On topic: Why not store the fingerprint/retina image/DNA digest-linked profile on a centralized server? At the border you provide a finderprint (or DNA in case of amputation, etc.) and your info is pulled up from a secure database. In terms of security this should be better than surrendring the control over the ID (passport) token and its info to a spy or a terrorist?
Off topic: Funny how most anti-immigration crusaders seem to be either rustic yokels or recently naturalized citizens. We welcomed you into this country, why do you wish to deny this welcome to those who come after you?
And all your 'it's the law' arguments make me nauseous. Let me illustrate the absurdity of what you are saying:
Your grandparents should have stopped being Jews in Nazi Germany: after all, it was the LAW. What part of 'illegal' don't you understand!
Well, why not stick to basics and use PowerPoint as one would use a slide projector: no fancy transitions, funky bullets, 'impressive' red-on-blue or purple-on-black colors, or paragraphs of tiny text. No animations of any sort. No 'whoosh' sound
Put up only pictures, graphs, and charts. Usually, if one has something good to show, it'll come our well regardless.
That being said, looking at the pictures of the blurry dogs in Tufte's presentation made me want to throw up and gave me a headache.
I understand this much: 1) Strip pocker fembot (x5) 2) Make them play against each-other while you play with yourself 3)... 4) Profit? (And see if indeed The AI is able to infer certain things about your hands
No, it's not as farfetched as one might think. For example, the score "DDDGDCBA" can be stored in an int (32 bit with some space left over), so randomly generating that is rather trivial. Of course you can also treat the tune as an ASCII string, but generating that will take much longer.
With English prose, a good assumption is 2 bits per letter.
Ignorantia legis neminem excusamus That's Latin for "ignorance of the law is no excuse": a principle recognized by the U.S. Courts.
Now consider what happens when RIAA figures out that every linux user may store copywrighted tunes in their/dev/random (Put a million computers to cat/dev/random for 100 years, and who knows what they'll come up with...)
Homework: test how long it takes for your/dev/urandom to come up with the beginning of Star Wars' music score: DDDGDCBA
Also note that supporting EICC is in every American's best interest: it helps prevent outsourcing.
If we mandate that all workers get paid living wage, get health and retirement benefits regardless of where they are located, there will no longer be an incentive for American companies to outsource our jobs. Currently we are losing jobs because we cannot compete with $0.12/hr Chinese child slaves that die of cancer by age 20.
Wanna do business with the US of A? Pay ALL your workers properly!
You asked for a legal opinion, which I have provided. You may also read up on ACLU and EFF legal arguments. I am indisposed to writing my own legal brief just because you ask me to (sorry).
I did say 1st, 4th, and 9ths (and possibly 10th if viewed as an extension of 9th) were clearly broken. One *could* believe Bush's Article 2 Presidential powers trump these, but that's not the claim you make.
Additionally, one *could* construct a hypothetical -but plausible- situation where 5th, 6th, and 11th (re: foreign nationals) would also be violated. I have no way of knowing if such situation had occured, hence I have not asserted these were in fact violated, just that they might be.
Well, apparently you trust the leader enough to do the right thing with the information they wrongly collected from my phonecalls, without a warrant (violating at least THREE Constitutional Amendments).
Why do you trust them to do the right thing while they are breaking the law as we speak?
I guess where we disargee is that I would prefer to have a system of checks and balances placed upon those in power, while you would would rather endow the leader with your blind trust and obedience.
The point I am making is that you have no knowledge of what laws will be in place years from now, and how these will apply to the conversations recorded today.
Not trying to invoke Goodwin here, but, in 1920's Germany it was not illegal to identify oneself as a Jew. Guess what a democratically elected Hitler did with those records some years later? Imagine in 2012 'we' elect an Ultra-left pinko that sends people like you and me to jail for supporting capitalism...
Even today, are you absolutely certain how your data are being used? The 'whistleblowers' are known to be currently targeted with these wiretaps.
How about fruit juice and their mixture? How about milk? How about any number of allowable combinations of 'chemicals' in drinking bottles, hand lotions, lip gloss.
You are right though: the only way this can work if we have a defined 'allow' list instead of trying to include every imaginable threat in a 'deny' list.
Raman is an overkill if all you are testing for is water/not water. It is usually used to get rid of the water signal in sample.
1) International-domestic warrantles wiretaps: this is what the Judge ruled illegal in today's story. It actually is not an unreasonable program because it targets 'known' terrorist numbers (more or less).
2) Blanket domestic-domestic warrantles wiretaps: cellular carriers such as AT&T voluntarily giving up the data to the NSA. This program taps EVERYONE who uses the carriers' networks. This is a giant fishing expedition, but the courts are actually O.K. with this one (go figure).
3) Phone and bank record collection: does not apparently store the content of conversations, just the dates, times, durations, and phone #'s
4) Who knows?
In all probability, warrants would easily be issued for 1), but definitely not for 2). The public is sympathetic to 1), but not to 2), hence you have a huge amount of obfuscation on the Admin's part: trying to lament exposure of 1) while drawing attention from 2).
Actually, you are thinking about the wrong program.
The Federal Judge has ordered NSA to stop wiretapping international calls that the Government says targets suspected al qaeda members.
The one you are thinking about (a much broader domestic wiretapping) was recently dismissed. It was also filed by the ACLU, hence the confusion.
While the decision may be a good news for privacy advocates, it is certain that the Government is likely to appeal Judge Taylor's decision.
I would argue that of the three known warrantless data collection programs, the one targeting international calls has the least privacy impact and the most potential to garner actionable intelligence and protect the American public, so it may be unfortunate that this is the one ordered stopped, while the other two are allowed to continue.
Slashdot Mirror
Off topic: Funny how most anti-immigration crusaders seem to be either rustic yokels or recently naturalized citizens. We welcomed you into this country, why do you wish to deny this welcome to those who come after you?
And all your 'it's the law' arguments make me nauseous. Let me illustrate the absurdity of what you are saying:
What are you, an idiot?
Well, why not stick to basics and use PowerPoint as one would use a slide projector: no fancy transitions, funky bullets, 'impressive' red-on-blue or purple-on-black colors, or paragraphs of tiny text. No animations of any sort. No 'whoosh' sound
Put up only pictures, graphs, and charts. Usually, if one has something good to show, it'll come our well regardless.
That being said, looking at the pictures of the blurry dogs in Tufte's presentation made me want to throw up and gave me a headache.
I understand this much: ...
1) Strip pocker fembot (x5)
2) Make them play against each-other while you play with yourself
3)
4) Profit? (And see if indeed The AI is able to infer certain things about your hands
No, it's not as farfetched as one might think. For example, the score "DDDGDCBA" can be stored in an int (32 bit with some space left over), so randomly generating that is rather trivial. Of course you can also treat the tune as an ASCII string, but generating that will take much longer.
With English prose, a good assumption is 2 bits per letter.
How about "but she told me she was 21" as a defence for anybody who genuinely didn't know the girl was 13?
GPP was also a joke, by the way.
Ignorantia legis neminem excusamus That's Latin for "ignorance of the law is no excuse": a principle recognized by the U.S. Courts.
/dev/random /dev/random for 100 years, and who knows what they'll come up with...)
/dev/urandom to come up with the beginning of Star Wars' music score: DDDGDCBA
Now consider what happens when RIAA figures out that every linux user may store copywrighted tunes in their
(Put a million computers to cat
Homework: test how long it takes for your
Not with Russian Brin in charge they won't.
I guess it resonates with the kooks that believe that one line runs our country today.
No, but it runs Linus, who happens to run Linux.
Also note that supporting EICC is in every American's best interest: it helps prevent outsourcing.
If we mandate that all workers get paid living wage, get health and retirement benefits regardless of where they are located, there will no longer be an incentive for American companies to outsource our jobs. Currently we are losing jobs because we cannot compete with $0.12/hr Chinese child slaves that die of cancer by age 20.
Wanna do business with the US of A? Pay ALL your workers properly!
Well, it was either the scrollwheel, or a user-replacable 400 VAC lead-acid battery, ultra-portable at 4.0 lb
Hmm, in that case, substitute 'NG Resonance' for cheerleader.
NOW you see why you'd want faster phones to run the distributed AI?
Ever scoped a tunnel diode?
*hides
You asked for a legal opinion, which I have provided. You may also read up on ACLU and EFF legal arguments. I am indisposed to writing my own legal brief just because you ask me to (sorry).
I did say 1st, 4th, and 9ths (and possibly 10th if viewed as an extension of 9th) were clearly broken. One *could* believe Bush's Article 2 Presidential powers trump these, but that's not the claim you make.
Additionally, one *could* construct a hypothetical -but plausible- situation where 5th, 6th, and 11th (re: foreign nationals) would also be violated. I have no way of knowing if such situation had occured, hence I have not asserted these were in fact violated, just that they might be.
Hope this helps.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/17/washington/17cn
1st, 4th, and 9th. And quite possibly 5th, 6th, and 11th.
pull your head outta your ass?
Why do you trust them to do the right thing while they are breaking the law as we speak?
Refering to http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=194330&cid=15
I guess where we disargee is that I would prefer to have a system of checks and balances placed upon those in power, while you would would rather endow the leader with your blind trust and obedience.
The point I am making is that you have no knowledge of what laws will be in place years from now, and how these will apply to the conversations recorded today.
Not trying to invoke Goodwin here, but, in 1920's Germany it was not illegal to identify oneself as a Jew. Guess what a democratically elected Hitler did with those records some years later? Imagine in 2012 'we' elect an Ultra-left pinko that sends people like you and me to jail for supporting capitalism...
Even today, are you absolutely certain how your data are being used? The 'whistleblowers' are known to be currently targeted with these wiretaps.
How about fruit juice and their mixture? How about milk? How about any number of allowable combinations of 'chemicals' in drinking bottles, hand lotions, lip gloss.
You are right though: the only way this can work if we have a defined 'allow' list instead of trying to include every imaginable threat in a 'deny' list.
Raman is an overkill if all you are testing for is water/not water. It is usually used to get rid of the water signal in sample.
Your reasoning: Well, it's not like IRS is stopping you from freely cheating on your tax returns.
It's just that if they catch you doing something they don't like it might cost you your freedom.
Say the wrong thing, and 20 years later, depending on who's in power, and you might just end up at a 'Freedom' Camp (a la "Arbeit macht frei").
I trust Bush, but I cannot blindly trust every future president having access to my records.
Again, you are confusing three separate programs:
1) International-domestic warrantles wiretaps: this is what the Judge ruled illegal in today's story. It actually is not an unreasonable program because it targets 'known' terrorist numbers (more or less).
2) Blanket domestic-domestic warrantles wiretaps: cellular carriers such as AT&T voluntarily giving up the data to the NSA. This program taps EVERYONE who uses the carriers' networks. This is a giant fishing expedition, but the courts are actually O.K. with this one (go figure).
3) Phone and bank record collection: does not apparently store the content of conversations, just the dates, times, durations, and phone #'s
4) Who knows?
In all probability, warrants would easily be issued for 1), but definitely not for 2). The public is sympathetic to 1), but not to 2), hence you have a huge amount of obfuscation on the Admin's part: trying to lament exposure of 1) while drawing attention from 2).
Actually, you are thinking about the wrong program.
The Federal Judge has ordered NSA to stop wiretapping international calls that the Government says targets suspected al qaeda members.
The one you are thinking about (a much broader domestic wiretapping) was recently dismissed. It was also filed by the ACLU, hence the confusion.
While the decision may be a good news for privacy advocates, it is certain that the Government is likely to appeal Judge Taylor's decision.
I would argue that of the three known warrantless data collection programs, the one targeting international calls has the least privacy impact and the most potential to garner actionable intelligence and protect the American public, so it may be unfortunate that this is the one ordered stopped, while the other two are allowed to continue.
How much are they going to save in licensing costs, does anyone know? (not just over Windows, but Office, Photoshop, etc.)
And how much are they going to need to spend on training up the competent tech support?
I remember MS claiming the TCO total cost of ownership is lower for Windows than for linux because of training...
VMware??
Really? They delay the flight to unload the baggage, then go through it to find one bad? Didn't know that.
I don't remember them ever delaying a flight by more than 20 minutes to wait up on no-shows.