I am getting ready to travel to the United States and don't want it to interrupt my terrorist training. Can you guys recommend a way around the DHS's websniffing protocols, eavesdropping, cellular tracking, etc?
See that you have a portable and best also MAC spoofing software. Then just use any wireless connection you can lay your hand on. This can be some person who forgot to place security on his connection, or places that do this on purpose.
Then use the same identical ways that you use at home as they are already sniffing your conection, eavedrop and monitor your cellphone.
Oh and considering your online terrorist training: despite what you might think killall will not do what you think it will.
Secret has perhaps a different meaning then I thought it had. In general men brag about their sexlive and women don't. That is because men having a lot of partners are real men while women who have more partners are sluts. So if men brag about it in the pub, they will brag about it anywhere.
And the kind of idiot who posts their afairs on Facebook are probably the same idiots who posts anything else about their person on Facebook. They tell people all their other private details, so why not this? It just makes the work for the PI easier, that is all that changes.
Sure, some people will still be smart enough NOT to talk about it, but for centuries people have known about affairs and sometimes willfully ignored the affairs of their partner.
What if he was still alive? What if he wasn't military and died because of being drunk and driving against a tree? What if she did not move and just was unhappy about the service?
The only thing you can complain about is the early termination fee. The rest is irrelevant. That is as long as the contract was not on his name.
They will not be bothered with people going away if enough people stay. As long as they come up ahead, the change they implemented will be done.
I know of a company who raised their prices for a certain product. Almost all customers for that product left, which was the point as they were not making enough money on it. They were not allowed to end the contract from their side, so when the customer asked to leave, they were 'nice enough' to not hold the customer to his end of the contract.
At another company they made service so bad that customers left, which again was what they wanted.
Companies care about making money, not about how much customers they have (unless that is directly linked to makinging money). That means that they do not want all the customers all the time, just those that make them money. If you don't make them money, they don't want your business.
No. What needs to change is NOT the agent ID. What needs to change is the perception of the companies.
If all people would use the Agent Switcher, then websites would say: Hey, everybody is using SomeRandomBrowser, why don't we just make sites that are only accessible for that browser?
What they should learn is to make sites that are made following standards. Then the browser makers must follow those standards or loose people using them.
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood." People are not born free and equal. Certainly not in dignity and surely not in rights. Some are born from very rich influential parents and some will be born from parents with serious drug problems. That does not mean things can't work out identical for them, but the start they have when they were born is NOT the same.
It would be nice if people had both reason and conscience, but they don't. Or perhaps they do, but it is so individual that there is no reason to mention it.
The last part talks about what they should do. Sure people SHOULD be nice towards each other, unfortunately because they all reason differently and have no common conscience and because they want to protect the un-equal way we are born, this will not happen.
The only place I can see where all people are free and equal working towards each other is in a theory, not in anything that will be real or working: communism.
if computer users in New Zealand get active again.
How ofen do they have to disagree to have them? You often see that if some groups wants to push something, they will retry and retry and get elected away all the time. Then suddenly they win, basically because everybody is tired of playing their silly game.
Now if you want to reverse it, they say that that can not be done, because it is the law.
What will happen here is that it might be rejected again and then it just starts all over again.
You sure it was not because you were hitting on co workers?
Also I learned that companies are not one big thing. They are a lot of smaller departments and one department can be great to be working in, the other is a complete nightmare. It also depends from person to person. I have worked with a company where friends of mine would not be able to work under the conditions I had to work with. I loved it.
Heck, isn't it good that the Directive lays out explicit retention and destruction requirements?
Destruction, yes. Retention? No. Obviously governements will say "But phone companies hold the same information". The big difference is that the reason telcos hold that information is not to give so much help to Big Brother but rather be able to send bills and collect money.
What they could do if they think somebody is very suspicious is to record his behavior (and even all the content) after court gave them permission.
What they are saying is "Keep the data that we want for us at your expense so we can look at at when we feel like it." This is worse then letting the family pay for the bullet for your execution. This is forcing people to walk around with that bullet all the time in case they need it AND at the same time make walking around with ammunition illegal and punishable by execution.
Why? Because 100% (of men) will look at porn and one of those images WILL be child porn even though you did not look for it. Could even be a pop-up-ad with an image of Bart and Lisa doing the nasty with their friends.
Analogy time. If I snoop on an open server from a big company, I will get send to the big house. So the same should apply here. Either drag every person responsible to jail or allow people to snoop on open servers.
Unfortunately the law will side with the company on both cases.
Then the computer system of that era was lousy. My mother has 4 names. That would mean that if she were to get to be put in some system (working, getting married, getting the US nationality) the system would not be able to cope. Having more then just a first and middle name is pretty common in many parts of the world.
I have no middle name and I have seen places where I needed to enter a middle name or at least a letter, otherwise I could not proceed.
You don't have an expectation of privacy when walking around town;
That is where it already starts to go wrong. Why should I not have privacy when walking around town. To me that means NO RECORDING or otherwise put things into some form that can be recalled later or seen form some place else.
To me that means no camera's, no photographs, no nothing, unless each and every individual gives his written permission. If that means that people are not able to do that, then DO NOT DO IT. Tough luck if you can't take pictures and it would mean probably the end of 'Americas Funniest Videocrap'.
I think my privacy is more worth then your picture.
I care about theirs, because I care about mine. If their privacy is taken, mine is taken as well. Random DNA searches, cameras all around, databases collecting all information about everything. So yes, they are curtailing the ability to preserve my information. They allow laws to be changed. They allow things to happen and I, as an individual, can do jack shit against it.
Oh and if I try to be anonymous on the Intertubes, I am accused of fraud. (Yep, really happened because I entered a fake name for some webmail account)
Or to say it in other words: First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out - because I was not a Jew. Then they came for the communists and I did not speak out - because I was not a communist. Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out - because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for me - and by then there was no one left to speak out for me.
So yes, I NEED to speak out for them in all their ignorance, because I worry about my privacy.
All the one-person-companies I know are either getting together and form a company or become consultants working for a company. Perhaps that is the reason nobody bids at your projects. They all already have a job. When we started looking for a new website for our Belgian company, we got a LOT of Belgians and no Ukrainians. And the Belgians where all companies. Some as small as 2 people, other enourmous. All companies worked with consultants based in Belgium. No idea what nationalities they were.
So my first guess as to why they do not bid on your project is because they do not need it as they already HAVE a job (and social security and payed holidays and...)
And I am half German too. (No idea what the relevance is to anything, but apparently there is some)
When breaking and entering a house, there should be a difference whether the people cleaned out your house and it is empty of everything or if they just came in and swam in your swimming pool like in the movie "The girl next door". Sure, both is illegal, but on different levels.
One is clearly for pure profit, the other was not. Should both be put in jail for the same amount of time?
And if you leave your car open and the motor running and the keys in, where I live you could be charged as well. And the thief would be getting much less of a punishment.
Officially at war would mean a deceleration of war. Even though the intend to use deadly weapons is not needed, it is to be expected. I doubt that that is the case, even without reading the articles.
After reading them, it is clear that is is a bad use of the word war. In the linked article one talks about "a row" and the other talks about "concerns". Now I understand that the British are very good and underplaying, but calling a war a row or a concerns is even to cool for them.
Even the fake war on drugs, terrorism and piracy is more of a war then this.
Sure it is a headline catcher. But if people are not willing to read it if it isn't, you should not make it louder, you should consider not posting it at all. This is not (yet) Foxnews.
Nothing like this has ever been possible in history,
Gutenberg begs to differ. At least enough to make a good analogy.
There are no accurate analogies as an analogy is never identical. That means people will always say something like : "But we are talking about music, not cars, so it is not an accurate analogy."
Slashdot Mirror
See that you have a portable and best also MAC spoofing software. Then just use any wireless connection you can lay your hand on. This can be some person who forgot to place security on his connection, or places that do this on purpose.
Then use the same identical ways that you use at home as they are already sniffing your conection, eavedrop and monitor your cellphone.
Oh and considering your online terrorist training: despite what you might think killall will not do what you think it will.
Or just sell the phone unlocked and usable for any and all providers, like they do in Belgium?
Sure, there is a downside. People see how much it actually costs.
Secret has perhaps a different meaning then I thought it had. In general men brag about their sexlive and women don't. That is because men having a lot of partners are real men while women who have more partners are sluts.
So if men brag about it in the pub, they will brag about it anywhere.
And the kind of idiot who posts their afairs on Facebook are probably the same idiots who posts anything else about their person on Facebook. They tell people all their other private details, so why not this?
It just makes the work for the PI easier, that is all that changes.
Sure, some people will still be smart enough NOT to talk about it, but for centuries people have known about affairs and sometimes willfully ignored the affairs of their partner.
If the dad is Schrödinger the other kid is both born and unborn at the same time.
No problems in Belgium either.
What if he was still alive? What if he wasn't military and died because of being drunk and driving against a tree? What if she did not move and just was unhappy about the service?
The only thing you can complain about is the early termination fee. The rest is irrelevant. That is as long as the contract was not on his name.
They will not be bothered with people going away if enough people stay. As long as they come up ahead, the change they implemented will be done.
I know of a company who raised their prices for a certain product. Almost all customers for that product left, which was the point as they were not making enough money on it. They were not allowed to end the contract from their side, so when the customer asked to leave, they were 'nice enough' to not hold the customer to his end of the contract.
At another company they made service so bad that customers left, which again was what they wanted.
Companies care about making money, not about how much customers they have (unless that is directly linked to makinging money). That means that they do not want all the customers all the time, just those that make them money. If you don't make them money, they don't want your business.
No. What needs to change is NOT the agent ID. What needs to change is the perception of the companies.
If all people would use the Agent Switcher, then websites would say: Hey, everybody is using SomeRandomBrowser, why don't we just make sites that are only accessible for that browser?
What they should learn is to make sites that are made following standards. Then the browser makers must follow those standards or loose people using them.
Reminds me of what some guy once said to me:
Three of my grand parents are from Sweden and they still call me African American.
"All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood."
People are not born free and equal. Certainly not in dignity and surely not in rights. Some are born from very rich influential parents and some will be born from parents with serious drug problems. That does not mean things can't work out identical for them, but the start they have when they were born is NOT the same.
It would be nice if people had both reason and conscience, but they don't. Or perhaps they do, but it is so individual that there is no reason to mention it.
The last part talks about what they should do. Sure people SHOULD be nice towards each other, unfortunately because they all reason differently and have no common conscience and because they want to protect the un-equal way we are born, this will not happen.
The only place I can see where all people are free and equal working towards each other is in a theory, not in anything that will be real or working: communism.
How ofen do they have to disagree to have them? You often see that if some groups wants to push something, they will retry and retry and get elected away all the time. Then suddenly they win, basically because everybody is tired of playing their silly game.
Now if you want to reverse it, they say that that can not be done, because it is the law.
What will happen here is that it might be rejected again and then it just starts all over again.
You sure it was not because you were hitting on co workers?
Also I learned that companies are not one big thing. They are a lot of smaller departments and one department can be great to be working in, the other is a complete nightmare. It also depends from person to person. I have worked with a company where friends of mine would not be able to work under the conditions I had to work with. I loved it.
Destruction, yes. Retention? No. Obviously governements will say "But phone companies hold the same information". The big difference is that the reason telcos hold that information is not to give so much help to Big Brother but rather be able to send bills and collect money.
What they could do if they think somebody is very suspicious is to record his behavior (and even all the content) after court gave them permission.
What they are saying is "Keep the data that we want for us at your expense so we can look at at when we feel like it." This is worse then letting the family pay for the bullet for your execution. This is forcing people to walk around with that bullet all the time in case they need it AND at the same time make walking around with ammunition illegal and punishable by execution.
Why? Because 100% (of men) will look at porn and one of those images WILL be child porn even though you did not look for it. Could even be a pop-up-ad with an image of Bart and Lisa doing the nasty with their friends.
Try the same with snooping on a companies server that was open and you will get to do several years.
Analogy time. If I snoop on an open server from a big company, I will get send to the big house. So the same should apply here. Either drag every person responsible to jail or allow people to snoop on open servers.
Unfortunately the law will side with the company on both cases.
Then the computer system of that era was lousy. My mother has 4 names. That would mean that if she were to get to be put in some system (working, getting married, getting the US nationality) the system would not be able to cope. Having more then just a first and middle name is pretty common in many parts of the world.
I have no middle name and I have seen places where I needed to enter a middle name or at least a letter, otherwise I could not proceed.
That is where it already starts to go wrong. Why should I not have privacy when walking around town. To me that means NO RECORDING or otherwise put things into some form that can be recalled later or seen form some place else.
To me that means no camera's, no photographs, no nothing, unless each and every individual gives his written permission. If that means that people are not able to do that, then DO NOT DO IT. Tough luck if you can't take pictures and it would mean probably the end of 'Americas Funniest Videocrap'.
I think my privacy is more worth then your picture.
I care about theirs, because I care about mine. If their privacy is taken, mine is taken as well. Random DNA searches, cameras all around, databases collecting all information about everything.
So yes, they are curtailing the ability to preserve my information. They allow laws to be changed. They allow things to happen and I, as an individual, can do jack shit against it.
Oh and if I try to be anonymous on the Intertubes, I am accused of fraud. (Yep, really happened because I entered a fake name for some webmail account)
Or to say it in other words:
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out - because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the communists
and I did not speak out - because I was not a communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out - because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me -
and by then there was no one left to speak out for me.
So yes, I NEED to speak out for them in all their ignorance, because I worry about my privacy.
All the one-person-companies I know are either getting together and form a company or become consultants working for a company. Perhaps that is the reason nobody bids at your projects. They all already have a job.
When we started looking for a new website for our Belgian company, we got a LOT of Belgians and no Ukrainians. And the Belgians where all companies. Some as small as 2 people, other enourmous. All companies worked with consultants based in Belgium. No idea what nationalities they were.
So my first guess as to why they do not bid on your project is because they do not need it as they already HAVE a job (and social security and payed holidays and ...)
And I am half German too. (No idea what the relevance is to anything, but apparently there is some)
Why is it that people think it is all OR/OR. Alternative can be AND/AND. So all of the sources together. Solar, hydrogen, wind, tidal, atomic, ...
There is an article? When has /. started to add articles?
When breaking and entering a house, there should be a difference whether the people cleaned out your house and it is empty of everything or if they just came in and swam in your swimming pool like in the movie "The girl next door". Sure, both is illegal, but on different levels.
One is clearly for pure profit, the other was not. Should both be put in jail for the same amount of time?
And if you leave your car open and the motor running and the keys in, where I live you could be charged as well. And the thief would be getting much less of a punishment.
Officially at war would mean a deceleration of war. Even though the intend to use deadly weapons is not needed, it is to be expected. I doubt that that is the case, even without reading the articles.
After reading them, it is clear that is is a bad use of the word war. In the linked article one talks about "a row" and the other talks about "concerns". Now I understand that the British are very good and underplaying, but calling a war a row or a concerns is even to cool for them.
Even the fake war on drugs, terrorism and piracy is more of a war then this.
Sure it is a headline catcher. But if people are not willing to read it if it isn't, you should not make it louder, you should consider not posting it at all. This is not (yet) Foxnews.
I mean there is a worm in Mezcal as well and nobody complaints. They even use it in their marketing and advertising.
Gutenberg begs to differ. At least enough to make a good analogy.
There are no accurate analogies as an analogy is never identical. That means people will always say something like : "But we are talking about music, not cars, so it is not an accurate analogy."