The United States has broken this with 'National Security Letters' and FISA. There are laws which you are not allowed to read until you are taken to 'trial' by them.
Both NSLs and FISA are about warrants, no? NSLs to gag recipients, FISA to issue the warrants in the first place. Both of these concepts are explained in public laws.
Is anyone claiming that there are actually secret laws, under which people have been secretly charged and secretly convicted?
A certain amount of paranoia is healthy, but let's not overdo it.
I believe TrueCrypt tries very hard to avoid swapping the key to disk; I don't know about the hibernation file (though I bet you could script something to shred the file on resume, if you were paranoid about it).
One would hope you would have set your highly secure system to not dump core on a kernel panic.
Unmount the TrueCrypt volume before hibernating / shutting down. Don't let people attach random Firewire devices to your system. Lock your system before walking away (really, unmount the TrueCrypt volume then, too, if you can). Don't run it in a VM unless you know what you're doing.
It's probably a technical thing. They may not have an API that lets them query your bank for your date of birth, while I believe running such a check against a credit card may be included in the usual antifraud capabilities (i.e. they make a preauth that doesn't charge you anything but lets them validate your DOB).
...every single user who has ever posted any photo of any identifiable person apart from themselves now knows that they are legally on the hook and must delete every such photo immediately. And probably close their account to be sure.
You have far more faith in the judgment of the common Facebook user than I.
But shouldn't they sue the people who actually PUBLISHED the picture?
I am not a lawyer, but I guarantee they have this covered. The terms of service almost certainly say that you irrevocably represent that you have the full permission of any subjects of your photos, and agree to indemnify (i.e. pay for the entire legal defense of) the service provider in cases where it is revealed that any representations you made in agreeing to the EULA are false.
So if they sue Facebook, Facebook points out the Terms of Service areas where you agreed to these things, then sues you to pay any judgment made against them as well.
I'm very excited to see this film in 48 FPS tomorrow. I don't particularly care whether or not it looks good. As a geek, the primary thing I'm interested in is a technology which has not been upgraded since the 1920s. If that doesn't excite you, I may have to personally revoke your geek card.
Let us momentarily suspend our political leaning as to the cause of this and just understand that the cost of a society in which there is such high population density will inevitably result in a certain, hopefully small, percentage of crazy people who will do something like this. Let us track down those crazy people, help them if they can be helped, protect the rest of society from them if they cannot be helped, and move on, grieving for those who we have lost.
BILLY MAYS HERE WITH MY LOUD-ASS VOICE! Are you bothered by new regulations limiting the volume of commercials? FEAR NOT, MARKETERS! With just ONE EASY COMMERCIAL STARRING ME, I can overcome ANY regulation limiting decibels simply by YELLING AT YOUR CUSTOMERS! I yell so loud, I can SHATTER THEIR MUTE BUTTON INTO A THOUSAND PIECES!
I bet anything that police / courts will determine that a warrant is not necessary to intercept this eavesdropping since it was already there (or some other flimsy reasoning). Instant audio bug.
Slashdot Mirror
The United States has broken this with 'National Security Letters' and FISA. There are laws which you are not allowed to read until you are taken to 'trial' by them.
Both NSLs and FISA are about warrants, no? NSLs to gag recipients, FISA to issue the warrants in the first place. Both of these concepts are explained in public laws.
Is anyone claiming that there are actually secret laws, under which people have been secretly charged and secretly convicted?
A certain amount of paranoia is healthy, but let's not overdo it.
Maybe the temperature needs to be a bit higher than 451.
Err, I wasn't talking about the maintainer, I was talking about the hypothetical person in the thread. Read a thread fully before responding.
And the answer to that is, "you're fired."
Anonymous predicts decline of McAfee Labs. News at eleven.
The Commission sent a 'statement of objections' to the South Korean group, with its preliminary view that Samsung was not acting fairly.
Samsung then wiped their asses with it and sent it back.
Honestly, this should be the final project of any decent software development course.
I believe TrueCrypt tries very hard to avoid swapping the key to disk; I don't know about the hibernation file (though I bet you could script something to shred the file on resume, if you were paranoid about it).
One would hope you would have set your highly secure system to not dump core on a kernel panic.
Unmount the TrueCrypt volume before hibernating / shutting down. Don't let people attach random Firewire devices to your system. Lock your system before walking away (really, unmount the TrueCrypt volume then, too, if you can). Don't run it in a VM unless you know what you're doing.
Common sense stuff, really.
It's probably a technical thing. They may not have an API that lets them query your bank for your date of birth, while I believe running such a check against a credit card may be included in the usual antifraud capabilities (i.e. they make a preauth that doesn't charge you anything but lets them validate your DOB).
Silly me, thinking I could get away with Unicode 2260.
Get that 21st century technology off of Slashdot, we run ancient Perl here and we like it! *mumbles something about uphill in the snow*
Whatever happened to crazy?
...every single user who has ever posted any photo of any identifiable person apart from themselves now knows that they are legally on the hook and must delete every such photo immediately. And probably close their account to be sure.
You have far more faith in the judgment of the common Facebook user than I.
But shouldn't they sue the people who actually PUBLISHED the picture?
I am not a lawyer, but I guarantee they have this covered. The terms of service almost certainly say that you irrevocably represent that you have the full permission of any subjects of your photos, and agree to indemnify (i.e. pay for the entire legal defense of) the service provider in cases where it is revealed that any representations you made in agreeing to the EULA are false.
So if they sue Facebook, Facebook points out the Terms of Service areas where you agreed to these things, then sues you to pay any judgment made against them as well.
I'm very excited to see this film in 48 FPS tomorrow. I don't particularly care whether or not it looks good. As a geek, the primary thing I'm interested in is a technology which has not been upgraded since the 1920s. If that doesn't excite you, I may have to personally revoke your geek card.
Let us momentarily suspend our political leaning as to the cause of this and just understand that the cost of a society in which there is such high population density will inevitably result in a certain, hopefully small, percentage of crazy people who will do something like this. Let us track down those crazy people, help them if they can be helped, protect the rest of society from them if they cannot be helped, and move on, grieving for those who we have lost.
Man, I want to visit that island. I bet they have good parties.
(Visit, not move there.)
BILLY MAYS HERE WITH MY LOUD-ASS VOICE! Are you bothered by new regulations limiting the volume of commercials? FEAR NOT, MARKETERS! With just ONE EASY COMMERCIAL STARRING ME, I can overcome ANY regulation limiting decibels simply by YELLING AT YOUR CUSTOMERS! I yell so loud, I can SHATTER THEIR MUTE BUTTON INTO A THOUSAND PIECES!
Can you cite this? I didn't realize that Google was (apparently) literally tracking my movements every time I used Navigation.
You're starving wrong.
I think I'll take Facebook's views on privacy with a grain of salt.
So, what, they should have veto power over everything the UN does? Why not just title them "world emperor" and be done with it?
but the US is denied the ability to have an appropriate role in the UN in exchange for these services
Veto power isn't good enough? I'm curious exactly what role you'd have them play...
I bet anything that police / courts will determine that a warrant is not necessary to intercept this eavesdropping since it was already there (or some other flimsy reasoning). Instant audio bug.
If you're running Windows, you can default to "yes".