Doubtful but it wouldn't really help. Funny thing about the "accepting cash" thing is, that the law only specifies cash must be accepted for debt. So if you owed money as a debt, and they refused to accept cash, and subsequently tried to bring you to court for payment, their refusal can be used to nullify the debt. (whether this applies to situations where money is owed to the state is unclear, I assume it would work like it does for anyone else but, it might not)
So a store, for example, could operate without using cash at all, but, a resteraunt couldn't because they would be required to accept cash for payment of the debt created by rendering the service. Since no service is being rendered until after payment.... its unclear that they are under any requirement by that.... however there may be other regulations, I am not familiar with what they might be.
> Then you add a random person walking across the street by J walking. There is just an other wildcard. And these people get hit and there were some deaths.
You know, I J walk ALL THE TIME and I think it gets a really bad rap because of people who j walk inconsiderately. I see plenty of people who just mosey across the street like they don't care.
If you pay attention and can even muster the effort to break into a jog for the 5 seconds it takes to get to the other side, its not hard to j walk without taking much risk or making anyone slow down (which I would argue are one and the same....since the risk really is that they wont see you and slow down).
Other than highways with much higher speeds, I have never seen a road that doesn't, in one way or another, afford plenty of opportunities to cross to anyone willing to wait a minute and pay attention....or at least, any able bodied person; obviously I am not talking about the elderly, infirmed, or those dragging infants along.
You know what....I don't care. Good for them. If they are....actually running. As long as they actually make it within a second of it turning, who gives a shit?
The ones that piss me off are the ones who start WALKING while the timer is on, or who ignore it entirely. We have an intersection with both a light and a stop sign (at a rotary no less), where since cars are stopping anyway, pedestrians regularly just walk out in front of them like it is unsignaled, seldom do they even feel the need to walk briskly.
But at least if they fucking move their ass it isn't so bad.
It was pretty clearly neither. If there had been a bribe, then there would be no arrest or report, and that cop would have a hard time explaining his bloody nose (my friend apparently elbowed him on the way down). If it had been a filing fee, the full amount would be on the report of what he had, and then it would be paid after.
Instead, the money just "dissapeared" between him being arrested and the report being filed. Funny thing with cash, how bills dissapear from stacks seemingly....of their own volition.
I am pretty sure that if he paid a bribe for anything, he would have just told me that. Honestly, he wasn't that smart. He still isn't that smart almost 20 years later, but at least now when he gets into trouble its for the right reasons fighting his psycho ex and her psycho mother for custody....which the courts gave him.... knowing how stupid he is, and how hard it is for a man to win custody, you can imagine what a situation that is.
When he told me about it, I didn't believe him until I saw the report of what he had on him at the time of arrest. Sure enough, it said 850.
Yet, as soon as I saw GP, I started scrolling down looking to see if somebody already posted it.
Actually, I liked this one. It took me a second but, honestly, I think he makes a great, if somewhat tounge in cheek point. I can see more evidence of people's fancy breakfast than I care to count, a significant portion of the population has high definition cameras that do a great job, even in the hands of novices.... and nobody caught a picture of Nessy or Big foot yet?
I don't see what is so fishy about that. He was also a school teacher, you would assume the salary he makes at that was paltry compared to the money he has from Apple, why would he even show up for work if he doesn't need the money?
Pretty sure he puts on his pants in the morning like the rest of us, don't see whats so out of character about acting like a normal human being; especially when he has a reputation of being a down to earth guy rather than some playboy moneylover. If you had told me Steve Jobs had done this, I would be shocked. This doesn't really surprize me from the woz.
Its not exactly unusual either for a person to be frugal out of habbit rather than need, especially if it is a lifelong habbit. Using myself as an example, I will stand there comparing products over price and weight at the grocery store to save a few cents I can easily afford, but I seldom remember to turn off lights and save electricity.
So that story was a few years back, a few even before that, I had a friend at my house who was a pot dealer. Now when I say friend, I mean, he pulled out his wad and asked me to count it for him while his hands were busy. Which, is of course, the only reasons I know this story is fact, I counted his wad with my own two hands and eyes.... it was exactly $1000 in $20 bills. Exactly, and ALL 20s.
After he left my house, he managed to get arrested. The exact details of how this happened are not as important. The key facts are that it was night, the place he was heading was the absolute nearest place to my house where one could spend any money, and he never made it even that far.
Now where this gets interesting is.... the police report actually said he had $850. Not $840 or $860 but, in fact, $850, an amount that one cannot make with $20 bills....meaning that they did, in fact, make change.
And boy can they be dicks when they want to be. Never been arrested myself, but a friend of mine was and called me to bring him some cash for bail. At 3 am, I am in a waiting room, 2 cops come out and let me know "its going to be a while, it could take all night" and "you should just leave, he can get home".....
Never mind that he was about 40 miles from home and his car wasn't being released....they just wanted him to have to walk. How long was the "long time" I was going to have to wait for the bail bondsman to show up? About 30-40 minutes.
This is the drinking game that deserves to turn into a drunken mob crime spree....if for no other reason than so someone can enter a statement into the official record about how the incident started.
Of course we should remember, this is really the red herring. It isn't so much an issue that a few private institutions have police of their own that they pay,.... no.
The issue is that the public police, the ones in charge of actual law enforcement and protection of the community, are outsourcing their functions to private entities; and then claiming that makes them exempt from open records.
Who carses that Officer Joe investigating underage drinking in the dorms has arrest power? The real problem is the city/county/state are using them to do an end run around records laws. AND as someone who lives in MA I can't help but note:
The argument that the LECs in Massachusetts are private corporations and therefore immune to the state open records law was made by Jack Collins, the general counsel for the Massachusetts Chiefs of Police Association
Having read the election material in MA, this is the same Association that writes the against opinions whenever anything comes up related to Marijuana Legalization. So in addition to arguing for secret raids, they also argue in favor of retaining the laws that are used to justify most of the same raids.
> Last I heard private security does NOT have the same powers as police. Not even close.
Unless they ARE police.
Believe it or not, this situation is less uncommon than you might think, and not exactly new. Now I live in MA so maybe this is not how it works elsewhere but, I have encountered the same speech at two universities, first as a student and then as an employee.
What they had to say was that University Police are employees of the University however they are also Police, which is why they use the term Police and NOT security. The claim is that their powers are granted to them by the state police.
So it has apparently been the case for at least the past 15 years or so, and likely a lot longer, that this situation was considered legal by the state police, who apparently grant these powers.
Guideline 10:
The first -- argument that is not an option-argument should be accepted as a delimiter indicating the end of options. Any following arguments should be treated as operands, even if they begin with the '-' character.
OTOH I would say there are some limits. Its one thing to say "oh shit that laptop with the layer of dust on it? No I forget, its been years".... but "Oh the laptop I use every day AND my desktop, yes I forgot those"
And certainly a whole nother ball game when you say "I encrypted all the evidence of my crime here" ROTFL "no I forget the key"....good luck with that.
1 in 10? That seems high. But here is the thing, alcohol is a carbohydrate and a good amount of the damage it does is really not all that different from fructose. That being the case, it makes sense that with increasing sugar intake, those also drinking a lot of alcohol would tend to get hit the hardest.
Both cause diabetes. Both cause heart disease. Both damage the liver.
ROTFL I never even thought of passing it as a path name! Its amazing how the solution that is right there can be so hard to see. Like many, I found out about -- years ago after swearing at my terminal for a while before resorting to reading the rm man page.
In fact, if your script generates path names instead of changing working directory, then it solves the entire original issue as well.
About as I would expect. A fellow admin and I were recently talking about the disown command and how after more than a decade on the job we are still finding out about commands that have existed since we were kids running around on the playground.
Most admins find out about -- after they run into a situation where they accidentally created a file with a name like "-f" go ahead, try and delete a file named "-f" any other way.
It works in many unix commands, actually "--" is a very common "end of options" signal. Really, any command that doesn't have a good syntax reason to not support it, really probably should. Many of the old ones do.
Most people I know who have learned shell learned it on the job in one way or another. There are often a lot of gaps. I did too, it took me a long time to get in the habbit of proper quoting, escaping etc, and this is definitely an easy one to miss.
> You said you deleted the unneeded data, therefore you didn't lose it, you disposed of it.
Yes, however the point remains that it means I have encrypted data that I can't decrypt; for really no nefarious reason and no lie. Its there, its encrypted, there does exist a key that could turn it back into the data that was.... but I could neither decrypt it nor prove it matches that other data that I can decrypt. Best anyone, even a forensic investigator could do is take my word for it.
Really in the end, the only point here is that the stink test proposed doesn't work....a professional familiar with encryption is actually quite likely to have data he can't decrypt for one reason or another.
Hell, to be honest, I do occasionally wonder that it might be a liability. Then I think.... fuck em, maybe I should just make some full partitions of just random data for kicks.
> You saying "I lost the data" is equivalent to saying "My whole life is a lie and I don't actually know how to do any > of the things I always talk about." Bullshit. You didn't lose the data.
Funny you would say that because.... you know I have a bunch of encrypted partitions, some of which I actually can't open. Some of it is encrypted with keys that I deleted because they were not needed. For example I have one particular one I can't open, because I never saved the key....it was only a temporary place to pull some data off encrypted tape to search for something.... after I no longer needed it, I just unmounted it. At the time I meant to go back and look for more, I never did, then I forgot the key....big deal....I have the tape still.
Course, I could never prove to anyone else that the data in there is the same as is on the tape....but.... frankly, that wasn't one of my concerns when i created it....I just didn't want to write it all to unencrypted disk and leave it sitting there.
I also have a few emails encrypted to my pgp key from the 90s. I can't seem top decrypt my key even though I thought i remembered the password. I only keep it around because someday I might guess right and there would be some minor use to having it.
Guess my whole life is a lie because I lost some data. I better go resign my day job right now!
Not only that either.... he admitted not only that he COULD but, that the communications that they were looking for were, indeed in those encrypted volumes.
As I understand, previous arguments and rulings have centered upon the idea that decrypting data would potentially give away information that the police didn't have already: like that you have the key and are associated with the contents.
If the police find a USB key in my drawer, and I refuse to talk about it, they only know that I posessed it. They don't know whats on it...or that I actually know whats on it. For all they really know, it could be an empty encrypted parition that I setup and lost the key to (yes, I have done this a coupel of times), it could even be a drive someone asked me to hold onto.
OTOH if I give them that information, then they can connect me directly with the unencrypted data, this makes a good amount of sense in that case.
I seriously hope you are right because it really deserves to; as such a basic violation against the very point of the courts. Courts do not exist to punish the guilty, they exist to protect the public from the government. They exist exactly for the purpose of preventing exactly what they are hiding!
As long as Paralell construction doesn't blow up, we don't even HAVE a court system worth calling one.
Honestly, I may occasionally joke about wanting an actual PipBoy, but the truth is, I don't want to wear anything on my arm, even a small thing. Maybe an upper arm/bicept device, but, not wrist or forearm. Possibly even a small pendant device, especially if it could be belt attached or pocketed as needed....but it would have to be a pretty clever device to overcome my suspicion that its going to end up left behind in a drawer forever in 3 weeks.
That is, as far as we know, a valid point. Though it assumes we know what people in the NSA care about and how they cooperate. Also the DEA is hardly alone, if you read the article on the US Marshall Service and sting rays, they didn't use the words "Parallel Construction" but, calling a Sting ray device a "confidential informant" really is basically the same thing.
As far as has been revealed to us anyway. The thing about parallel construction is that, unless they actually admit to it or talk about it, we really can't know if it is happening. We KNOW the DEA does it, we don't know if anyone else does; however we should expect that they take cues from eachother in how to operate.
In fact, for all we know, this technique was taught to the DEA by the NSA. In fact, its really nothing more than classic counterintelligence, which, would tend to be their bag.
True, but only half the story. More true is to say that surveillance activities are already beyond the review of courts by the loophole known as parallel construction.
Quite simply it doesn't matter to them, because they will never even admit that is where it came from, they will simply use what they now know to set up a fiction that can be supplied to the court. Kind of like a manufactured alibi except in reverse.
Slashdot Mirror
Doubtful but it wouldn't really help. Funny thing about the "accepting cash" thing is, that the law only specifies cash must be accepted for debt. So if you owed money as a debt, and they refused to accept cash, and subsequently tried to bring you to court for payment, their refusal can be used to nullify the debt.
(whether this applies to situations where money is owed to the state is unclear, I assume it would work like it does for anyone else but, it might not)
So a store, for example, could operate without using cash at all, but, a resteraunt couldn't because they would be required to accept cash for payment of the debt created by rendering the service. Since no service is being rendered until after payment.... its unclear that they are under any requirement by that.... however there may be other regulations, I am not familiar with what they might be.
> Then you add a random person walking across the street by J walking. There is just an other wildcard. And these people get hit and there were some deaths.
You know, I J walk ALL THE TIME and I think it gets a really bad rap because of people who j walk inconsiderately. I see plenty of people who just mosey across the street like they don't care.
If you pay attention and can even muster the effort to break into a jog for the 5 seconds it takes to get to the other side, its not hard to j walk without taking much risk or making anyone slow down (which I would argue are one and the same....since the risk really is that they wont see you and slow down).
Other than highways with much higher speeds, I have never seen a road that doesn't, in one way or another, afford plenty of opportunities to cross to anyone willing to wait a minute and pay attention....or at least, any able bodied person; obviously I am not talking about the elderly, infirmed, or those dragging infants along.
You know what....I don't care. Good for them. If they are....actually running. As long as they actually make it within a second of it turning, who gives a shit?
The ones that piss me off are the ones who start WALKING while the timer is on, or who ignore it entirely. We have an intersection with both a light and a stop sign (at a rotary no less), where since cars are stopping anyway, pedestrians regularly just walk out in front of them like it is unsignaled, seldom do they even feel the need to walk briskly.
But at least if they fucking move their ass it isn't so bad.
It was pretty clearly neither. If there had been a bribe, then there would be no arrest or report, and that cop would have a hard time explaining his bloody nose (my friend apparently elbowed him on the way down). If it had been a filing fee, the full amount would be on the report of what he had, and then it would be paid after.
Instead, the money just "dissapeared" between him being arrested and the report being filed. Funny thing with cash, how bills dissapear from stacks seemingly....of their own volition.
I am pretty sure that if he paid a bribe for anything, he would have just told me that. Honestly, he wasn't that smart. He still isn't that smart almost 20 years later, but at least now when he gets into trouble its for the right reasons fighting his psycho ex and her psycho mother for custody....which the courts gave him.... knowing how stupid he is, and how hard it is for a man to win custody, you can imagine what a situation that is.
When he told me about it, I didn't believe him until I saw the report of what he had on him at the time of arrest. Sure enough, it said 850.
Yet, as soon as I saw GP, I started scrolling down looking to see if somebody already posted it.
Actually, I liked this one. It took me a second but, honestly, I think he makes a great, if somewhat tounge in cheek point. I can see more evidence of people's fancy breakfast than I care to count, a significant portion of the population has high definition cameras that do a great job, even in the hands of novices.... and nobody caught a picture of Nessy or Big foot yet?
I don't see what is so fishy about that. He was also a school teacher, you would assume the salary he makes at that was paltry compared to the money he has from Apple, why would he even show up for work if he doesn't need the money?
Pretty sure he puts on his pants in the morning like the rest of us, don't see whats so out of character about acting like a normal human being; especially when he has a reputation of being a down to earth guy rather than some playboy moneylover. If you had told me Steve Jobs had done this, I would be shocked. This doesn't really surprize me from the woz.
Its not exactly unusual either for a person to be frugal out of habbit rather than need, especially if it is a lifelong habbit. Using myself as an example, I will stand there comparing products over price and weight at the grocery store to save a few cents I can easily afford, but I seldom remember to turn off lights and save electricity.
Is it entirely rational? No, its just habbit.
So that story was a few years back, a few even before that, I had a friend at my house who was a pot dealer. Now when I say friend, I mean, he pulled out his wad and asked me to count it for him while his hands were busy. Which, is of course, the only reasons I know this story is fact, I counted his wad with my own two hands and eyes.... it was exactly $1000 in $20 bills. Exactly, and ALL 20s.
After he left my house, he managed to get arrested. The exact details of how this happened are not as important. The key facts are that it was night, the place he was heading was the absolute nearest place to my house where one could spend any money, and he never made it even that far.
Now where this gets interesting is.... the police report actually said he had $850. Not $840 or $860 but, in fact, $850, an amount that one cannot make with $20 bills....meaning that they did, in fact, make change.
And boy can they be dicks when they want to be. Never been arrested myself, but a friend of mine was and called me to bring him some cash for bail. At 3 am, I am in a waiting room, 2 cops come out and let me know "its going to be a while, it could take all night" and "you should just leave, he can get home".....
Never mind that he was about 40 miles from home and his car wasn't being released....they just wanted him to have to walk. How long was the "long time" I was going to have to wait for the bail bondsman to show up? About 30-40 minutes.
This is the drinking game that deserves to turn into a drunken mob crime spree....if for no other reason than so someone can enter a statement into the official record about how the incident started.
Of course we should remember, this is really the red herring. It isn't so much an issue that a few private institutions have police of their own that they pay,.... no.
The issue is that the public police, the ones in charge of actual law enforcement and protection of the community, are outsourcing their functions to private entities; and then claiming that makes them exempt from open records.
Who carses that Officer Joe investigating underage drinking in the dorms has arrest power? The real problem is the city/county/state are using them to do an end run around records laws. AND as someone who lives in MA I can't help but note:
Having read the election material in MA, this is the same Association that writes the against opinions whenever anything comes up related to Marijuana Legalization. So in addition to arguing for secret raids, they also argue in favor of retaining the laws that are used to justify most of the same raids.
Government is very lucrative business.
> Last I heard private security does NOT have the same powers as police. Not even close.
Unless they ARE police.
Believe it or not, this situation is less uncommon than you might think, and not exactly new. Now I live in MA so maybe this is not how it works elsewhere but, I have encountered the same speech at two universities, first as a student and then as an employee.
What they had to say was that University Police are employees of the University however they are also Police, which is why they use the term Police and NOT security. The claim is that their powers are granted to them by the state police.
So it has apparently been the case for at least the past 15 years or so, and likely a lot longer, that this situation was considered legal by the state police, who apparently grant these powers.
I figured it might be, looks like you are right: http://pubs.opengroup.org/onli...
12.2 Utility Syntax Guidelines:
OTOH I would say there are some limits. Its one thing to say "oh shit that laptop with the layer of dust on it? No I forget, its been years".... but "Oh the laptop I use every day AND my desktop, yes I forgot those"
And certainly a whole nother ball game when you say "I encrypted all the evidence of my crime here" ROTFL "no I forget the key"....good luck with that.
1 in 10? That seems high. But here is the thing, alcohol is a carbohydrate and a good amount of the damage it does is really not all that different from fructose. That being the case, it makes sense that with increasing sugar intake, those also drinking a lot of alcohol would tend to get hit the hardest.
Both cause diabetes. Both cause heart disease. Both damage the liver.
http://www.thesuperherobody.co...
Seems like the drinkers are our canaries in this coal mine.
ROTFL I never even thought of passing it as a path name!
Its amazing how the solution that is right there can be so hard to see. Like many, I found out about -- years ago after swearing at my terminal for a while before resorting to reading the rm man page.
In fact, if your script generates path names instead of changing working directory, then it solves the entire
original issue as well.
I might start using ./ a lot more now.
About as I would expect. A fellow admin and I were recently talking about the disown command and how after more than a decade on the job we are still finding out about commands that have existed since we were kids running around on the playground.
Most admins find out about -- after they run into a situation where they accidentally created a file with a name like "-f" go ahead, try and delete a file named "-f" any other way.
It works in many unix commands, actually "--" is a very common "end of options" signal. Really, any command that doesn't have a good syntax reason to not support it, really probably should. Many of the old ones do.
Most people I know who have learned shell learned it on the job in one way or another. There are often a lot of gaps. I did too, it took me a long time to get in the habbit of proper quoting, escaping etc, and this is definitely an easy one to miss.
> You said you deleted the unneeded data, therefore you didn't lose it, you disposed of it.
Yes, however the point remains that it means I have encrypted data that I can't decrypt; for really no nefarious reason and no lie. Its there, its encrypted, there does exist a key that could turn it back into the data that was.... but I could neither decrypt it nor prove it matches that other data that I can decrypt. Best anyone, even a forensic investigator could do is take my word for it.
Really in the end, the only point here is that the stink test proposed doesn't work....a professional familiar with encryption is actually quite likely to have data he can't decrypt for one reason or another.
Hell, to be honest, I do occasionally wonder that it might be a liability. Then I think.... fuck em, maybe I should just make some full partitions of just random data for kicks.
> You saying "I lost the data" is equivalent to saying "My whole life is a lie and I don't actually know how to do any
> of the things I always talk about." Bullshit. You didn't lose the data.
Funny you would say that because.... you know I have a bunch of encrypted partitions, some of which I actually can't open. Some of it is encrypted with keys that I deleted because they were not needed. For example I have one particular one I can't open, because I never saved the key....it was only a temporary place to pull some data off encrypted tape to search for something.... after I no longer needed it, I just unmounted it. At the time I meant to go back and look for more, I never did, then I forgot the key....big deal....I have the tape still.
Course, I could never prove to anyone else that the data in there is the same as is on the tape....but.... frankly, that wasn't one of my concerns when i created it....I just didn't want to write it all to unencrypted disk and leave it sitting there.
I also have a few emails encrypted to my pgp key from the 90s. I can't seem top decrypt my key even though I thought i remembered the password. I only keep it around because someday I might guess right and there would be some minor use to having it.
Guess my whole life is a lie because I lost some data. I better go resign my day job right now!
Not only that either.... he admitted not only that he COULD but, that the communications that they were looking for were, indeed in those encrypted volumes.
As I understand, previous arguments and rulings have centered upon the idea that decrypting data would potentially give away information that the police didn't have already: like that you have the key and are associated with the contents.
If the police find a USB key in my drawer, and I refuse to talk about it, they only know that I posessed it. They don't know whats on it...or that I actually know whats on it. For all they really know, it could be an empty encrypted parition that I setup and lost the key to (yes, I have done this a coupel of times), it could even be a drive someone asked me to hold onto.
OTOH if I give them that information, then they can connect me directly with the unencrypted data, this makes a good amount of sense in that case.
I seriously hope you are right because it really deserves to; as such a basic violation against the very point of the courts. Courts do not exist to punish the guilty, they exist to protect the public from the government. They exist exactly for the purpose of preventing exactly what they are hiding!
As long as Paralell construction doesn't blow up, we don't even HAVE a court system worth calling one.
Honestly, I may occasionally joke about wanting an actual PipBoy, but the truth is, I don't want to wear anything on my arm, even a small thing. Maybe an upper arm/bicept device, but, not wrist or forearm. Possibly even a small pendant device, especially if it could be belt attached or pocketed as needed....but it would have to be a pretty clever device to overcome my suspicion that its going to end up left behind in a drawer forever in 3 weeks.
That is, as far as we know, a valid point. Though it assumes we know what people in the NSA care about and how they cooperate. Also the DEA is hardly alone, if you read the article on the US Marshall Service and sting rays, they didn't use the words "Parallel Construction" but, calling a Sting ray device a "confidential informant" really is basically the same thing.
As far as has been revealed to us anyway. The thing about parallel construction is that, unless they actually admit to it or talk about it, we really can't know if it is happening. We KNOW the DEA does it, we don't know if anyone else does; however we should expect that they take cues from eachother in how to operate.
In fact, for all we know, this technique was taught to the DEA by the NSA. In fact, its really nothing more than classic counterintelligence, which, would tend to be their bag.
True, but only half the story. More true is to say that surveillance activities are already beyond the review of courts by the loophole known as parallel construction.
Quite simply it doesn't matter to them, because they will never even admit that is where it came from, they will simply use what they now know to set up a fiction that can be supplied to the court. Kind of like a manufactured alibi except in reverse.