hip new thing anymore, but it's being developed for heavily.
It took COBOL over 30 years to reach this point. Perhaps Java will reach the same point, but I'll bet it takes decades... for now, it's alive and well. (Perhaps there's been a buggy new release, but all the applications using older releases are fine, with new applications made all the time.)
> that Advisory Circular is going to stand out like a sore thumb in court. It is generally considered to be good practice.
Considered good practice by who? Not R/C pilots. *Nobody* limits themselves to 400 feet AGL unless 1) they're close to an airport (that's actually in the AMA regulations) or 2) they just don't feel like flying higher. Glider pilots especially will exceed 400 feet on every single flight if they can, and even a good winch launch will get you up to 500 feet or so.
As for the rest of the suggestions, they're generally followed, though noise considerations are much less important with gliders and electric planes (electric planes weren't common in 1981 -- but they are now.)
I don't know how it plays out in (civil) court if something does go bad, but of course that's incredibly rare. I'd say that the common R/C practice is to fly as high as you want as long as you can still see your plane. (For example, at 2600 feet, a 2m glider is a speck that you can just barely tell what direction it's pointed in.) The people suing might pull up this advisory circular, and the defendant would pull up the AMA guidelines and say that 1) it was based on the circular and yet 2) that restriction is not there. How it turns out in court, I don't know.
In general, when R/C pilots do something really stupid, it's the local police that come down on them, not the FAA. Perhaps the FAA piles on them more later, but I don't know that the FAA can really do that much to somebody who doesn't have (or need) a pilot's license. If a criminal law is violated, it's likely the local law enforcement that takes care of it (but the FAA might get involved if a full scale plane or airport is involved.) If it's a civil issue, I'm not sure that the FAA or local police would have anything to do with it.
If an R/C pilot has a pilot's license too, perhaps he needs to be more careful of this advisory...
Drones have no pilot, and often suffer from doing incredibly stupid things, such as running into things, flying too low, and coming close to other aircraft.
Your point is a good one, but drones may or may not have a pilot. Predator drones for example do have a pilot -- he's just hundreds or thousands of miles away.
Ultimately, the only practical distinction between drones and R/C planes is that R/C planes are flown by pilots who always have line of sight to the plane itself (and when they lose this, the planes typically crash.) Drones often do not. And yes, people do put FPV (first person view) gear onto R/C planes and fly them like drones -- which basically turns them into drones.
The FAA is expected to clarify the distinctions between the two further soon. The R/C community is hoping that they don't get caught up in any regulations the FAA puts down, but we'll see how it goes.
RC aircraft are also restricted to ceiling height, location of use, and size/weight as I recall.
You recall incorrectly.
FAA Advisory Circular 91-57 gives some suggestions, but they are only suggestions. The AMA has restrictions on weight and locations of use, but it's restrictions only apply to it's members.
There are no restrictions on altitude -- glider pilots regularly go up to thousands of feet. (You might run into some problems with the FAA if you went over 18,000 feet or so -- but that's way, way beyond the norm.) but As for location of use, there may be some laws and locations here and there (for example, FAA no-fly zones generally apply to model airplanes too), but in general there aren't any restrictions there either.
There is talk of the FAA giving regulations (rather than advisories)... but it hasn't happened yet.
(I work at Netflix)I figured out at some point that the maximum possible number of DVDs you can get in an average 30-day month is 10*X, where X is the number of DVDs you can have out at a time. So the best-case scenario for a 3-at-a-time plan is 30 DVDs a month.
I think it's 2*X per week if you get movies in the mail the next day, or 3*X per week if you get them in the *same* day.
--- Next day --- Netflix sends you movies (often new releases!) on monday, they arrive tuesday. You get it in the mail on wednesday, netflix gets it on thursday and sends a replacement, and you get it on friday and have it in the mail on saturday and it arrives back at Netflix on monday.
--- Same day --- Netflix sends you movies on monday, they arrive tuesday. You take it to the post office by 5pm and have it postmarked that day. Netflix gets it on wednesday, and you have a new movie on thursday. You take that to the post office by 5pm and Netflix has it on friday, and they send out a new one, and you have that on saturday, and you take that to the post office on saturday by 5pm and Netflix has that on monday.
Neither situation requires that Netflix works on Saturday (they didn't used to, but they do now.) If you fall out of sync with the week, then it does matter that they're open on Saturday, but if you want new releases, you want to get back on the schedule anyways, as Netflix won't send heavy users new releases unless they get them the very day that they're available.
The "Next day" situation works out to 8.6*x movies/average month, and the "Same day" one works out to 12.9*x movies/average month. (An average month is 30.4 days long.)
The "Same day" situation really screams "pirate" -- you don't even have time to watch the movies if three arrive at noon and you have to have them at the post office by 5pm. The "Next Day" scenario could be somebody who just really likes movies... at least then there's time to watch them.
When you start worrying about registers, isn't that a compiler problem?
Absolutely, but maybe you misunderstood my point.
These additional registers offer a performance benefit. Yes, it is absolutely the compiler's job to use them -- and it does, and this results in faster code. I was explaining why code compiled in x86_64 mode is generally faster than the same code compiled in i386 mode.
Some of the performance benefits do require that the code authors consider the 64 bit registers available and code accordingly to take advantage of them, but there are other performance benefits that will generally happen with no work at all on the part of the part of the developers -- the compiler will just make it happen.
Apparently "true" 64-bit processing uses a more modern instruction set on the CPU, so I suppose there are additional performance and security benefits to using it.
x86_64 has more registers than x86 (i386, 32 bit) so that can give a significant performance increase in some situations. (Note that this is not directly related to being 64 bit vs 32 bit -- it's simply having more registers with the more modern instruction set, as you put it.) Being able to do operations 64 bits at once rather than 32 bits at once speeds things up as well if the program is written to use it (and of course, this IS all about 64 bit vs 32 bit.) On the down side, pointers are larger and so memory usage may be somewhat larger, requiring more memory and causing more memory cache misses, but in general I think the extra registers and 64 bit registers more than make up for it.
Exactly how big the difference is depends on many factors, but in general, compiled for 64 bit is faster than that compiled for 32 bit. Not always, but in general.
and that's if the stars align and USPS has a two day turnaround....
For most (more than 50% anyways) Netflix customers, the USPS already has a one day turnaround -- get the DVD in the mail today, it arrives tomorrow. So most people can have a new DVD in two days as long as they get their DVD postmarked today.
The guy took two weeks to crack WEP? He must have been doing something wrong then.
... or, maybe he initially knew nothing of wireless hacking, and had to spend 13 days learning about it and downloading stuff... and the actual hack took five minutes.
When a fan rotates, the air right on the blades doesn't move -- that's why fans get dirty over time, as dust gets caught in that region of barely moving air.
I'm not sure I see a big difference here between a heatsink that moves through air and a heatsink that has air move over it.
But can you be legally compelled to tell them where the key is? (If they knew where it was, they'd just get a warrant for it and take it -- they don't need your help.)
Or for that matter, can you be legally compelled to tell them where the safe is? After all -- if they have the safe, they can open it. It might not be easy, but they don't actually need the key. An encrypted laptop could very well be far more secure than that safe.
That sounds like a rather spot on analogy. Sounds like precedent is against her.
Did you read the next paragraph? They gave a number of precedents that were for her.
The point is that this could go either way, and the story did try to give both sides.
The argument that the passphrase, itself, is the incriminating self-testimony seems really weak, both because the passphrase is not being required, and because the passphrase is not, in the end, what will incriminate her.
IANAL, of course.
Traditionally, defendants have not been required to assist in any manner in building the legal case against them. Giving up the password assists.
Your home can be search (with a warrant) without your assistance. Your brain cannot -- at least not yet. (And be very afraid of what the courts might rule if we ever do have the technology to read people's memories!)
As for the argument that "the passphrase is not what will incriminate her", using that argument we could require that murder suspects tell us where the body is. After all, it's not the location of the body that will incriminate them -- it's the body itself.
Really, what it boils down to here is that analogies aren't going to solve this. The issue isn't so complicated that the courts need an analogy to simplify matters. Instead, they'll simply rule on which is more "fundamental" -- our right to not self incriminate, or the prosecutions right to get needed information.
No. the entire idea behind ebay is to bid the maximum amount you are willing to pay. If you do that there is NEVER a reason to make a 2nd bid.
OK, but you're competing with people who often don't follow this rule.
In general, you have two goals -- 1) win the item, and 2) pay as little as possible, and in general, the best way to achieve these goals is to bid exactly once -- at the last possible moment -- with the highest amount you're willing to spend on the item.
You could also bid this same amount earlier in the auction, but that bid by itself changes things -- simply by bidding you're telling other bidders that this item is valuable, and they may be willing to up their bids based on this new information. You do best by denying them this additional information until it's too late.
(Yes, if there's two equal bids, the earliest one wins -- but that's easily defeated by bidding an odd amount. Don't bid $100.00 -- bid $104.26, which will beat any bid up to $104.25, no matter when it was placed.)
The kid who was shoved off his bike by Officer Pogan during a Critical Mass ride. Nobody tried to take the tourist's camera, but it's one of many situations where the video kept an innocent kid out of jail.
The transit police who tried to take everybody's cell phones after the police shot a suspect cuffed on the ground (presumably it was a mistake, but still...)
I still think Rodney King was a watershed event that led to many of the future incidents where the police started trying to take cameras and claiming they couldn't be videotaped.
Many police cars in US has vehicle front cams, don't they? What they're afraid of I guess is retaliation against their families by gangs
Really, what they're afraid of is evidence of their wrongdoing being used against them.
Think the Rodney King incident. The police were acquitted, though it seems to most that they should have been convicted.
Having their actions recorded by citizens takes some of the power away from the police and puts it in the hands of the citizens -- and police don't like giving up power. THAT is what they're afraid of.
They might claim that they're afraid of retaliation by gangs or something else, but that's not the real reason they don't like being recorded. They don't like being recorded because nobody likes being recorded when these recordings might be used against them later.
Slashdot Mirror
If you are renting would the landlord be targetted?
If the plaintiffs thought they had a chance of prevailing ... absolutely. Similarly, if they thought it would work, they'd also sue your ISP, computer manufacturer, parents, doctor and fifth grade teacher.
(Do they have a chance? Got me.)
I dare say that the lack of cell towers would make a triangulation through said cell towers a bit difficult.
Of course, it would also make talking to the iPhone difficult if the iPhone can't reach any cell phone towers.
The iPhone may know exactly where it is thanks to it's GPS ... but without cell phone towers, it can't tell anybody. Except the owner, but he already knows.
Spam is UNSOLICITED!
If people signed up for it, then it is not spam.
That is (part of) one possible definition of it.
If I look up the relevant definition at dictionary.com --
Irrelevant or inappropriate messages sent on the Internet to a large number of recipients
Yes, if you requested it, it's not really irrelevant, but perhaps you didn't realize exactly what you were getting? Or perhaps what you wanted changed over time? (And I'm not even talking about the possibilities of people being tricked into signing up for these emails ...)
Ultimately, to many users, "spam" is email they don't want, whatever the story behind it reaching them is. You might be amazed at how many people have intentionally subscribed to a mailing list -- then reported it as spam over the years, much to the dismay of people running legitimate mailing lists.
Sorry, but your "unsolicited commercial email" definition (I assume that's what you're after) is far more specific than many people ascribe to, and is far too simple to properly cover the issue.
How many people actually legitimately "opt-in" for spam? Probably pretty close to 0.
Quite a few, actually.
Like ge7 said ... history has proven that people *will* opt into spam if you give them something in return. Give them a free ringtone, a mp3, some porn. Or a coupon for free food, and they'll agree to almost anything. It's not like anybody actually reads what they're agreeing to.
Of course, the flip side is that many of these people will scream bloody murder when these companies start spamming them "for no reason".
And many people do opt-in to spam -- spam that's highly targeted. As ge7 said ... GroupOn deals in your area? Often quite valuable, but once you stop caring -- it's spam.
To my (somewhat) trained eye, this looks like any other R/C airplane run by amateurs who fly them strictly within line of sight (though many have been putting FPV equipment so they can fly them with a first person view, often a few miles away.)
From time to time our R/C planes do malfunction and will fly off out of our control, or something will go wrong and they'll crash and we won't be able to find and recover them. Perhaps it's just some hobbyist's plane that got away from him? It certainly looks like something a hobbyist made rather than an expensive commercial/military model.
Though I guess this does bode poorly for the hobby -- ham radio operators don't bring their radios with them when they go to many countries because people often equate radios with spies ... I guess the next step is to equate people flying R/C planes with spies?
How many parking lot surfers are you really going to see?
Who knows? It's easy to discourage them, and there is another advantage ...
If you use WPA2 with a password, each user has their own connection encrypted separately from everybody else's, even if everybody is using the same WPA2 password. So people cannot sniff each other's traffic.
(With WEP, if you knew the shared password, you could use it to decrypt everybody's traffic that used the same password. This isn't related to how WEP was cracked, it's just a part of how it works. But WPA2 is smarter and everything is encrypted independently.)
Anything which replaces officer "hunches" with something more probabilistically sound* is fine by me.
I have a "hunch" that this black man over here is about to commit a crime ...
"Hunches" very often lead to profiling. Unfortunately, profiling is fairly effective -- it's just really, really unfair to those who are profiled and yet innocent.
I doubt they would be liable on a system that is not guaranteed to work since it is underground in a difficult place to get wireless communications.
And that's exactly why they added antennas and repeaters underground for it.
At least in the US, if this was done and somebody was seriously injured or died and couldn't summon medical attention because of it ... there would be lawsuits. As for if they would succeed or not, that would depend on the specifics of the cases.
I imagine that nobody is writing new applications in COBOL.
You could be wrong, you know
Fair enough. COBOL has never been my area of expertise.
I do occasional work for a company that still develops heavily in Fortran, so it's not dead either.
But while Fortran and COBOL may be "niche" languages nowadays with little (but not no) new work done in them ... java so very isn't. Just because there's something newer and hipper (what is the hot flavor of the week? Is it still Ruby on Rails, or did I blink?), that doesn't mean that java isn't still hot.
> but so many legacy systems are built on it [Java] that it's basically guaranteed to live for quite a while longer
I imagine that nobody is writing new applications in COBOL. New applications are written in Java every day.
Java may not be the hip new thing anymore, but it's being developed for heavily.
It took COBOL over 30 years to reach this point. Perhaps Java will reach the same point, but I'll bet it takes decades ... for now, it's alive and well. (Perhaps there's been a buggy new release, but all the applications using older releases are fine, with new applications made all the time.)
> that Advisory Circular is going to stand out like a sore thumb in court. It is generally considered to be good practice.
Considered good practice by who? Not R/C pilots. *Nobody* limits themselves to 400 feet AGL unless 1) they're close to an airport (that's actually in the AMA regulations) or 2) they just don't feel like flying higher. Glider pilots especially will exceed 400 feet on every single flight if they can, and even a good winch launch will get you up to 500 feet or so.
As for the rest of the suggestions, they're generally followed, though noise considerations are much less important with gliders and electric planes (electric planes weren't common in 1981 -- but they are now.)
I don't know how it plays out in (civil) court if something does go bad, but of course that's incredibly rare. I'd say that the common R/C practice is to fly as high as you want as long as you can still see your plane. (For example, at 2600 feet, a 2m glider is a speck that you can just barely tell what direction it's pointed in.) The people suing might pull up this advisory circular, and the defendant would pull up the AMA guidelines and say that 1) it was based on the circular and yet 2) that restriction is not there. How it turns out in court, I don't know.
In general, when R/C pilots do something really stupid, it's the local police that come down on them, not the FAA. Perhaps the FAA piles on them more later, but I don't know that the FAA can really do that much to somebody who doesn't have (or need) a pilot's license. If a criminal law is violated, it's likely the local law enforcement that takes care of it (but the FAA might get involved if a full scale plane or airport is involved.) If it's a civil issue, I'm not sure that the FAA or local police would have anything to do with it.
If an R/C pilot has a pilot's license too, perhaps he needs to be more careful of this advisory ...
Drones have no pilot, and often suffer from doing incredibly stupid things, such as running into things, flying too low, and coming close to other aircraft.
Your point is a good one, but drones may or may not have a pilot. Predator drones for example do have a pilot -- he's just hundreds or thousands of miles away.
Ultimately, the only practical distinction between drones and R/C planes is that R/C planes are flown by pilots who always have line of sight to the plane itself (and when they lose this, the planes typically crash.) Drones often do not. And yes, people do put FPV (first person view) gear onto R/C planes and fly them like drones -- which basically turns them into drones.
The FAA is expected to clarify the distinctions between the two further soon. The R/C community is hoping that they don't get caught up in any regulations the FAA puts down, but we'll see how it goes.
RC aircraft are also restricted to ceiling height, location of use, and size/weight as I recall.
You recall incorrectly.
FAA Advisory Circular 91-57 gives some suggestions, but they are only suggestions. The AMA has restrictions on weight and locations of use, but it's restrictions only apply to it's members.
There are no restrictions on altitude -- glider pilots regularly go up to thousands of feet. (You might run into some problems with the FAA if you went over 18,000 feet or so -- but that's way, way beyond the norm.) but As for location of use, there may be some laws and locations here and there (for example, FAA no-fly zones generally apply to model airplanes too), but in general there aren't any restrictions there either.
There is talk of the FAA giving regulations (rather than advisories) ... but it hasn't happened yet.
Yes, but tall buildings sway all the time in heavy winds. I'll bet the effect was pretty small ...
(I work at Netflix)I figured out at some point that the maximum possible number of DVDs you can get in an average 30-day month is 10*X, where X is the number of DVDs you can have out at a time. So the best-case scenario for a 3-at-a-time plan is 30 DVDs a month.
I think it's 2*X per week if you get movies in the mail the next day, or 3*X per week if you get them in the *same* day.
--- Next day ---
Netflix sends you movies (often new releases!) on monday, they arrive tuesday. You get it in the mail on wednesday, netflix gets it on thursday and sends a replacement, and you get it on friday and have it in the mail on saturday and it arrives back at Netflix on monday.
--- Same day ---
Netflix sends you movies on monday, they arrive tuesday. You take it to the post office by 5pm and have it postmarked that day. Netflix gets it on wednesday, and you have a new movie on thursday. You take that to the post office by 5pm and Netflix has it on friday, and they send out a new one, and you have that on saturday, and you take that to the post office on saturday by 5pm and Netflix has that on monday.
Neither situation requires that Netflix works on Saturday (they didn't used to, but they do now.) If you fall out of sync with the week, then it does matter that they're open on Saturday, but if you want new releases, you want to get back on the schedule anyways, as Netflix won't send heavy users new releases unless they get them the very day that they're available.
The "Next day" situation works out to 8.6*x movies/average month, and the "Same day" one works out to 12.9*x movies/average month. (An average month is 30.4 days long.)
The "Same day" situation really screams "pirate" -- you don't even have time to watch the movies if three arrive at noon and you have to have them at the post office by 5pm. The "Next Day" scenario could be somebody who just really likes movies ... at least then there's time to watch them.
When you start worrying about registers, isn't that a compiler problem?
Absolutely, but maybe you misunderstood my point.
These additional registers offer a performance benefit. Yes, it is absolutely the compiler's job to use them -- and it does, and this results in faster code. I was explaining why code compiled in x86_64 mode is generally faster than the same code compiled in i386 mode.
Some of the performance benefits do require that the code authors consider the 64 bit registers available and code accordingly to take advantage of them, but there are other performance benefits that will generally happen with no work at all on the part of the part of the developers -- the compiler will just make it happen.
Apparently "true" 64-bit processing uses a more modern instruction set on the CPU, so I suppose there are additional performance and security benefits to using it.
x86_64 has more registers than x86 (i386, 32 bit) so that can give a significant performance increase in some situations. (Note that this is not directly related to being 64 bit vs 32 bit -- it's simply having more registers with the more modern instruction set, as you put it.) Being able to do operations 64 bits at once rather than 32 bits at once speeds things up as well if the program is written to use it (and of course, this IS all about 64 bit vs 32 bit.) On the down side, pointers are larger and so memory usage may be somewhat larger, requiring more memory and causing more memory cache misses, but in general I think the extra registers and 64 bit registers more than make up for it.
Exactly how big the difference is depends on many factors, but in general, compiled for 64 bit is faster than that compiled for 32 bit. Not always, but in general.
More on all of that here.
and that's if the stars align and USPS has a two day turnaround....
For most (more than 50% anyways) Netflix customers, the USPS already has a one day turnaround -- get the DVD in the mail today, it arrives tomorrow. So most people can have a new DVD in two days as long as they get their DVD postmarked today.
The guy took two weeks to crack WEP? He must have been doing something wrong then.
... or, maybe he initially knew nothing of wireless hacking, and had to spend 13 days learning about it and downloading stuff ... and the actual hack took five minutes.
Really, this is what people are harping on?
When a fan rotates, the air right on the blades doesn't move -- that's why fans get dirty over time, as dust gets caught in that region of barely moving air.
I'm not sure I see a big difference here between a heatsink that moves through air and a heatsink that has air move over it.
But can you be legally compelled to tell them where the key is? (If they knew where it was, they'd just get a warrant for it and take it -- they don't need your help.)
Or for that matter, can you be legally compelled to tell them where the safe is? After all -- if they have the safe, they can open it. It might not be easy, but they don't actually need the key. An encrypted laptop could very well be far more secure than that safe.
That sounds like a rather spot on analogy. Sounds like precedent is against her.
Did you read the next paragraph? They gave a number of precedents that were for her.
The point is that this could go either way, and the story did try to give both sides.
The argument that the passphrase, itself, is the incriminating self-testimony seems really weak, both because the passphrase is not being required, and because the passphrase is not, in the end, what will incriminate her.
IANAL, of course.
Traditionally, defendants have not been required to assist in any manner in building the legal case against them. Giving up the password assists.
Your home can be search (with a warrant) without your assistance. Your brain cannot -- at least not yet. (And be very afraid of what the courts might rule if we ever do have the technology to read people's memories!)
As for the argument that "the passphrase is not what will incriminate her", using that argument we could require that murder suspects tell us where the body is. After all, it's not the location of the body that will incriminate them -- it's the body itself.
Really, what it boils down to here is that analogies aren't going to solve this. The issue isn't so complicated that the courts need an analogy to simplify matters. Instead, they'll simply rule on which is more "fundamental" -- our right to not self incriminate, or the prosecutions right to get needed information.
No. the entire idea behind ebay is to bid the maximum amount you are willing to pay. If you do that there is NEVER a reason to make a 2nd bid.
OK, but you're competing with people who often don't follow this rule.
In general, you have two goals -- 1) win the item, and 2) pay as little as possible, and in general, the best way to achieve these goals is to bid exactly once -- at the last possible moment -- with the highest amount you're willing to spend on the item.
You could also bid this same amount earlier in the auction, but that bid by itself changes things -- simply by bidding you're telling other bidders that this item is valuable, and they may be willing to up their bids based on this new information. You do best by denying them this additional information until it's too late.
(Yes, if there's two equal bids, the earliest one wins -- but that's easily defeated by bidding an odd amount. Don't bid $100.00 -- bid $104.26, which will beat any bid up to $104.25, no matter when it was placed.)
There's no shortage of examples.
The kid who was shoved off his bike by Officer Pogan during a Critical Mass ride. Nobody tried to take the tourist's camera, but it's one of many situations where the video kept an innocent kid out of jail.
The transit police who tried to take everybody's cell phones after the police shot a suspect cuffed on the ground (presumably it was a mistake, but still ...)
I still think Rodney King was a watershed event that led to many of the future incidents where the police started trying to take cameras and claiming they couldn't be videotaped.
Many police cars in US has vehicle front cams, don't they? What they're afraid of I guess is retaliation against their families by gangs
Really, what they're afraid of is evidence of their wrongdoing being used against them.
Think the Rodney King incident. The police were acquitted, though it seems to most that they should have been convicted.
Having their actions recorded by citizens takes some of the power away from the police and puts it in the hands of the citizens -- and police don't like giving up power. THAT is what they're afraid of.
They might claim that they're afraid of retaliation by gangs or something else, but that's not the real reason they don't like being recorded. They don't like being recorded because nobody likes being recorded when these recordings might be used against them later.