Right. But isn't this was robots.txt is for? Perhaps we need to update the RFC to indicate that the page(s) are okay for search results, but not okay for aggregators? Seems like a simple fix that doesn't involve lawyers.
Actually there is no need for that, google allows multiple ways to block or limit the search results these news organizations can display already. Google has their different crawlers listed on their support pages and also provides examples of how to block specific crawlers from indexing their sites or limit what is displayed. In addition they also support blocking via meta tags and even http headers. So if the news organizations wanted to show up in search results but not in google news they could easily set the following on the web server:
X-Robots-Tag: Googlebot-News: noindex
And just like that the news stories would not be indexed at all, or if they did not want snippets but just a normal link they could replace noindex with nosnippet and they would have blocked news snippets being shown site wide. With the solution to their woes being so simple I am not sure why they have not done it yet.
But are other things the equivalent of yelling "fire" in a crowded movie theatre?
The "shouting fire in a crowded theater" is a bullshit statement from a bullshit case because of a bullshit law.
Holmes used his statement to justify the imprisonment of draft dissenters during world war one in clear contradiction of the first amendment which even he admitted, eventually. I will say it again, this is bad law, and anyone who wants to have a serious discussion about free speak should not utter it in polite company.
That being said, yeah the quality of advertising and accuracy of advertisers statements is something to look at. It does seem like many sites allow these snake oil salesmen to set up shop on their doorstep through frames or whatever. And they want to keep their reputation while blaming the advertisers without admitting responsibility for letting them in. Shame on them, they own the site, police the content.
There is a more technical breakdown of the malware from the folks at Talos that discovered it. According to them ClamAV has a signature to detect the altered installers. Also it looks like Malwarebytes has the signature too so if that is what you are using get the updated signature files and run a scan.
Otherwise look for outbound traffic attempting to go to 216.126.225.148, that is the hardcoded C2 server the malware uses.
I don't see how a "debug mode" or an accident can get passwords located in the code like that, no matter how horri-bad a dev is.
Oh I can see it, some horri-bad dev write a "Select * from users" because that is the only SQL he knows and then finds a bunch of extra fields in his response. And rather than asking someone or googling about selecting fields he then marks all the rest of the fields as hidden. Out of site, out of mind. Only master haxxor ninjas know how to right click a page and select view source.
They have NO ONE to blame but themselves, it is OPEN SOURCE which means they can actually review the code and fix issue.
To be fair most organizations do not have the expertise or desire to review and fix the source code for products they are using, open source or not.
That being said I am betting dollars to pesos that they were attacked with the March Vulnerability and not taken down by the zero day from a week ago. It seems like unless a vulnerability has a fancy web page and gets featured on CNN, management could not give a flying fuck. Wait till the next patch cycle becomes wait until the next quarter becomes eh we'll get to it. And that shit has got to stop.
Instead when you use a word like "guys", you get blocked. I'm just stupified by the bullying behavior of Mozilla's employees: https://mzl.la/2gu5521
Lol, that thread is freaking great. A contributor asked about the status on a two year old feature request and makes the mistake of using "guys" when referring to a collective group and get three responses about his use of "gendered language" and his responses marked as abusive and off-topic. And the icing on the cake is that guys is considered non-gendered by both Mirriam-Webster and Oxforddictionaries. As for the feature request itself, still in an unknown status. Honestly if that is how they react to every perceived slight, I can see why Firefox is struggling.
Didn't we just have an article on here about an OTA (or network) update disabling TVs? I really wouldn't want that happening to cars...
Twoarticles actually. At least in the smart lock case there was still the manual option of a normal key, the tv users were screwed. Hopefully these car manufacturers are taking notes and designing their system that if the update fails the car still retains it's "car" functionality, like starting and driving. You're point about a hacker sending code to break a vehicle is a valid one, but imagine being some dude working a 9-5 who can't get into work for a couple weeks because the manufacturer bricked his car with a real update. That has it's own dimension of suck.
Since this person sits on the steering committee, his "barefoot-and-pregnant" ideals would bias against female contributors.
You did not even read the supposed MRA article that he tweeted did you? Here skim through it. There is nothing in there about women or gender roles. The author Geoffrey Miller, an associate professor of psychology at the University of New Mexico, was making a case that speech codes can be unfairly discriminatory against people with mental health issues that make them less able to interact with people without those mental issues and are more likely to violate speech codes because of of their mental health problems. he concludes his article saying he will outline a legal strategy for removing speech codes that discriminate against those populations with mental health issues by way of ADA challenges.
There was nothing in there about keeping women barefoot and pregnant, no calls to ban abortion so not sure how everyone got to the point this was an MRA article or how you got that the person who linked this article is a bigot, racist, sexist who wants to keep women "barefoot-and-pregnant". But you had better stop, because every single time you start putting this crap out there that someone is an "*ist" because of an article they wrote or linked and then other people fact check the claim and find nothing of the sort, you lose credibility.
Now I will say this, I am not sure on the quality of the article because I am not a psychologist, but he did use a lot of Wikipedia citations. I would have liked to see maybe more primary or secondary sources and who knows, maybe he has them on reserve for his next article. But I am not sure a successful ADA complaint can be made on the backs of Wikipedia.
He wasn't a Nazi and his freedom of speech was not curtailed and he was not prosecuted. Merkel said the prosecution could move forward, but it never did.
Yeah, if I saw someone escape prosecution by the skin of his teeth I am sure going to be encouraged to speak up like him. Chilling effects dude, they happen.
Go back and read the article more carefully.
I could but I have taken notice of what happened already. Germany has a lese-majeste law on the books. This guy (rightly or wrongly) criticized Recepe Erdrogen and his stalking of hobbits up Mt. Doom personal characteristics,and he tried to use that law to silence a critic. And Merkel was ok with that. Do you think that encouraged "loud political discourse"?
You can still be dragged into court for libel or slander.
the U.S. has a much stricter definition of libel and slander than European countries, so much so that we passed the SPEECH act. Germany on the other hand moved to prosecute a comedian for criticizing Erdrogen, who recently wanted to make the teaching of evolution illegal.
You think flying a Nazi flag or telling people that you're going to put them in ovens or promoting the Klan in a majority black community might fit that definition? Of course it does. Free speech does not give you the right to say whatever kind of shit you want without consequences. It didn't in 1789 and it doesn't now.
Quit trying to drag neo-nazis into this shit. You asserted that " if you go to Germany right now, you will hear much greater diversity in political speech and ideology than you will in the US.". And I have already shown that is not the case. I, here in the US, can criticize any leader i want and not fear prosecution. Trump is a narcissist, Edrogan needs to lay off them hobbits, Merkel is a coward and Theresa May is a way worse leader than Lord Buckethead. Can anyone in Germany say the same?
That's not even close to true. Nazis don't have freedom of speech in Germany, haven't had it for over half a century, but you still hear loud political discourse from all over the ideological spectrum. Nobody was "next".
Germany and free speech, Germany and free speech, where have I heard this trope before? Oh right, last year where a comedian was being charged for the crime of "insulting a foreign head of state". Now to be fair they did eventually drop the charges and made moves to drop that particular crime, though the current status of that effort I do not know. Who knows, maybe the made the motion of repealing it but it "Died in committee" only for the law to be dusted off again when it is convenient.
But the question remains, why was that particular thing codified into law? What prompted the German leaders to make it illegal to criticize foreign heads of state? Was there some pressing crisis of low moral foreign dignitaries in need of a safe space in Germany? I am not sure, but the after effects remain. This is yet another example of the chilling effects that free speech restrictions can have upon "loud political discourse". While you may say there is no slippery slope, I would say that this is but one example of one. Nazi's may not have freedom of speech in Germany, but neither do political comedians.
P.S. For those Slashdotters living in Germany, I am not aware of the current status of your Lese-Majeste laws but do be aware that U.S. President Trump is also a big fan of expanding Libel laws, so unless you know for certain that the law mentioned above was repealed you may want to keep quite about him. Because he will certainly use them against you if he can.
No kidding, I haven't checked out the site but damn the summary is comedy gold:
admonish the "Jew media;" liberally employ various racial epithets; and, in a less offensive post, provided an update on which characters are available on Pokemon Go.
I am just imagining some guy in a KKK outfit screaming about the liberal media while chasing down a squirtle in the Bronx. Maybe that is how they plan their rallys, by pokestops?
Alternatively, if protesters hadn't protested against the KKK and Nazis, the KKK and Nazis would have been emboldened and run bigger marches next time round.
The Charlottesville rally was already set up to be the biggest white supremacist gathering in recent history, described by one of the organizers as "the biggest rally event we've had this millennium", pulling in members from the KKK, the proud boys, neo-Confederates, neo-nazis, and just about every other white supremacy group in the nation.
Still with all this coordination and bluster the event planner requested a permit for at most 400 people. Now that may seem like a lot but these people were coming from all over the country, hell that murderer that drove into the crowd was from Ohio. The white supremacy movement, with months of coordination and planning, could only gather less than 400 people for one of their hate rallys. There are high school graduating classes with more people than that. With the events in Charlottesville and the media's endless reporting before and after it may seem like these groups are very large and a profound influence on society, but the truth is that these people are a very very small minority of the population and most people do not believe like they do. The KKK and Nazi's may become as emboldened as they want, I do not see them ever fielding marches that exceed the size of a high school football stadium. Because no one wants to join them.
It is an interesting dilemma, but it is 'solving' the problem with market forces instead of laws, which is an interesting phenomena.
Be careful with how you praise 'market forces'. It could very well lead to organizations buying out domains that are critical of them. Before domains were mainly considered a type of property, they belonged to the owner as long as they kept up on their registration fees and it was up to the owner if he wanted to keep it or not.
But now that GoDaddy and Google have decided to refuse registration based on the content how far is it till they decide to sell domain names to the highest bidder? Or cancel registration if they get a better offer? ripoffreport.com could easily be bought out by one of the companies it has named, and the EFF is already operating in the red last year, how well do you think they would fair in a bidding war for their own domain against any organization that would love to shut them down? Do not cheer for 'market forces' at work in what is one of the most important subsystems in the internet, be wary because it could happen to you next.
This particular thing has not. Nor even really this class of things.
Were this thing to have happened two years ago there would have been some precedent covering this. Before October 2016 ICANN operated the DNS system at the behest of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration of the US Department of Commerce. I am not a lawyer but it would have been easy to argue this arrangement would have made ICANN a state actor, and restricted from engaging in content based limitation of speech just like the government itself.
But now that ICANN has moved from being managed by the Department of Commerce to a "Multi-Stakeholder Community" the legality of this move is much more uncertain. While private institutions are free to enforce their own policies and restrictions can they take over a government built and designed system and do the same? Especially if the government was instrumental in supporting and developing the system in the first place and leading to it's success. the current DNS system we have in place is roughly equivalent to the Interstate Highway System in that both form a major backbone of their respective systems. I imagine many people would complain if the US government ceded control of the highway system to private enterprises, especially if that private enterprise started blocking highway access to people they deemed undesirable. Yet that is what is going on here, and I am not sure what the legal ramifications are for it.
Incidentally one of the main criticisms of moving ICANN out from under the DOC was the concern that other nations without as robust protections of free speech as the United States would try to take down domains that fall afoul of their laws or politics. It seems that their fears from those days may have been justified.
My best guess is that some middle manager signed off on it, but then had seconds thoughts and wanted to "monetize" it (read: sell it) with delusions of becoming the next rapid 7 or something. The authors protested because they wanted to release Meatpistol to the community and do their presentation. Butthurt manager fired them in retaliation, probably not knowing what sort of shit show he was starting.
Purple people would tend to be a target for the Purple People Eater, making them quite the liability... just sayin'
Although the Purple People Eater does have the ability to fly, his monocular vision reduces his depth perception making him a somewhat less dangerous foe. Purple People should drop a point or two into agility to make evasion easier.
Articles 2-4: Don't be confused by the word blizzard. Was the Trojan built an "apparatus which can be used to intercept...electronic communication"? Then "yes".
And that is where a lot of the information security professionals are concerned. There are several programs and methods used in information security research and penetration testing that would fall under that category, one example being the Meterpreter shell in the Metasploit framework. If this case results in a conviction under those charges you can bet many companies and researchers would hesitate to publish their tools for fear of being the next target on an ambitious DA's hit list. Criminalizing tools based on their functionality rather than the users actions with them could have a very chilling effect on information security research.
According to this study about 0.6% of the adult population identifies as transgender. If the US is hurting for manpower that much I hope they go after the 1%ers kids before trying to draw from the transgender community. Maybe then they will think twice about supporting chicken hawks who are too eager to go to war but not willing to fight it.
May be a day late and a dollar short on this response but that is not a good analogy. Client side validation is not swapping stickers, it is handing the customer the label maker and letting them choose their own price. Sure it has a suggested price as the default, but without checking the accuracy on the server side you are letting the customer pick which ever price they want and you accept it because that is how your system is set up. It is like the credit card company that did not verify their own contract when it was sent back by a customer. If your system is set up to auto accept what the customer said you are going to have a bad time.
Slashdot Mirror
Right. But isn't this was robots.txt is for? Perhaps we need to update the RFC to indicate that the page(s) are okay for search results, but not okay for aggregators? Seems like a simple fix that doesn't involve lawyers.
Actually there is no need for that, google allows multiple ways to block or limit the search results these news organizations can display already. Google has their different crawlers listed on their support pages and also provides examples of how to block specific crawlers from indexing their sites or limit what is displayed. In addition they also support blocking via meta tags and even http headers. So if the news organizations wanted to show up in search results but not in google news they could easily set the following on the web server:
And just like that the news stories would not be indexed at all, or if they did not want snippets but just a normal link they could replace noindex with nosnippet and they would have blocked news snippets being shown site wide. With the solution to their woes being so simple I am not sure why they have not done it yet.
But are other things the equivalent of yelling "fire" in a crowded movie theatre?
The "shouting fire in a crowded theater" is a bullshit statement from a bullshit case because of a bullshit law.
Holmes used his statement to justify the imprisonment of draft dissenters during world war one in clear contradiction of the first amendment which even he admitted, eventually. I will say it again, this is bad law, and anyone who wants to have a serious discussion about free speak should not utter it in polite company.
That being said, yeah the quality of advertising and accuracy of advertisers statements is something to look at. It does seem like many sites allow these snake oil salesmen to set up shop on their doorstep through frames or whatever. And they want to keep their reputation while blaming the advertisers without admitting responsibility for letting them in. Shame on them, they own the site, police the content.
There is a more technical breakdown of the malware from the folks at Talos that discovered it. According to them ClamAV has a signature to detect the altered installers. Also it looks like Malwarebytes has the signature too so if that is what you are using get the updated signature files and run a scan.
Otherwise look for outbound traffic attempting to go to 216.126.225.148, that is the hardcoded C2 server the malware uses.
Buffy and the Scooby gang, giving back to the community!
I don't see how a "debug mode" or an accident can get passwords located in the code like that, no matter how horri-bad a dev is.
Oh I can see it, some horri-bad dev write a "Select * from users" because that is the only SQL he knows and then finds a bunch of extra fields in his response. And rather than asking someone or googling about selecting fields he then marks all the rest of the fields as hidden. Out of site, out of mind. Only master haxxor ninjas know how to right click a page and select view source.
They have NO ONE to blame but themselves, it is OPEN SOURCE which means they can actually review the code and fix issue.
To be fair most organizations do not have the expertise or desire to review and fix the source code for products they are using, open source or not.
That being said I am betting dollars to pesos that they were attacked with the March Vulnerability and not taken down by the zero day from a week ago. It seems like unless a vulnerability has a fancy web page and gets featured on CNN, management could not give a flying fuck. Wait till the next patch cycle becomes wait until the next quarter becomes eh we'll get to it. And that shit has got to stop.
Instead when you use a word like "guys", you get blocked. I'm just stupified by the bullying behavior of Mozilla's employees: https://mzl.la/2gu5521
Lol, that thread is freaking great. A contributor asked about the status on a two year old feature request and makes the mistake of using "guys" when referring to a collective group and get three responses about his use of "gendered language" and his responses marked as abusive and off-topic. And the icing on the cake is that guys is considered non-gendered by both Mirriam-Webster and Oxforddictionaries. As for the feature request itself, still in an unknown status. Honestly if that is how they react to every perceived slight, I can see why Firefox is struggling.
Didn't we just have an article on here about an OTA (or network) update disabling TVs? I really wouldn't want that happening to cars...
Two articles actually. At least in the smart lock case there was still the manual option of a normal key, the tv users were screwed. Hopefully these car manufacturers are taking notes and designing their system that if the update fails the car still retains it's "car" functionality, like starting and driving. You're point about a hacker sending code to break a vehicle is a valid one, but imagine being some dude working a 9-5 who can't get into work for a couple weeks because the manufacturer bricked his car with a real update. That has it's own dimension of suck.
We should consider replacing much of the C code in existence with JavaScript to improve security and reliability.
I was wondering what it would be like to have an aneurysm, now I know. Thanks buddy!>/p>
Since this person sits on the steering committee, his "barefoot-and-pregnant" ideals would bias against female contributors.
You did not even read the supposed MRA article that he tweeted did you? Here skim through it. There is nothing in there about women or gender roles. The author Geoffrey Miller, an associate professor of psychology at the University of New Mexico, was making a case that speech codes can be unfairly discriminatory against people with mental health issues that make them less able to interact with people without those mental issues and are more likely to violate speech codes because of of their mental health problems. he concludes his article saying he will outline a legal strategy for removing speech codes that discriminate against those populations with mental health issues by way of ADA challenges.
There was nothing in there about keeping women barefoot and pregnant, no calls to ban abortion so not sure how everyone got to the point this was an MRA article or how you got that the person who linked this article is a bigot, racist, sexist who wants to keep women "barefoot-and-pregnant". But you had better stop, because every single time you start putting this crap out there that someone is an "*ist" because of an article they wrote or linked and then other people fact check the claim and find nothing of the sort, you lose credibility.
Now I will say this, I am not sure on the quality of the article because I am not a psychologist, but he did use a lot of Wikipedia citations. I would have liked to see maybe more primary or secondary sources and who knows, maybe he has them on reserve for his next article. But I am not sure a successful ADA complaint can be made on the backs of Wikipedia.
We once had some cosmetology students visit our Astronomy lab on an open day. I guess they didn't read Cosmology and Stellar Modelling correctly.
"We're hear to make that heavenly body, heavenly!"
He wasn't a Nazi and his freedom of speech was not curtailed and he was not prosecuted. Merkel said the prosecution could move forward, but it never did.
Yeah, if I saw someone escape prosecution by the skin of his teeth I am sure going to be encouraged to speak up like him. Chilling effects dude, they happen.
Go back and read the article more carefully.
I could but I have taken notice of what happened already. Germany has a lese-majeste law on the books. This guy (rightly or wrongly) criticized Recepe Erdrogen and his stalking of hobbits up Mt. Doom personal characteristics,and he tried to use that law to silence a critic. And Merkel was ok with that. Do you think that encouraged "loud political discourse"?
You can still be dragged into court for libel or slander.
the U.S. has a much stricter definition of libel and slander than European countries, so much so that we passed the SPEECH act. Germany on the other hand moved to prosecute a comedian for criticizing Erdrogen, who recently wanted to make the teaching of evolution illegal.
You think flying a Nazi flag or telling people that you're going to put them in ovens or promoting the Klan in a majority black community might fit that definition? Of course it does. Free speech does not give you the right to say whatever kind of shit you want without consequences. It didn't in 1789 and it doesn't now.
Quit trying to drag neo-nazis into this shit. You asserted that " if you go to Germany right now, you will hear much greater diversity in political speech and ideology than you will in the US.". And I have already shown that is not the case. I, here in the US, can criticize any leader i want and not fear prosecution. Trump is a narcissist, Edrogan needs to lay off them hobbits, Merkel is a coward and Theresa May is a way worse leader than Lord Buckethead. Can anyone in Germany say the same?
"German Law" hasn't done anything to curtail free speech. Just don't be a Nazi.
Ahem. Though please please please, tell me how this comedian was a Nazi.
That's not even close to true. Nazis don't have freedom of speech in Germany, haven't had it for over half a century, but you still hear loud political discourse from all over the ideological spectrum. Nobody was "next".
Germany and free speech, Germany and free speech, where have I heard this trope before? Oh right, last year where a comedian was being charged for the crime of "insulting a foreign head of state". Now to be fair they did eventually drop the charges and made moves to drop that particular crime, though the current status of that effort I do not know. Who knows, maybe the made the motion of repealing it but it "Died in committee" only for the law to be dusted off again when it is convenient.
But the question remains, why was that particular thing codified into law? What prompted the German leaders to make it illegal to criticize foreign heads of state? Was there some pressing crisis of low moral foreign dignitaries in need of a safe space in Germany? I am not sure, but the after effects remain. This is yet another example of the chilling effects that free speech restrictions can have upon "loud political discourse". While you may say there is no slippery slope, I would say that this is but one example of one. Nazi's may not have freedom of speech in Germany, but neither do political comedians.
P.S. For those Slashdotters living in Germany, I am not aware of the current status of your Lese-Majeste laws but do be aware that U.S. President Trump is also a big fan of expanding Libel laws, so unless you know for certain that the law mentioned above was repealed you may want to keep quite about him. Because he will certainly use them against you if he can.
No kidding, I haven't checked out the site but damn the summary is comedy gold:
admonish the "Jew media;" liberally employ various racial epithets; and, in a less offensive post, provided an update on which characters are available on Pokemon Go.
I am just imagining some guy in a KKK outfit screaming about the liberal media while chasing down a squirtle in the Bronx. Maybe that is how they plan their rallys, by pokestops?
Alternatively, if protesters hadn't protested against the KKK and Nazis, the KKK and Nazis would have been emboldened and run bigger marches next time round.
The Charlottesville rally was already set up to be the biggest white supremacist gathering in recent history, described by one of the organizers as "the biggest rally event we've had this millennium", pulling in members from the KKK, the proud boys, neo-Confederates, neo-nazis, and just about every other white supremacy group in the nation.
Still with all this coordination and bluster the event planner requested a permit for at most 400 people. Now that may seem like a lot but these people were coming from all over the country, hell that murderer that drove into the crowd was from Ohio. The white supremacy movement, with months of coordination and planning, could only gather less than 400 people for one of their hate rallys. There are high school graduating classes with more people than that. With the events in Charlottesville and the media's endless reporting before and after it may seem like these groups are very large and a profound influence on society, but the truth is that these people are a very very small minority of the population and most people do not believe like they do. The KKK and Nazi's may become as emboldened as they want, I do not see them ever fielding marches that exceed the size of a high school football stadium. Because no one wants to join them.
It is an interesting dilemma, but it is 'solving' the problem with market forces instead of laws, which is an interesting phenomena.
Be careful with how you praise 'market forces'. It could very well lead to organizations buying out domains that are critical of them.
Before domains were mainly considered a type of property, they belonged to the owner as long as they kept up on their registration fees and it was up to the owner if he wanted to keep it or not.
But now that GoDaddy and Google have decided to refuse registration based on the content how far is it till they decide to sell domain names to the highest bidder? Or cancel registration if they get a better offer? ripoffreport.com could easily be bought out by one of the companies it has named, and the EFF is already operating in the red last year, how well do you think they would fair in a bidding war for their own domain against any organization that would love to shut them down? Do not cheer for 'market forces' at work in what is one of the most important subsystems in the internet, be wary because it could happen to you next.
This has been ruled on by the courts.
This particular thing has not. Nor even really this class of things.
Were this thing to have happened two years ago there would have been some precedent covering this. Before October 2016 ICANN operated the DNS system at the behest of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration of the US Department of Commerce. I am not a lawyer but it would have been easy to argue this arrangement would have made ICANN a state actor, and restricted from engaging in content based limitation of speech just like the government itself.
But now that ICANN has moved from being managed by the Department of Commerce to a "Multi-Stakeholder Community" the legality of this move is much more uncertain. While private institutions are free to enforce their own policies and restrictions can they take over a government built and designed system and do the same? Especially if the government was instrumental in supporting and developing the system in the first place and leading to it's success. the current DNS system we have in place is roughly equivalent to the Interstate Highway System in that both form a major backbone of their respective systems. I imagine many people would complain if the US government ceded control of the highway system to private enterprises, especially if that private enterprise started blocking highway access to people they deemed undesirable. Yet that is what is going on here, and I am not sure what the legal ramifications are for it.
Incidentally one of the main criticisms of moving ICANN out from under the DOC was the concern that other nations without as robust protections of free speech as the United States would try to take down domains that fall afoul of their laws or politics. It seems that their fears from those days may have been justified.
My best guess is that some middle manager signed off on it, but then had seconds thoughts and wanted to "monetize" it (read: sell it) with delusions of becoming the next rapid 7 or something. The authors protested because they wanted to release Meatpistol to the community and do their presentation. Butthurt manager fired them in retaliation, probably not knowing what sort of shit show he was starting.
While also looking to hire more security professionals. I think this little stunt may have an adverse effect on their recruitment efforts.
Purple people would tend to be a target for the Purple People Eater, making them quite the liability... just sayin'
Although the Purple People Eater does have the ability to fly, his monocular vision reduces his depth perception making him a somewhat less dangerous foe. Purple People should drop a point or two into agility to make evasion easier.
Articles 2-4: Don't be confused by the word blizzard. Was the Trojan built an "apparatus which can be used to intercept...electronic communication"? Then "yes".
And that is where a lot of the information security professionals are concerned. There are several programs and methods used in information security research and penetration testing that would fall under that category, one example being the Meterpreter shell in the Metasploit framework. If this case results in a conviction under those charges you can bet many companies and researchers would hesitate to publish their tools for fear of being the next target on an ambitious DA's hit list. Criminalizing tools based on their functionality rather than the users actions with them could have a very chilling effect on information security research.
For example, a "haul all Latino soldiers off to prison" order would not survive.
You say that, yet this case has not been ruled unconstitutional, and given the packing that has been done recently....
and if we have a draft will this last?
According to this study about 0.6% of the adult population identifies as transgender. If the US is hurting for manpower that much I hope they go after the 1%ers kids before trying to draw from the transgender community. Maybe then they will think twice about supporting chicken hawks who are too eager to go to war but not willing to fight it.
May be a day late and a dollar short on this response but that is not a good analogy. Client side validation is not swapping stickers, it is handing the customer the label maker and letting them choose their own price. Sure it has a suggested price as the default, but without checking the accuracy on the server side you are letting the customer pick which ever price they want and you accept it because that is how your system is set up. It is like the credit card company that did not verify their own contract when it was sent back by a customer. If your system is set up to auto accept what the customer said you are going to have a bad time.