Google are not heroes in this matter. They did not lobby for fairer copyright laws. They simply broke the existing laws on a massive scale and got a settlement that benefitted them but no one else.
Quite like Sony and the root-kit fiasco where if any random joe had done what Sony did they would be rotting in prison for eternity. But because Sony is so big and fucked over so many people, they got off with little more than a finger waggling.
Google is making the books searchable with one intent in mind, to know what you are searching for, so they can offer relevant ads and targeted marketing leads.
Same thing can be said about your search history. However google has a policy of "anonymizing" some of what it records after a certain period of time. They only do that because of the public pressure that has been applied. From the user's point of view it is a good thing to keep that pressure up, we may find that Google "discovers" that they can get enough value out of your personal information in even less time than they do now and adjusts their privacy protections accordingly.
Sorry, this discussion is for ADULTS ONLY... come back when you can put together an argument that doesn't involve spewing insults and incoherent bullshit
Hey dumb ass, get the fuck out of the kitchen if you can't stand the heat. You are the zero IQ who started in with the insults, and now you want to act all high and mighty? You hypocrite. But what else should I expect from someone who thinks the world revolves around himself?
I think anonymous was playing troll/straight-man there. Who really knows the noun without knowing its origins? It's not like it has really entered the common vernacular like asshat did.
Seriously, the vast majority of the time the convienence of not going to some crappy site and being bogged down by a corporate nightmare of a website, or having to wait for the weather on the TV, greatly makes up for whatever limited insight meteorologists can possibly add.
That's why they are usually pretty young things. I think it was Mary Poppins who said, "A little T&A with your weather helps the advertising go down."
How many black people walk past that aren't loud? How the fuck should I know?
BingfuckingO. You are just so dumb you can't put two and two together unless you can see all four pieces first. That's the kind of innumeracy that leads to racism and the overtly loud and proud confidence that its not racism.
Stereotypes are formed based on the things we notice, not the things we don't notice.
You're such a fucking dumb ass that you think the world revolves around you. That if you didn't see it, it didn't happen and doesn't matter.
Like you wrote, stereotypes are shortcuts and shortcuts aren't always the right path, else they wouldn't be a short cut, they would be the regular path. Racial stereotyping is precisely the kind of shortcut that sends you off into the boonies. You are just too fucking dumb to realize you got lost.
The idiot that wrote the article at Anandtech is not "somewhat confused", he is flat out wrong on the fundamental facts of what he based his conclusions on.
Yeah, I was going for sarcasm with that.
(6 or 7 years ago they used to be a solid tech-y folks, what happened?)
Maybe your own level of experience has matured over the intervening years because Anandtech hasn't really changed. Apart from the rare professional guest writer, Anandtech and the rest of their ilk have always been amateur hour productions because they've been staffed by hobbyists and amateurs. Since most of their readership is even less experienced hobbyists they are frequently looked upon as sources of knowledge and wisdom when they are really little more than the blind leading the blind.
Which is why I think the best way would be to go after the product being peddled rather than the company making the call.
All that will happen is that a lot of fly-by-night distributors get set up and then torn down once johnny law starts to move in. These scammers aren't selling name-brand stuff anyway, just their own house-branded versions of stuff manufactured under generic contract. So you'll catch these dummy corps but there won't be anything but an empty shell by the time they are caught, meanwhile the people behind it have opened up a new dummy corp and are doing the exact same thing again.
What will happen is that the bank which issued your credit car will eat the charge and you will never hear anything more of it. In fact, even if they do track down the perps, they won't share the information with you. They tend to be really tight-lipped about anything like that.
Dude, you're a moron. You are the one claiming you know all of the teenagers on the planet. ZK is saying some of the teenagers (many?) say this. You are claiming that NONE of them do. Only one of you is claiming to know all of the teenagers on the planet.
Do you really believe that Zero_Kelvin knows "millions of teenagers?" For all practical purposes he is claiming the exact same thing I am, except I'm applying common sense and he's just making shit up to support his own little pet peeve.
You don't need special boxes or encryption to prevent your neighbors from knowing what you are watching, thats what a switch is for.
I should have elaborated - many SDV systems have the switch at the neighborhood level, not the house level. Similar to the way cable modem bandwidth is shared with your neighbors.
I say millions of teenagers say "minute" when they mean a long time, but a minute is still 60 seconds.
Yeah, I don't think so. Your definition of "a long time" is something that YOU have pretty much made up on the spot and in the process ruined any claim to being an authority on english word definitions. Very few teenagers, or anyone else, mean "a long time" when they say "minute" - its pretty rare for anyone to mean anything even approaching an hour when they say "minute." And unless you are a fruit-fly or suffer from ADD, an hour hardly ever qualifies as "a long time."
But, since a "short space of time" is a merriam-webster endorsed standard meaning of the word "minute," you kinda had to make up some BS in order to support your rather unsupportable point. It's ironic that you misused the key word in your own rant on people misusing words. I think its the best case of grammar-nazi karma I've seen to date.
Its almost certain that the encryption is done prior to multiplexing, done inside the transport stream at the packet level even. That's way it works now with full-blown cablecard encryption.
Plus, space requirements aren't that prohibitive, maximum bandwidth of a single qam channel is 38mbps - that's 2 to 4 HDTV channels depending on how much the cableco over-compresses their channels.
The FCC mandates that if a cableco carries a channel that is broadcast over the air (OTA), then they can not encrypt their copy of it. The waiver is for the deployment of a couple of models of ultra-simple cable boxes (which, by the way, can't tune the full-blown cablecard encrypted channels) that just happen to have this DES privacy mode. Other cablecos, like comcast have been deploying similar boxes that do not have "privacy mode." But as far as I can tell, the waiver does not permit anyone to start encrypting the copies of OTA channels.
Seems to me that the result may be the reverse of what he predicts - that non-premium channels which are currently encrypted with the full-blown cablecard encryption like the digital versions of CNN, MTV, etc may get reduced to "privacy mode" encryption so that they can be more easily sold to more customers without as big a capital investment.
Then, there is also the whole thing about exactly what privacy mode is for. Are these boxes simply just cable boxes or are they boxes that support switched video - where you only have one or two video streams coming into your home at any one time and the box is responsible for requesting what channel the head-end should send you. In that case, the "privacy" mode may be a way to keep your neighbors from seeing what you are watching - as they can do now with most on-demand shows which are transmitted totally in the clear via special semi-hidden channels that anyone can tune to if they know the channel number in use.
You're missing that I wouldn't say it because I can see how it could be construed as racist. When people do say it, though, they mean it as a compliment. Most people don't try to keep compliments to themselves.
Most racism isn't about purposefully being a jackass. Its about applying stereotypes without regard for the individual.
you cannot blame the average Joe for categorizing you according to the minority you represent.
Since when does anyone "represent" a minority? You sign up to be a representative, then sure, you get what you deserve. You wave that flag proudly and you deserve all the pros and cons of doing so.
But, if you are born that way or otherwise come to it through no action of your own, then its bullshit to accept people pigeon-holing you.
So, within that confluence of factors, the searches were probably quite legally acceptable.
Indeed, the term "reasonable," as it has been permuted by the lawyers through the centuries, no longer bears much resemblance to how a reasonable man would use it.
The briefing a friend of mine receives every year to maintain his (US) security clearance goes out of its way to classify copyright violations as security risks. It is mostly about software piracy issues but music and movies are touched on too. Its bad enough that copyright violations are part of the security briefing (no other kinds of crimes that are not actual risks to security are in there) but the truly ridiculous part of it is that, in the presentation, it is given equal weight to actual security problems like accidental disclosure, contact with foreign agents, etc. If you were to simply take the briefing at face value making a copy of an mp3 to bring to the secure area is just as bad as fucking Mata Hari.
Or, just use different profiles for different purposes.
If you start firefox with these command-line options:
-no-remote -ProfileManager
you get a pop-up asking you which profile to use. You can have completely seperate profiles with different themes, different plugins, different bookmarks, different histories, different caches, etc -- they do not share information across profiles. You can even set a default profile so that if you don't use the profile manager, that specific profile is the one that gets loaded.
I have a default for general browsing with almost all cookies and javascript blocked, one just for google mail that lets google set cookies and use javascript, and another one called "blank man" which is pretty open, but deletes everything on exit (cookies, history, etc) which I use one-shot at a time whenever I go to a website that wants personal information like amazon or my bank. One could easily have a 'pr0n' profile that they only run when they are in the mood and is otherwise never even seen.
Slashdot Mirror
Google are not heroes in this matter. They did not lobby for fairer copyright laws. They simply broke the existing laws on a massive scale and got a settlement that benefitted them but no one else.
Quite like Sony and the root-kit fiasco where if any random joe had done what Sony did they would be rotting in prison for eternity. But because Sony is so big and fucked over so many people, they got off with little more than a finger waggling.
Google is making the books searchable with one intent in mind, to know what you are searching for, so they can offer relevant ads and targeted marketing leads.
Same thing can be said about your search history. However google has a policy of "anonymizing" some of what it records after a certain period of time. They only do that because of the public pressure that has been applied. From the user's point of view it is a good thing to keep that pressure up, we may find that Google "discovers" that they can get enough value out of your personal information in even less time than they do now and adjusts their privacy protections accordingly.
Sorry, this discussion is for ADULTS ONLY... come back when you can put together an argument that doesn't involve spewing insults and incoherent bullshit
Hey dumb ass, get the fuck out of the kitchen if you can't stand the heat.
You are the zero IQ who started in with the insults, and now you want to act all high and mighty?
You hypocrite.
But what else should I expect from someone who thinks the world revolves around himself?
Whatever happened to the notion that others' feelings ought to matter to us as much as our own?
When did being a total asshat become a jailable offense?
I think anonymous was playing troll/straight-man there.
Who really knows the noun without knowing its origins?
It's not like it has really entered the common vernacular like asshat did.
Seriously, the vast majority of the time the convienence of not going to some crappy site and being bogged down by a corporate nightmare of a website, or having to wait for the weather on the TV, greatly makes up for whatever limited insight meteorologists can possibly add.
That's why they are usually pretty young things.
I think it was Mary Poppins who said, "A little T&A with your weather helps the advertising go down."
How many black people walk past that aren't loud? How the fuck should I know?
BingfuckingO. You are just so dumb you can't put two and two together unless you can see all four pieces first.
That's the kind of innumeracy that leads to racism and the overtly loud and proud confidence that its not racism.
Stereotypes are formed based on the things we notice, not the things we don't notice.
You're such a fucking dumb ass that you think the world revolves around you. That if you didn't see it, it didn't happen and doesn't matter.
Like you wrote, stereotypes are shortcuts and shortcuts aren't always the right path, else they wouldn't be a short cut, they would be the regular path. Racial stereotyping is precisely the kind of shortcut that sends you off into the boonies. You are just too fucking dumb to realize you got lost.
'Good Enough' is how technology has always been.
Yes. Even Voltaire famously said, "The Perfect is the Enemy of the Good."
The idiot that wrote the article at Anandtech is not "somewhat confused", he is flat out wrong on the fundamental facts of what he based his conclusions on.
Yeah, I was going for sarcasm with that.
(6 or 7 years ago they used to be a solid tech-y folks, what happened?)
Maybe your own level of experience has matured over the intervening years because Anandtech hasn't really changed. Apart from the rare professional guest writer, Anandtech and the rest of their ilk have always been amateur hour productions because they've been staffed by hobbyists and amateurs. Since most of their readership is even less experienced hobbyists they are frequently looked upon as sources of knowledge and wisdom when they are really little more than the blind leading the blind.
I think you are confused. OTA channels are encrypted by some cableco's (RCN) for example despite the FCC mandates.
RCN is in my town. They do not encrypt OTA channels.
You are the perfect example of a racist - totally innumerate.
How many black people walk past and aren't loud?
Which is why I think the best way would be to go after the product being peddled rather than the company making the call.
All that will happen is that a lot of fly-by-night distributors get set up and then torn down once johnny law starts to move in. These scammers aren't selling name-brand stuff anyway, just their own house-branded versions of stuff manufactured under generic contract. So you'll catch these dummy corps but there won't be anything but an empty shell by the time they are caught, meanwhile the people behind it have opened up a new dummy corp and are doing the exact same thing again.
What will happen is that the bank which issued your credit car will eat the charge and you will never hear anything more of it. In fact, even if they do track down the perps, they won't share the information with you. They tend to be really tight-lipped about anything like that.
Dude, you're a moron. You are the one claiming you know all of the teenagers on the planet. ZK is saying some of the teenagers (many?) say this. You are claiming that NONE of them do. Only one of you is claiming to know all of the teenagers on the planet.
Do you really believe that Zero_Kelvin knows "millions of teenagers?" For all practical purposes he is claiming the exact same thing I am, except I'm applying common sense and he's just making shit up to support his own little pet peeve.
You don't need special boxes or encryption to prevent your neighbors from knowing what you are watching, thats what a switch is for.
I should have elaborated - many SDV systems have the switch at the neighborhood level, not the house level. Similar to the way cable modem bandwidth is shared with your neighbors.
You know about all of the teenagers on the planet??? Who would have thought that Santa Clause posts on Slashdot under the SlashID Jah-Wren Ryel !!!
You know about all of the teenagers on the planet??? Who would have thought that Santa Clause posts on Slashdot under the SlashID Zero_Kelvin !!!
I say millions of teenagers say "minute" when they mean a long time, but a minute is still 60 seconds.
Yeah, I don't think so. Your definition of "a long time" is something that YOU have pretty much made up on the spot and in the process ruined any claim to being an authority on english word definitions. Very few teenagers, or anyone else, mean "a long time" when they say "minute" - its pretty rare for anyone to mean anything even approaching an hour when they say "minute." And unless you are a fruit-fly or suffer from ADD, an hour hardly ever qualifies as "a long time."
But, since a "short space of time" is a merriam-webster endorsed standard meaning of the word "minute," you kinda had to make up some BS in order to support your rather unsupportable point. It's ironic that you misused the key word in your own rant on people misusing words. I think its the best case of grammar-nazi karma I've seen to date.
Its almost certain that the encryption is done prior to multiplexing, done inside the transport stream at the packet level even.
That's way it works now with full-blown cablecard encryption.
Plus, space requirements aren't that prohibitive, maximum bandwidth of a single qam channel is 38mbps - that's 2 to 4 HDTV channels depending on how much the cableco over-compresses their channels.
The guy is somewhat confused.
The FCC mandates that if a cableco carries a channel that is broadcast over the air (OTA), then they can not encrypt their copy of it.
The waiver is for the deployment of a couple of models of ultra-simple cable boxes (which, by the way, can't tune the full-blown cablecard encrypted channels) that just happen to have this DES privacy mode. Other cablecos, like comcast have been deploying similar boxes that do not have "privacy mode." But as far as I can tell, the waiver does not permit anyone to start encrypting the copies of OTA channels.
Seems to me that the result may be the reverse of what he predicts - that non-premium channels which are currently encrypted with the full-blown cablecard encryption like the digital versions of CNN, MTV, etc may get reduced to "privacy mode" encryption so that they can be more easily sold to more customers without as big a capital investment.
Then, there is also the whole thing about exactly what privacy mode is for. Are these boxes simply just cable boxes or are they boxes that support switched video - where you only have one or two video streams coming into your home at any one time and the box is responsible for requesting what channel the head-end should send you. In that case, the "privacy" mode may be a way to keep your neighbors from seeing what you are watching - as they can do now with most on-demand shows which are transmitted totally in the clear via special semi-hidden channels that anyone can tune to if they know the channel number in use.
You're missing that I wouldn't say it because I can see how it could be construed as racist. When people do say it, though, they mean it as a compliment. Most people don't try to keep compliments to themselves.
Most racism isn't about purposefully being a jackass. Its about applying stereotypes without regard for the individual.
you cannot blame the average Joe for categorizing you according to the minority you represent.
Since when does anyone "represent" a minority?
You sign up to be a representative, then sure, you get what you deserve. You wave that flag proudly and you deserve all the pros and cons of doing so.
But, if you are born that way or otherwise come to it through no action of your own, then its bullshit to accept people pigeon-holing you.
if you accept that the point of the law is to narrow as much as possible the definition of any particular word.
Lol. Seems like the point of the law is add just enough ambiguity to the meaning of words to keep lawyers employed.
So, within that confluence of factors, the searches were probably quite legally acceptable.
Indeed, the term "reasonable," as it has been permuted by the lawyers through the centuries, no longer bears much resemblance to how a reasonable man would use it.
The briefing a friend of mine receives every year to maintain his (US) security clearance goes out of its way to classify copyright violations as security risks. It is mostly about software piracy issues but music and movies are touched on too. Its bad enough that copyright violations are part of the security briefing (no other kinds of crimes that are not actual risks to security are in there) but the truly ridiculous part of it is that, in the presentation, it is given equal weight to actual security problems like accidental disclosure, contact with foreign agents, etc. If you were to simply take the briefing at face value making a copy of an mp3 to bring to the secure area is just as bad as fucking Mata Hari.
Use different browsers for different purposes.
Or, just use different profiles for different purposes.
If you start firefox with these command-line options:
-no-remote -ProfileManager
you get a pop-up asking you which profile to use. You can have completely seperate profiles with different themes, different plugins, different bookmarks, different histories, different caches, etc -- they do not share information across profiles. You can even set a default profile so that if you don't use the profile manager, that specific profile is the one that gets loaded.
I have a default for general browsing with almost all cookies and javascript blocked, one just for google mail that lets google set cookies and use javascript, and another one called "blank man" which is pretty open, but deletes everything on exit (cookies, history, etc) which I use one-shot at a time whenever I go to a website that wants personal information like amazon or my bank. One could easily have a 'pr0n' profile that they only run when they are in the mood and is otherwise never even seen.