Got to love the U.K. 'You viewed porn on your computer?! OMG You are a child molester! GAOL 4 U." Don't worry though, the religious right here in the U.S. desires Taliban like laws to the same effect.
If you google 'effects of porn on children' you'll get tons of results saying the terrible scary things that will happen, but most made on actual studies read more like this http://www.apa.org/monitor/nov07/webporn.aspx .
So it seems that all this hand waving by Cameron is about getting reelected and society control.
Many millions did it in the 19th and first half of the 20th century
I'll up you one on that. Pretty much everybody did before the first half of the 20th century, everywhere.
Dying in the desert heat when the power goes out is the price we pay for not living like desert people. Freezing to death when the power goes out is the price an idiot pays when they don't have good shelter, plenty of warm clothes, and if cold enough, a moderate heat source (you don't need much with good insulation). Living in a modern (desert) city with tons of asphalt, things painted dark colors, and poor building design is a great way to get heat stroke.
It's not likely the shillfest is coming directly from Microsoft, it's probably contracted out by some other group(s). I noticed it on most the major sites that I read not long before release that the number of blatantly obvious shill posts skyrocketed. It would be interesting if all the sites could get together and build data metrics on the shillyness of each user, there IPs, how long the accounts had been created and so forth to see if it points to a shill group, or how many of the shills are just blind Microsoft believers.
Not sure what you've done (or someone's configuration somewhere has done), but the PPTP client on Linux that I'm using stays connected pretty much forever without disconnects. It's highly likely that the client code on your Android phone and Linux box are the same or close to the same.
And I could spend 50k licenses for an employee and it would be insane because they don't make close to that in one year, if not two. Not all businesses are large businesses with huge budgets, in some businesses saving $1000 here or there makes a pretty big difference.
Yep, and that patch will clean up your computer after hackers take over the server and run a remote shell on your computer and pilfer any information their botnet can find. Thank god we don't have to write secure software any more since we can patch it any time we need to before the hackers actually run exploits.
Couple of hundred at most, and only in places where the job is very low pay and a machine would be very expensive to use. The modern factory is turning an episode of the Jetsons, put material in one end and it poops out goods on the other end with minimal human involvement.
Every old medical system I've seen is stored in some odd format or database. Most smaller clinic don't migrate records because of the insane costs that the vendors want to charge and instead migrate the information over on a client by client basis as they come in the office. If they patient doesn't come in for a number of years the records never get transferred. Since many of these systems cost yearly fees to run, after some point they are just shut off.
This isn't the patients fault. I will go as far and say that it isn't the hospitals fault either, it seems every system is proprietary, especially the older systems. What needs to occur is an open records format that is legislated.
Depending on the design of the ISP network, the packet can be spoofed and pass egress filtering, as long as the source is spoofing another host in the ISP network.
A lot of people have died from falling trees or downed power lines a long way from the coast, so what you say isn't true. Now getting the hell out of flood zones is the best way to survive as you say. You must run from the water, it will kill you.
In general... To enter your home and 'take' the drive, law enforcement must have a warrant to collect it on your property for acts that you have committed. Example, you pirate a bunch of shit and the FBI party van shows up to collect your computers. On the cloud it's different. Bob down the road pirates something on the same cloud service you are on, the FBI party van shows up at the cloud service and collects Bobs data, your data, and Johns data too. I hope that short example shows you the difference, and that difference is you don't have to do anything wrong at all to have your data taken in the cloud.
It's because you think of cameras as static. Add a network of zoom and pan cameras with some software smarts that can track an individual and it's pretty much the same thing, except the filmed are unaware of it occurring.
Excuse or reason? If you were born to parents of racists it's highly likely that you would hold their worldview, at least for some time in your life, till you had the knowledge and experience to form opinions otherwise. It is easy now to look into the past and judge, how will history look upon you and judge what you are ignorant in?
What about the converse of someone tainting you, your car, or home with drug scent. Preferably something not easily detectable my humans and clear in color. Boss going to the airport? Let him get a nice rubber glove. Some dickhead you know traveling to Mexico and back? This will delay his trip an hour or two.
Your unfortunate problem is you only have your life experience to draw from. Take a year of to study history of law enforcement and the history of crime. You may learn it's impossible to prevent harm to the defenseless. You may also learn that giving any group power with no oversight and penalties for wrong doing will cause them to cause far more harm then they fix. Smoking weed isn't an indicator of how willing one is to commit a crime against another, along with any number of other 'crimes' as they are labeled these days. From everything you've said, it seems that you think that punishing 'thought crime' should be legal.
How many people were killed under communist governments again? Give the authorities enough power and no oversight and people that have done no wrong will be come statistics. This SAF-T world that you seek doesn't exist, and things surely will get worse by giving a group absolute power.
My guess is you're a middle class white guy, try being a minority for a while and your rosy outlook on law enforcement may change.
HAHAHA, fuck no. They'll use the guise of protection of the police and beat you, or even shoot you if you try to record them. Turn about is not fair play, they want the power. They will lie to you and say it is illegal to record them and destroy the video. If you are lucky you might get a payoff from the city while the officer keeps his job.
I mean, judges give out warrants like tissue paper during winter, why the fuck are we allowing law enforcement to operate without one. Might as well just say no cop needs a warrant anywhere now. Shit, if I were the feds, I'd just set up cameras everywhere now, evidently there are no penalties for doing it.
There are alternate, more widely accepted, explanations for that particular statistic. Specifically: Feds don't charge until they know they are very likely to win, and defense attorneys understand this.
The feds aren't pushed 'as' hard as local police to solve crimes, they will sit and gather information for years. The feds won't arrest you on the spot most of the time for committing a crime until they have rock solid evidence of a felony being committed (and probably video and audio taped). Where on the other hand, the local cop may arrest you on the spot with far less evidence. There have been many cases where the feds have waited till a large number of crimes have been committed by a group so they can use RICO against them.
"Behavior that could be taught as a trained response to any number of stimuli, including a voice command. The point being that officer friendly could trigger that same response with or without drugs being present."
The point being that if this were true then anyone could trivially challenge the legality of the officer's raids in court by asking for this test to be carried out.
In reality, police don't teach their dog this sort of thing precisely because it would completely undermine and destroy any subsequent legal action stemming from a search with the dog if the defendant could trivially ask the courts to demand prove that the dog's actions were legit.
So yes it is possible to teach dogs these things, but the laws and training regimes of dog units are as strict as they are and avoid this precisely to ensure that convictions based on evidence found with dogs are going to be solid.
WTF, how could you prove any voice command wrong doing by the officer? We're not arguing that the dogs can't find drugs, we're arguing that the dogs 'can' find drugs that aren't even there. You see in the cases where no drugs are found, no charges will be brought up. In cases where drugs are found because the trainer told the dog to point even though the dog wouldn't, you couldn't tell the difference. Police do all kinds of shit that undermines subsequent legal action, and sometimes it gets thrown out of court, but a lot of the poorest and most ignorant do not get the legal help that could get them out of trouble and instead plea bargain.
The police 'should' have a warrant for the first search in the first place, if they had a warrant to search for drugs then the dog most likely would not need extra authorization. If they were there for any other reason the evidence from the search 'should' be thrown out as fruit from the poisoned tree. Police commonly 'invite' themselves in to peoples houses without permission for fishing expeditions. Allowing them the use of even more technology (yes a trained dog is technology, you have to go to vast expense to train these dogs, and even then the false positive rate is very high) is dangerous since even 'better' electronic noses are being developed now.
Who gives a shit if he's a 'suspected' drug deal. Hell you're a suspected drug dealer, I'm a suspected drug dealer, we all are when the cops can search whoever they want without a warrant for being a drug dealer. The reason we have the warrant system we do now is because of abuses we suffered under the Royal Crown where they would search what they want for whatever reason, we do not want to go back to those days.
Make the police follow the law, punish them when they don't.
Slashdot Mirror
Got to love the U.K. 'You viewed porn on your computer?! OMG You are a child molester! GAOL 4 U." Don't worry though, the religious right here in the U.S. desires Taliban like laws to the same effect.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-sunny-side-of-smut is a decent summary of a few studies that pretty much say 'What internet porn problem?'
If you google 'effects of porn on children' you'll get tons of results saying the terrible scary things that will happen, but most made on actual studies read more like this http://www.apa.org/monitor/nov07/webporn.aspx .
So it seems that all this hand waving by Cameron is about getting reelected and society control.
Many millions did it in the 19th and first half of the 20th century
I'll up you one on that. Pretty much everybody did before the first half of the 20th century, everywhere.
Dying in the desert heat when the power goes out is the price we pay for not living like desert people. Freezing to death when the power goes out is the price an idiot pays when they don't have good shelter, plenty of warm clothes, and if cold enough, a moderate heat source (you don't need much with good insulation). Living in a modern (desert) city with tons of asphalt, things painted dark colors, and poor building design is a great way to get heat stroke.
I had this strange distopian vision that in the future the only carriers were Google, Apple, and Microsoft*. I shuddered.
(*Not that MS is going to pull of a phone someone wants any time soon.)
Thus the Matrix is born.
It's not likely the shillfest is coming directly from Microsoft, it's probably contracted out by some other group(s). I noticed it on most the major sites that I read not long before release that the number of blatantly obvious shill posts skyrocketed. It would be interesting if all the sites could get together and build data metrics on the shillyness of each user, there IPs, how long the accounts had been created and so forth to see if it points to a shill group, or how many of the shills are just blind Microsoft believers.
Not sure what you've done (or someone's configuration somewhere has done), but the PPTP client on Linux that I'm using stays connected pretty much forever without disconnects. It's highly likely that the client code on your Android phone and Linux box are the same or close to the same.
And I could spend 50k licenses for an employee and it would be insane because they don't make close to that in one year, if not two. Not all businesses are large businesses with huge budgets, in some businesses saving $1000 here or there makes a pretty big difference.
Yep, and that patch will clean up your computer after hackers take over the server and run a remote shell on your computer and pilfer any information their botnet can find. Thank god we don't have to write secure software any more since we can patch it any time we need to before the hackers actually run exploits.
Couple of hundred at most, and only in places where the job is very low pay and a machine would be very expensive to use. The modern factory is turning an episode of the Jetsons, put material in one end and it poops out goods on the other end with minimal human involvement.
Every old medical system I've seen is stored in some odd format or database. Most smaller clinic don't migrate records because of the insane costs that the vendors want to charge and instead migrate the information over on a client by client basis as they come in the office. If they patient doesn't come in for a number of years the records never get transferred. Since many of these systems cost yearly fees to run, after some point they are just shut off.
This isn't the patients fault. I will go as far and say that it isn't the hospitals fault either, it seems every system is proprietary, especially the older systems. What needs to occur is an open records format that is legislated.
Depending on the design of the ISP network, the packet can be spoofed and pass egress filtering, as long as the source is spoofing another host in the ISP network.
A lot of people have died from falling trees or downed power lines a long way from the coast, so what you say isn't true. Now getting the hell out of flood zones is the best way to survive as you say. You must run from the water, it will kill you.
In general... To enter your home and 'take' the drive, law enforcement must have a warrant to collect it on your property for acts that you have committed. Example, you pirate a bunch of shit and the FBI party van shows up to collect your computers. On the cloud it's different. Bob down the road pirates something on the same cloud service you are on, the FBI party van shows up at the cloud service and collects Bobs data, your data, and Johns data too. I hope that short example shows you the difference, and that difference is you don't have to do anything wrong at all to have your data taken in the cloud.
It's because you think of cameras as static. Add a network of zoom and pan cameras with some software smarts that can track an individual and it's pretty much the same thing, except the filmed are unaware of it occurring.
Excuse or reason? If you were born to parents of racists it's highly likely that you would hold their worldview, at least for some time in your life, till you had the knowledge and experience to form opinions otherwise. It is easy now to look into the past and judge, how will history look upon you and judge what you are ignorant in?
What about the converse of someone tainting you, your car, or home with drug scent. Preferably something not easily detectable my humans and clear in color. Boss going to the airport? Let him get a nice rubber glove. Some dickhead you know traveling to Mexico and back? This will delay his trip an hour or two.
Your unfortunate problem is you only have your life experience to draw from. Take a year of to study history of law enforcement and the history of crime. You may learn it's impossible to prevent harm to the defenseless. You may also learn that giving any group power with no oversight and penalties for wrong doing will cause them to cause far more harm then they fix. Smoking weed isn't an indicator of how willing one is to commit a crime against another, along with any number of other 'crimes' as they are labeled these days. From everything you've said, it seems that you think that punishing 'thought crime' should be legal.
How many people were killed under communist governments again? Give the authorities enough power and no oversight and people that have done no wrong will be come statistics. This SAF-T world that you seek doesn't exist, and things surely will get worse by giving a group absolute power.
My guess is you're a middle class white guy, try being a minority for a while and your rosy outlook on law enforcement may change.
HAHAHA, fuck no. They'll use the guise of protection of the police and beat you, or even shoot you if you try to record them. Turn about is not fair play, they want the power. They will lie to you and say it is illegal to record them and destroy the video. If you are lucky you might get a payoff from the city while the officer keeps his job.
http://www.ironmill.com/2011/08/31/man-faces-life-in-jail-for-recording-police-video/
http://www.pixiq.com/article/las-vegas-cop-beats-man-for-videotaping-him
http://www.myfoxboston.com/story/18706155/man-who-says-he-was-beaten-for-recording-police-receives-33000-settlement
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/nov/08/opinion/la-oe-turley-video-20111108
I mean, judges give out warrants like tissue paper during winter, why the fuck are we allowing law enforcement to operate without one. Might as well just say no cop needs a warrant anywhere now. Shit, if I were the feds, I'd just set up cameras everywhere now, evidently there are no penalties for doing it.
There are alternate, more widely accepted, explanations for that particular statistic. Specifically: Feds don't charge until they know they are very likely to win, and defense attorneys understand this.
The feds aren't pushed 'as' hard as local police to solve crimes, they will sit and gather information for years. The feds won't arrest you on the spot most of the time for committing a crime until they have rock solid evidence of a felony being committed (and probably video and audio taped). Where on the other hand, the local cop may arrest you on the spot with far less evidence. There have been many cases where the feds have waited till a large number of crimes have been committed by a group so they can use RICO against them.
I would need a lot of convincing to understand why the government has any sort of legitimate state interest in controlling
civil forfeiture
"Behavior that could be taught as a trained response to any number of stimuli, including a voice command. The point being that officer friendly could trigger that same response with or without drugs being present."
The point being that if this were true then anyone could trivially challenge the legality of the officer's raids in court by asking for this test to be carried out.
In reality, police don't teach their dog this sort of thing precisely because it would completely undermine and destroy any subsequent legal action stemming from a search with the dog if the defendant could trivially ask the courts to demand prove that the dog's actions were legit.
So yes it is possible to teach dogs these things, but the laws and training regimes of dog units are as strict as they are and avoid this precisely to ensure that convictions based on evidence found with dogs are going to be solid.
WTF, how could you prove any voice command wrong doing by the officer? We're not arguing that the dogs can't find drugs, we're arguing that the dogs 'can' find drugs that aren't even there. You see in the cases where no drugs are found, no charges will be brought up. In cases where drugs are found because the trainer told the dog to point even though the dog wouldn't, you couldn't tell the difference. Police do all kinds of shit that undermines subsequent legal action, and sometimes it gets thrown out of court, but a lot of the poorest and most ignorant do not get the legal help that could get them out of trouble and instead plea bargain.
This needs modded up, everyone should read the article as to why dogs should not be allowed in these cases.
The police 'should' have a warrant for the first search in the first place, if they had a warrant to search for drugs then the dog most likely would not need extra authorization. If they were there for any other reason the evidence from the search 'should' be thrown out as fruit from the poisoned tree. Police commonly 'invite' themselves in to peoples houses without permission for fishing expeditions. Allowing them the use of even more technology (yes a trained dog is technology, you have to go to vast expense to train these dogs, and even then the false positive rate is very high) is dangerous since even 'better' electronic noses are being developed now.
Who gives a shit if he's a 'suspected' drug deal. Hell you're a suspected drug dealer, I'm a suspected drug dealer, we all are when the cops can search whoever they want without a warrant for being a drug dealer. The reason we have the warrant system we do now is because of abuses we suffered under the Royal Crown where they would search what they want for whatever reason, we do not want to go back to those days.
Make the police follow the law, punish them when they don't.