Last time I checked, if you sign a contract, you have agreed to whatever it says
Then you didn't check very hard. There are all kinds of things you cannot legally agree to (or rather, that you cannot be legally forced to comply with after having agreed to them).
Therefore, if you're buying anything on credit that costs more than an order of magnitude less than that
Congratulations! You win the/. Mangled and Unintelligible Grammar Award for 2011! I know, it's early in the year, but I doubt even the worst New Delhi call center employee who speaks English as his 6th language could manage to construct a sentence that says so much, and means so little.
Therefore, if you're buying anything on credit that costs more than $2,000 -- $2,000 being an order of magnitude less than $20,000. Therefore, if you're buying anything on credit that costs more than $2,000 less than $20,000
less than $18,000 -- perhaps the most sensible meaning.
Oh bullshit. You're a fucking moron if you think that's what we're talking about. We're not talking about diplomats breaking into facilities of the governments they're communicating with. We're talking about their ability to return honest reports on the conversations they had with their counterparts back to the State Department, the White House, and Congress. That isn't illegal in any universe.
It just strikes me as strange that people who would be paranoid enough to encrypt their [probably completely banal and uninteresting] data, when told that their encryption might not actually prevent the world's top spies from accessing said data, would brush off the idea as simple paranoia. Make up your mind, folks: Are you paranoid or aren't you?
As another poster said, it's about threat reduction. I'm not trying to hide my (admittedly banal and uninteresting data) from the NSA. I'm trying to hide it from the guy who steals my laptop (which carries my bank and tax records, among other financial details) off an airport chair when I'm stupidly not looking. I'm trying to hide it from my angry ex-girlfriend and other petty foes who might (and in the past, have) caused mischief for me by getting into my computer. If the NSA comes after my stuff, I don't see much point in worrying about the data (I have no data worth more than life). If I were a Chinese dissident or similar I'd be more concerned about it. As is, basic drive encryption with dm-crypt and luks is good enough for my needs.
Not necessarily. I'm paranoid enough to encrypt my drives, but not enough to check it (though I did compile it from source, gentoo, but of course we know from Trusting Trust that compiling even carefully audited source code is no real protection).
I encrypt my drives so that my tax/bank records are safe if the laptop gets stolen, and so no one can tamper with personally important data. I'm trying to fend off identity theft (and angry ex-girlfriends), not the NSA. Trusting everything top to bottom isn't necessary for all purposes.
Except they have no way to know if there even is a hidden partition. What are they going to do? Just continue beating everyone indefinitely? How do they know the suspect hasn't hidden another hidden encrypted partition inside the first one? It's beatings all the way down. I can imagine the Marquis de Sade's erection rising out of the earth like a tumescent volcano at this news.
Many do, but gosh darn it, carriers want you to actually pay more to put a greater burden on their netwo
You must have Down's syndrome.
If I'm under the monthly limit for my plan what the fuck does it matter which device got the bits? 5GiB on my phone is indistinguishable from 5GiB on my laptop. It's the exact same network load.
After taking credit for the killing of bin Laden, Trump said he wasn't going to believe he was dead until he placed his fingers in the wounds in Osama's hands and side.
Did you just compare Osama bin Laden to Jesus? Because that's what the Lit Major in me just read.
I've only been running it for a few weeks since I got fed up with the Natty Beta changes, but I ran Slackware for years, so I'm no stranger to more hands-on adminning. Still getting used to portage though.
Eh, and Windows doesn't do the things I want. No out of the box support for python/perl scripting, poor git functionality, and a lack of a simple cli cron job system.
Things which are common knowledge to the site's readers should not have to be summarized. Just because you haven't read/. at all in the last five years doesn't mean anyone else was confused. Should they have to explain what the EU Commission is too? Or the Pentagon? After all, a story about military spending controlled by a five-sided polygon seems mighty strange.
If no one viewed it, no one would make it, would they?
Wrong. Or rather, pedophiles will pursue children regardless of whether they're filming it. Or do you really think that if no one bought/viewed the pictures the creep wouldn't have raped the kid? No one makes child porn who doesn't want to, and wasn't going to, molest children anyway.
If you don't like it, here's a crazy idea: TURN OFF YOUR CELLPHONE. Only turn it on when you need to make a call. When you are done with the call, turn it off.
Turning it off isn't enough. You have to pull the battery/SIM card. They stress this immensely in DOE security training briefings. Cell phones can be powered on remotely (the power off is a soft-off, more like suspend to RAM than a hard power off), and the mic and cameras can be switched on to transmit data without activating the screen so that the phone looks like it's still off.
Really? You have a laptop bag with slogans calling other people idiots while simultaneously abusing basic french grammar? Is this a hipster thing, where the irony is the point?
Yes, line employees have NEVER acted contrary to stated policies at any time in the history of forever. Glad we cleared that up.
Policies are just that--it doesn't really matter whether anyone follows them. If they're stated, they exist.
Sort of like how it violates the merchant agreements with credit card companies for the register monkeys to ask for your ID if the card is signed, but some still do. Just because they don't follow the policy doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Baa is the greatest miniature giant space porcupine in the universe! How dare you insult him so! This behaviour must not continue. Feel the burning stare of my porcupine and change your ways.
So it was the Republican party that pushed for the civil rights in the 60;s and lost the vote in the south.
Sure, ignore the second part of my post about it being ridiculous to ignore the past seventy years of change in the Republican party. Its much easier to snark at me if you don't read what I actually wrote.
However, since you do bring it up, no the Republican party didn't push for the Civil Rights Act of 1964. HOWEVER, they did vote in favor of it by a larger percentage margin than the Democrats. The vote on that act had nothing to do with the parties, it was a straight North/South vote. 90% of Northern congressmen voted yes, 90% of Southern congressmen voted no, which worked out to something like 80% of Republicans voting yes and 60% of Democrats voting yes (Because there were very few Southern Republicans, but the Southern Republicans voted against it as strongly as Southern Democrats).
It was only AFTER that vote that the racists all moved out of the Democratic party and into the Republican party BECAUSE Johnson and the other Democratic party leaders pushed for the bill. Read Thompson's Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72. It has some great accounts of how that shift was going down in the midst of Wallace's presidential bid in the primaries, and Nixon throwing the VP-nom to Agnew.
Yes, the Republican party today is home to a bunch of racist southerners. That was not the case until around 1970, when all those racist southerners (people like Strom Thurmond who was a Democrat until after the Civil Rights Act o 1964) left the Democratic party and took over the Republican party (the kind of people who cheered when Reagan said he didn't leave the Democratic party but that the Democratic party left him). Before 1970 (and especially before 1920, back when it really was still the party of Teddy and Lincoln) the Republicans were largely more socially progressive than the Democrats (though less economically progressive going back to the former Whigs who founded the party).
Slashdot Mirror
Last time I checked, if you sign a contract, you have agreed to whatever it says
Then you didn't check very hard. There are all kinds of things you cannot legally agree to (or rather, that you cannot be legally forced to comply with after having agreed to them).
Therefore, if you're buying anything on credit that costs more than an order of magnitude less than that
Congratulations! You win the /. Mangled and Unintelligible Grammar Award for 2011! I know, it's early in the year, but I doubt even the worst New Delhi call center employee who speaks English as his 6th language could manage to construct a sentence that says so much, and means so little.
Therefore, if you're buying anything on credit that costs more than $2,000 -- $2,000 being an order of magnitude less than $20,000.
Therefore, if you're buying anything on credit that costs more than $2,000 less than $20,000
less than $18,000 -- perhaps the most sensible meaning.
Oh bullshit. You're a fucking moron if you think that's what we're talking about. We're not talking about diplomats breaking into facilities of the governments they're communicating with. We're talking about their ability to return honest reports on the conversations they had with their counterparts back to the State Department, the White House, and Congress. That isn't illegal in any universe.
It just strikes me as strange that people who would be paranoid enough to encrypt their [probably completely banal and uninteresting] data, when told that their encryption might not actually prevent the world's top spies from accessing said data, would brush off the idea as simple paranoia. Make up your mind, folks: Are you paranoid or aren't you?
As another poster said, it's about threat reduction. I'm not trying to hide my (admittedly banal and uninteresting data) from the NSA. I'm trying to hide it from the guy who steals my laptop (which carries my bank and tax records, among other financial details) off an airport chair when I'm stupidly not looking. I'm trying to hide it from my angry ex-girlfriend and other petty foes who might (and in the past, have) caused mischief for me by getting into my computer. If the NSA comes after my stuff, I don't see much point in worrying about the data (I have no data worth more than life). If I were a Chinese dissident or similar I'd be more concerned about it. As is, basic drive encryption with dm-crypt and luks is good enough for my needs.
Not necessarily. I'm paranoid enough to encrypt my drives, but not enough to check it (though I did compile it from source, gentoo, but of course we know from Trusting Trust that compiling even carefully audited source code is no real protection).
I encrypt my drives so that my tax/bank records are safe if the laptop gets stolen, and so no one can tamper with personally important data. I'm trying to fend off identity theft (and angry ex-girlfriends), not the NSA. Trusting everything top to bottom isn't necessary for all purposes.
Just as soon as I finish building my personal bathysphere.
Except they have no way to know if there even is a hidden partition. What are they going to do? Just continue beating everyone indefinitely? How do they know the suspect hasn't hidden another hidden encrypted partition inside the first one? It's beatings all the way down. I can imagine the Marquis de Sade's erection rising out of the earth like a tumescent volcano at this news.
T-Mobile is happy with me using it.
Enjoy it while it lasts. *Cue Imperial March as AT&T logo rolls into view*
Many do, but gosh darn it, carriers want you to actually pay more to put a greater burden on their netwo
You must have Down's syndrome.
If I'm under the monthly limit for my plan what the fuck does it matter which device got the bits? 5GiB on my phone is indistinguishable from 5GiB on my laptop. It's the exact same network load.
As a "Lit Major" you'll make a great Java programmer.
I prefer perl personally.
Lexington (Is that the Confederate Capital
Only if they conquered Massachusetts.
After taking credit for the killing of bin Laden, Trump said he wasn't going to believe he was dead until he placed his fingers in the wounds in Osama's hands and side.
Did you just compare Osama bin Laden to Jesus? Because that's what the Lit Major in me just read.
I've only been running it for a few weeks since I got fed up with the Natty Beta changes, but I ran Slackware for years, so I'm no stranger to more hands-on adminning. Still getting used to portage though.
Eh, and Windows doesn't do the things I want. No out of the box support for python/perl scripting, poor git functionality, and a lack of a simple cli cron job system.
... and for linux: sudo apt-get install updates
That's sudo emerge --newuse --update --deep world on my boxen you insensitive clod!
Things which are common knowledge to the site's readers should not have to be summarized. Just because you haven't read /. at all in the last five years doesn't mean anyone else was confused. Should they have to explain what the EU Commission is too? Or the Pentagon? After all, a story about military spending controlled by a five-sided polygon seems mighty strange.
I'm pretty sure Monsanto has at least one patent on a tree.
If no one viewed it, no one would make it, would they?
Wrong. Or rather, pedophiles will pursue children regardless of whether they're filming it. Or do you really think that if no one bought/viewed the pictures the creep wouldn't have raped the kid? No one makes child porn who doesn't want to, and wasn't going to, molest children anyway.
If you don't like it, here's a crazy idea: TURN OFF YOUR CELLPHONE. Only turn it on when you need to make a call. When you are done with the call, turn it off.
Turning it off isn't enough. You have to pull the battery/SIM card. They stress this immensely in DOE security training briefings. Cell phones can be powered on remotely (the power off is a soft-off, more like suspend to RAM than a hard power off), and the mic and cameras can be switched on to transmit data without activating the screen so that the phone looks like it's still off.
Really? You have a laptop bag with slogans calling other people idiots while simultaneously abusing basic french grammar? Is this a hipster thing, where the irony is the point?
Yes, line employees have NEVER acted contrary to stated policies at any time in the history of forever. Glad we cleared that up.
Policies are just that--it doesn't really matter whether anyone follows them. If they're stated, they exist.
Sort of like how it violates the merchant agreements with credit card companies for the register monkeys to ask for your ID if the card is signed, but some still do. Just because they don't follow the policy doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Most people would be more upset about that than you seem to be.
Baa is the greatest miniature giant space porcupine in the universe! How dare you insult him so! This behaviour must not continue. Feel the burning stare of my porcupine and change your ways.
You do realize you're talking to yourself right? There's no one else here.
So it was the Republican party that pushed for the civil rights in the 60;s and lost the vote in the south.
Sure, ignore the second part of my post about it being ridiculous to ignore the past seventy years of change in the Republican party. Its much easier to snark at me if you don't read what I actually wrote.
However, since you do bring it up, no the Republican party didn't push for the Civil Rights Act of 1964. HOWEVER, they did vote in favor of it by a larger percentage margin than the Democrats. The vote on that act had nothing to do with the parties, it was a straight North/South vote. 90% of Northern congressmen voted yes, 90% of Southern congressmen voted no, which worked out to something like 80% of Republicans voting yes and 60% of Democrats voting yes (Because there were very few Southern Republicans, but the Southern Republicans voted against it as strongly as Southern Democrats).
It was only AFTER that vote that the racists all moved out of the Democratic party and into the Republican party BECAUSE Johnson and the other Democratic party leaders pushed for the bill. Read Thompson's Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72. It has some great accounts of how that shift was going down in the midst of Wallace's presidential bid in the primaries, and Nixon throwing the VP-nom to Agnew.
Yes, the Republican party today is home to a bunch of racist southerners. That was not the case until around 1970, when all those racist southerners (people like Strom Thurmond who was a Democrat until after the Civil Rights Act o 1964) left the Democratic party and took over the Republican party (the kind of people who cheered when Reagan said he didn't leave the Democratic party but that the Democratic party left him). Before 1970 (and especially before 1920, back when it really was still the party of Teddy and Lincoln) the Republicans were largely more socially progressive than the Democrats (though less economically progressive going back to the former Whigs who founded the party).