You should look into MEGA: https://mega.nz/
I've found their Linux client to be very reliable and MEGA has end-to-end encryption so they can't read your files like Dropbox can.
Use a service with end-to-end encryption like MEGA. Most services like Dropbox, OneDrive, and Google Drive can read your files.
It would be even better to encrypt locally before uploading to a cloud service but that can be a pain on devices like phones and tablets.
Your argument is quite flawed. Firstly, you're implying that just because the regulation wasn't needed before means it wont be needed now or in the future. And if it wasn't needed because everyone is already playing nice then there should be no harm in having it, since the only way it would effect anything is if they decided not to play nice. Secondly you're trying to deflect to a different issue with a "two wrongs make a right" sentiment. Just because Facebook, Google and Twitter are bad for the health for internet doesn't mean it's OK for Comcast, Verizon and AT&T to screw over the internet even further.
Not at all. There are plenty of legitimate uses for function hooking outside of malware. I know for a fact that the Windows driver for my audio card does it. And there are tons of examples of hooking code that predate his examples. Including Microsoft's own Detours: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/project/detours/
Secured was never ment to mean 'Encryypted', it was ment 'encrypted and you're talking to who you think you are'
How is your browser or the CA supposed to know what website you think you're on? Are you saying that they're supposed to read your mind? Secured, in the context of HTTPS, has always meant "encrypted and you're talking to the server associated with the domain/URL you accessed." And yes, this discussion has been had already... and if you didn't notice, no one is agreeing with you.
You keep using capital letters in a domain name. You know that's now how that works right? All domains are always lowercase, and even if you type them in manually your browser will switch it to lowercase.
Actually I can't get a certificate for that domain even from Let's Encrypt. You know why? Because I don't own that domain. But if I did own it, I could buy one for $10/yr from my domain registrar. And... "secure"... You keep using that word. I don't think that word means what you think it means.
You're making assumptions about what "secure" means in this context. It means the communications are secure from 3rd parties. That doesn't mean the website you're communicating with isn't evil. It never has.
Here, I have a lockbox for you. It's secure, don't worry.... It's full of spiders, but it's secure.
I'm sorry you misunderstood what certificates do but they NEVER worked like that. Anyone can buy any domain they want (so long as it's available) and buy a certificate for it. You have always been able to do that. And Let's Encrypt doesn't allow anything more then any normal certificate issuer except.
Well to be fair, they're actually trying to charge him with "criminal secondary copyright infringement" which is not a real thing. Secondary infringement is a civil issue and has never been defined as criminal. https://torrentfreak.com/presi...
Well of course it's felony, it always is when copyright infringement is criminal and not civil. But you're missing the most crucial part: they are NOT charging him with "copyright infringement" they're charging him with "secondary copyright infringement". Which is not a crime. It can be a civil issue, but there is no such thing as criminal secondary copyright infringement. And all the other charges hinge on that first charge.
https://torrentfreak.com/presi...
He's not being charged with theft. He's being charged with "secondary copyright infringement"... which isn't a crime in the US or in New Zealand. On top of that, because he is legally fighting his extradition, they are saying he's a fugitive and that they can seize all of his assets (so he will have no way to defend himself if he does get extradited).
It doesn't. Who said it did? The question was why the social norm doesn't match nature. And my answer is because we've modified the "nature" of death, we need to modify the "nature" of birth so that we don't run into overpopulation issues. We're living longer and surviving things we wouldn't naturally survive. We probably shouldn't be procreating at the speed "nature intended" because we're not dying at the speed "nature intended."
There's nothing moral about the issue at all. People need to stop having so many damn babies, in their teens or otherwise.
Actually they do still update the game, with new features and content even. They release a new update every month. It's funny because it used to be when new features where requested by players they would often give the excuse "PS2 limitations." One of those limitations was inventory space, which apparently the PS2 didn't have enough memory for more. Now they've added quite a bit more inventory space, which has been sorely needed. Also the last expansion (Seekers of Adoulin) was never released for PS2 because it couldn't handle it.
Actually that decision was made by SquareEnix, not Sony. They greatly reduced the amount of resources they're investing in FFXI (since it's a 14 year old MMO) so they dropped support for the PS2 and Xbox 360 versions.
Sony's original comment was obviously talking about Playstation PC cross-platform play. Nothing in their comment indicated they were willing to work with other consoles. Obviously it would be good if they would all play nice together but it's silly to act like Sony had a "change of heart."
This was my point exactly. I wasn't commenting on the legality of the action, only that I doubt there were any "hacking" skills required to do what they did.
Slashdot Mirror
You should look into MEGA: https://mega.nz/ I've found their Linux client to be very reliable and MEGA has end-to-end encryption so they can't read your files like Dropbox can.
Use a service with end-to-end encryption like MEGA. Most services like Dropbox, OneDrive, and Google Drive can read your files. It would be even better to encrypt locally before uploading to a cloud service but that can be a pain on devices like phones and tablets.
"Buy up all ISPs in his area..." Soooo... just Comcast then?
Your argument is quite flawed. Firstly, you're implying that just because the regulation wasn't needed before means it wont be needed now or in the future. And if it wasn't needed because everyone is already playing nice then there should be no harm in having it, since the only way it would effect anything is if they decided not to play nice. Secondly you're trying to deflect to a different issue with a "two wrongs make a right" sentiment. Just because Facebook, Google and Twitter are bad for the health for internet doesn't mean it's OK for Comcast, Verizon and AT&T to screw over the internet even further.
You mean like the HTTP "Expires" header?
Not at all. There are plenty of legitimate uses for function hooking outside of malware. I know for a fact that the Windows driver for my audio card does it. And there are tons of examples of hooking code that predate his examples. Including Microsoft's own Detours: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/project/detours/
Secured was never ment to mean 'Encryypted', it was ment 'encrypted and you're talking to who you think you are'
How is your browser or the CA supposed to know what website you think you're on? Are you saying that they're supposed to read your mind? Secured, in the context of HTTPS, has always meant "encrypted and you're talking to the server associated with the domain/URL you accessed." And yes, this discussion has been had already... and if you didn't notice, no one is agreeing with you.
it was assumed
There's your problem.
You keep using capital letters in a domain name. You know that's now how that works right? All domains are always lowercase, and even if you type them in manually your browser will switch it to lowercase.
Actually I can't get a certificate for that domain even from Let's Encrypt. You know why? Because I don't own that domain. But if I did own it, I could buy one for $10/yr from my domain registrar. And... "secure"... You keep using that word. I don't think that word means what you think it means.
You're making assumptions about what "secure" means in this context. It means the communications are secure from 3rd parties. That doesn't mean the website you're communicating with isn't evil. It never has.
*except it's free. (I swear I had that in there... I blame Slashdot eating my words)
Here, I have a lockbox for you. It's secure, don't worry.... It's full of spiders, but it's secure. I'm sorry you misunderstood what certificates do but they NEVER worked like that. Anyone can buy any domain they want (so long as it's available) and buy a certificate for it. You have always been able to do that. And Let's Encrypt doesn't allow anything more then any normal certificate issuer except.
Not that this is an OS anyone uses but... https://www.redox-os.org/
Well to be fair, they're actually trying to charge him with "criminal secondary copyright infringement" which is not a real thing. Secondary infringement is a civil issue and has never been defined as criminal. https://torrentfreak.com/presi...
Well of course it's felony, it always is when copyright infringement is criminal and not civil. But you're missing the most crucial part: they are NOT charging him with "copyright infringement" they're charging him with "secondary copyright infringement". Which is not a crime. It can be a civil issue, but there is no such thing as criminal secondary copyright infringement. And all the other charges hinge on that first charge. https://torrentfreak.com/presi...
He's not being charged with theft. He's being charged with "secondary copyright infringement" ... which isn't a crime in the US or in New Zealand. On top of that, because he is legally fighting his extradition, they are saying he's a fugitive and that they can seize all of his assets (so he will have no way to defend himself if he does get extradited).
Look around you, I guess birth verus death rate is 1:1 likley the burth rate is lower ... get out from under your rock.
Really? http://www.worldometers.info/w... http://www.census.gov/popclock...
It doesn't. Who said it did? The question was why the social norm doesn't match nature. And my answer is because we've modified the "nature" of death, we need to modify the "nature" of birth so that we don't run into overpopulation issues. We're living longer and surviving things we wouldn't naturally survive. We probably shouldn't be procreating at the speed "nature intended" because we're not dying at the speed "nature intended." There's nothing moral about the issue at all. People need to stop having so many damn babies, in their teens or otherwise.
Because nature "expected" us to die faster then modern medicine has allowed.
It's been confirmed to be real: https://yro.slashdot.org/story...
Actually they do still update the game, with new features and content even. They release a new update every month. It's funny because it used to be when new features where requested by players they would often give the excuse "PS2 limitations." One of those limitations was inventory space, which apparently the PS2 didn't have enough memory for more. Now they've added quite a bit more inventory space, which has been sorely needed. Also the last expansion (Seekers of Adoulin) was never released for PS2 because it couldn't handle it.
Actually that decision was made by SquareEnix, not Sony. They greatly reduced the amount of resources they're investing in FFXI (since it's a 14 year old MMO) so they dropped support for the PS2 and Xbox 360 versions.
Sony's original comment was obviously talking about Playstation PC cross-platform play. Nothing in their comment indicated they were willing to work with other consoles. Obviously it would be good if they would all play nice together but it's silly to act like Sony had a "change of heart."
This was my point exactly. I wasn't commenting on the legality of the action, only that I doubt there were any "hacking" skills required to do what they did.