If you're like me, you either don't have a wsj subscription or don't plan on feeding the pay-for-internet madness. Here is a way to read the article if you fall into either category.
Alternate, non-paywalled link: https://outline.com/epLGYZ
Cisco Talos announces that malware cleaning app...
Except it wasn't a malware cleaning app. Just a cleaning app. Maybe it happened to clean malware that got caught in the recycle bin, but that's about the extent of it. Of course, it ended up being a malware-infected cleaning app. Maybe that's what the OP meant??
Had an acquaintance get hit with this and received the phishing attempt. Didn't click the link because of the red flags (non-specific document name and the TO address) but sent him a warning and a link to this story. He replied telling me he knew about it and their IT department was handling it. I replied back but it bounced. I changed the subject, removed the phishing link in the quoted email thread and it went through. Looks like google is blocking these messages from being sent/received at all. Fairly recent change as well.
Buying a DVD does give you rights to format-shift from DVD to something else. So VidAngel is selling the DVD to people, and format-shifting it to digital for people, and then delivering it to them. The end-user has the option to take physical delivery of the DVD, have VidAngel store it forever, or sell it back as a 'used' copy for slightly cheaper.
Not according to this. Granted, it's just a year-old article on a tech site, but according to them, the DMCA forbids consumers from decrypting discs to format shift. Stupid? I think so, but unless the courts change their mind, VidAngel is headed for a world of hurt.
As much as I hate it, ripping for personal use is illegal under the DMCA (anti-circumvention). Ripping for the content editing I think is explicitly separately allowed, but I'm not sure if that's what makes it legal for them. They may be playing the physical disc with an EDL - I don't actually know.
As much as I hate to say it, you are correct (at least as of October of 2015). The legal wrangling came to the conclusion that because CDs were never encrypted, consumers can format-shift. But DVDs and Bly rays? Not so much. However, it seems to me that given the vast number of people that do this "under the radar" it can't be long before an "exemption" is granted to bring this in line with Fair Use.
Filmmakers don't have the right to force you to keep your eyes open for every second of their film. But they do have the right to control how someone distributes a copy of their work. Because copyright, dammit.
I think this will be the salient point of the legal argument. Is VidAngel a distributor? Or are they only reselling discs with filters and letting the consumer apply them as they please?
Yes, the copyright-holders altered their own work. Which they could do. Because they held the copyright. Someone else who wants to do that needs to get permission from the copyright-holder.
Copyright, in part, protects an artist's expression from tampering by others. But they're free to "tamper" with it themselves, because it's their expression.
The only gotcha to this argument is the Family Movie Viewing Act, which is part of the Copyright act, specifically allows a person in their own home modify movies without consent of the copyright holder. VidAngel is arguing that this is exactly what is going on with their service. They provide the movie (unaltered), the filter and let the viewer apply said filter how they wish in their own home. Frankly, I hope VidAngel wins if only so that media producers run into some kind of limit to their seemingly unending power over the consumer.
While I agree with some of your statements and assertions, your conclusion and proposed solution is flawed. Yes, the founding fathers distrusted standing armies and envisioned the 2nd Amendment as a remedy for this. However, some of the founding fathers felt the entire bill of rights as superfluous as the constitution already granted sovereignty to the people, not the elected government. By extension, the notion that there should be a "well armed militia" instead of a standing army is also a contradiction IF (caps on purpose) the army reports to the people. I have no idea how that would be accomplished in practice, but I do know that the order of soap box to ballot box to ammo box is that way for a reason. Power determines the course of civilizations and national and international politics. Money and guns equal power and the federal government started out with neither. Alexander Hamilton provided money to the feds and they use it expertly to influence supposedly sovereign states to bend to their will in small and large ways. Ultimately, it was as you pointed out, the standing army that secured the federal government as the prominent power in our federalism experiment.
Now here is where your conclusion is flawed. Power cannot be taken without power. It can certainly be given up, but that is an idealistic dream. There is not one single case of that ever happening to a nation state without the threat of greater power forced upon it. Machiavelli was right that it is better to be feared than loved and we are proving it again in the USA. The problem is not having guns (power), it's having too many and allowing them to be used for things that they shouldn't be used for. England is an example of what I consider too far to one extreme -- where only hunters are allowed guns and even the police don't regularly carry firearms. I'm not a flag-waiving NRA member, but I do believe that we must uphold the laws of the land, which includes the 2nd amendment. I also believe the US is too far to the other extreme with a militarized police force with too-lax provisions in place to allow them to kill citizens. The founding fathers provided checks and balances at the highest levels of government and I believe this model should be followed down to the lowest levels. If power is the problem, then balancing it is the solution.
Instead of giving up power (guns), we should re-think how guns are distributed and used. I like the Israeli model, where all citizens are trained in the military, possess weapons and know how to use them properly. Their crime rate is famously low for a reason (terrorism aside). My proposal would be to require training for all gun owners (to encourage safe and sensible use), prohibit military weapons or tactics to be used by the police and to return to a state of balance. I could go into greater detail, but I'm neither a lawmaker or policy influencer -- just an armchair philosphizer.
You're right. This isn't about platforms, this is about following the law and IMNSHO, DPD did not do that. Without any information except what has been reported on this and other websites, it appears that after preventing his ability to move, cordoning off the area and attempting to negotiate for hours, they made a judgment call to end his life. He may or may not have been a threat to the general population or to the officers on scene. Regardless, the power to end another life is precisely what is at issue in the mind of the shooter, the mind of the police and the mind of every US citizen that is aware of the increase in police violence. Civilian police forces should not be in the business of killing people and that's what the constitution is talking about with the phrase "due process". It's the military's job to kill people and the military are not peace officers, they are war officers. The distinction is important and bound by law, but increasingly ignored by police forces with the aid of the federal government. The militarization (not just a FUD word, but literally, the conversion of peace officers to war officers) of police forces is the issue and the reason why there was a protest in Dallas and the reason why Johnson went mental and decided to kill cops there. Assassinating him (look up the definition) only reinforces the feeling among Americans that the police are out of control. Did he deserve to die? Most likely, but it isn't the job of police forces to determine that. That is what a judge and jury are for and one of the reasons thirteen colonies because thirteen states after a long and bloody war. If there is not a strong legal reaction to DPD's use of force in this way, the situation will get worse, not better. If there is not a show of restraint by those who are sworn to "serve and protect" there will be escalation that leads to civil war. The USA has already had one and we should do everything we can to avoid another because it was the single great cause of American deaths, ever. If you say you care about people, then you should care about upholding the law, especially for those who are given guns by the government chosen "by the people".
TBH, I was surprised this was a windows box at all. It's been a while since I admined for a station, but the weather graphics were designed/rendered on an SGI box. Like the AVIDs, they had their own support contract. We did have a station IT administered Optiplex for the weather producer to put the segment together, but it was just an interface to the SGI's software. I'm sure that winsoft has caught up to SGI for this application and wouldn't be surprised if SGI was almost out of the market by now.
Having worked IT for a TV station, i can tell you that the weather graphics workstations are often NOT on the local AD domain. This is deliberate and the local IT guy usually doesn't "own" that particular workstation. It's usually up to the weather guy and weather software vendor to provide support. Likely, this little insightful nugget was lost on that pair or they simply didn't care. Either way, it might not be the IT guy's fault at all.
There is an active and vocal thread (one of many) that lead me to believe that there are a lot of people affected. Personally, I re-installed Win10 from ISO and the problem went away.
Edward Snowden on the other hand is a US Citizen who is wanted for breaking US laws (albeit, he did so while in the country). Outside of terrorist sympathizers who defected to Middle Eastern countries to participate in terrorist plotting, I can't think of very many US citizens who committed crimes outside the US and were extradited back to the US for trial.
For Windows machines, I use WSUS Offline. It also comes in handy when I'm at a customer site and their internet is so slow that I can't patch a single machine in a day. Yes, there are still areas of the world where DSL is sold less than a Mbps download.
Point being that the government should get out of defining marriage, to do so it needs to adjust all those laws that make assumptions about marriage.
This. The Government has no business telling the citizens what contracts they can or cannot make with each other. Legally, marriage has a host of baggage (inheritance, visitation, taxation, etc) that legitimizes the Supreme Court's actions. The 14th Amendment applies to the legal aspects of marriage, not to marriage itself, but because of those connections, it affects much more than who gets the house when one spouse dies. Married or not married doesn't define classes (the sexual revolution shot that to hell), but when there's money on the line, people get all kinds of upset if a piece of paper (marriage contract) keeps them from it.
Instead of "legalizing gay marriage" or "outlawing gay marriage", the people (who hold all the rights not specifically identified in the constitution) should remove the legality from marriage and return it to what it was intended for: to build strong family relationships and teach children how to be productive, balanced citizens. Essentially, marriage should stop being a contract requiring courts to begin and end and return to being the building block of society.
Who cares? A C-130 (or similar) hitting anything but a military-style drone would barely get scratched. Seriously, these things weigh less than 10 kilos, much smaller than said birds. Why is this an issue?
Personally, I have three external hard drives encrypted with TrueCrypt that I rotate and keep in a fire safe at an offsite building. I rotate them monthly. Cost is a little high, but it fast, easy and convenient for me. Your circumstances are likely different enough that you will need a different approach. But generally, my archive set is large (3+TB) and sensitive (taxes, bank statements, account numbers, passwords, etc) so this solution works best for me.
According to one article you can call them to complain and get a free upgrade to the version you need or send a scan of your receipt to H&R Block and get a free version of Tax Cut that has all the forms. Personally, I prefer the former so Intuit knows they have an unhappy customer serious enough to call them on these shenanigans.
That was exactly my thought. My wife is a "tenured" high school science teacher with a master's degree. The school district publishes their salary chart and there are salary adjustments for years of service, education and nothing else. You can get side jobs like coaching or sponsoring an organization, but gender just isn't on there. Seems like most salary analysis is flawed in fundamental ways.
So how in the world did a diverse field like IT get lumped together with Mathematics of all professions? And does it seem to me that calling the IT industry "Computers" is a backslide to the early 80's?
This is the answer to almost every Internet-inspired drama. The internet wants to be free. Information wants to be free. The bottom line instead is, everything has a price including the internet and your information. Pay for it, own it and no one else can.
This is a panel to determine if the US "employs its technical collection capabilities in a manner that optimally protects our national security and advances our foreign policy while appropriately accounting for other policy considerations, such as the risk of unauthorized disclosure and our need to maintain the public trust."
This isn't supposed to be oversignt. It's entirely for the NSA's benefit.
Well, that's the problem, isn't it? Whoever determined the purpose of this panel (ostensibly, Mr. Obama) missed the point of why Americans are upset. Furthermore, it indicates that the Administration has no intention of changing the status quo. This is why it is newsworthy and why it's to our benefit to know and understand what a "privacy reform panel" looks like. There are other threads discussing how to go about realizing real change (in the broken American political system), so I will refer you to those if you want to talk about changing how and why this panel is the wrong answer to a large problem.
Slashdot Mirror
If you're like me, you either don't have a wsj subscription or don't plan on feeding the pay-for-internet madness. Here is a way to read the article if you fall into either category. Alternate, non-paywalled link: https://outline.com/epLGYZ
Cisco Talos announces that malware cleaning app...
Except it wasn't a malware cleaning app. Just a cleaning app. Maybe it happened to clean malware that got caught in the recycle bin, but that's about the extent of it. Of course, it ended up being a malware-infected cleaning app. Maybe that's what the OP meant??
Had an acquaintance get hit with this and received the phishing attempt. Didn't click the link because of the red flags (non-specific document name and the TO address) but sent him a warning and a link to this story. He replied telling me he knew about it and their IT department was handling it. I replied back but it bounced. I changed the subject, removed the phishing link in the quoted email thread and it went through. Looks like google is blocking these messages from being sent/received at all. Fairly recent change as well.
Buying a DVD does give you rights to format-shift from DVD to something else. So VidAngel is selling the DVD to people, and format-shifting it to digital for people, and then delivering it to them. The end-user has the option to take physical delivery of the DVD, have VidAngel store it forever, or sell it back as a 'used' copy for slightly cheaper.
Not according to this. Granted, it's just a year-old article on a tech site, but according to them, the DMCA forbids consumers from decrypting discs to format shift. Stupid? I think so, but unless the courts change their mind, VidAngel is headed for a world of hurt.
As much as I hate it, ripping for personal use is illegal under the DMCA (anti-circumvention). Ripping for the content editing I think is explicitly separately allowed, but I'm not sure if that's what makes it legal for them. They may be playing the physical disc with an EDL - I don't actually know.
As much as I hate to say it, you are correct (at least as of October of 2015). The legal wrangling came to the conclusion that because CDs were never encrypted, consumers can format-shift. But DVDs and Bly rays? Not so much. However, it seems to me that given the vast number of people that do this "under the radar" it can't be long before an "exemption" is granted to bring this in line with Fair Use.
Filmmakers don't have the right to force you to keep your eyes open for every second of their film. But they do have the right to control how someone distributes a copy of their work. Because copyright, dammit.
I think this will be the salient point of the legal argument. Is VidAngel a distributor? Or are they only reselling discs with filters and letting the consumer apply them as they please?
Yes, the copyright-holders altered their own work. Which they could do. Because they held the copyright. Someone else who wants to do that needs to get permission from the copyright-holder.
Copyright, in part, protects an artist's expression from tampering by others. But they're free to "tamper" with it themselves, because it's their expression.
The only gotcha to this argument is the Family Movie Viewing Act, which is part of the Copyright act, specifically allows a person in their own home modify movies without consent of the copyright holder. VidAngel is arguing that this is exactly what is going on with their service. They provide the movie (unaltered), the filter and let the viewer apply said filter how they wish in their own home. Frankly, I hope VidAngel wins if only so that media producers run into some kind of limit to their seemingly unending power over the consumer.
While I agree with some of your statements and assertions, your conclusion and proposed solution is flawed. Yes, the founding fathers distrusted standing armies and envisioned the 2nd Amendment as a remedy for this. However, some of the founding fathers felt the entire bill of rights as superfluous as the constitution already granted sovereignty to the people, not the elected government. By extension, the notion that there should be a "well armed militia" instead of a standing army is also a contradiction IF (caps on purpose) the army reports to the people. I have no idea how that would be accomplished in practice, but I do know that the order of soap box to ballot box to ammo box is that way for a reason. Power determines the course of civilizations and national and international politics. Money and guns equal power and the federal government started out with neither. Alexander Hamilton provided money to the feds and they use it expertly to influence supposedly sovereign states to bend to their will in small and large ways. Ultimately, it was as you pointed out, the standing army that secured the federal government as the prominent power in our federalism experiment.
Now here is where your conclusion is flawed. Power cannot be taken without power. It can certainly be given up, but that is an idealistic dream. There is not one single case of that ever happening to a nation state without the threat of greater power forced upon it. Machiavelli was right that it is better to be feared than loved and we are proving it again in the USA. The problem is not having guns (power), it's having too many and allowing them to be used for things that they shouldn't be used for. England is an example of what I consider too far to one extreme -- where only hunters are allowed guns and even the police don't regularly carry firearms. I'm not a flag-waiving NRA member, but I do believe that we must uphold the laws of the land, which includes the 2nd amendment. I also believe the US is too far to the other extreme with a militarized police force with too-lax provisions in place to allow them to kill citizens. The founding fathers provided checks and balances at the highest levels of government and I believe this model should be followed down to the lowest levels. If power is the problem, then balancing it is the solution.
Instead of giving up power (guns), we should re-think how guns are distributed and used. I like the Israeli model, where all citizens are trained in the military, possess weapons and know how to use them properly. Their crime rate is famously low for a reason (terrorism aside). My proposal would be to require training for all gun owners (to encourage safe and sensible use), prohibit military weapons or tactics to be used by the police and to return to a state of balance. I could go into greater detail, but I'm neither a lawmaker or policy influencer -- just an armchair philosphizer.
You're right. This isn't about platforms, this is about following the law and IMNSHO, DPD did not do that. Without any information except what has been reported on this and other websites, it appears that after preventing his ability to move, cordoning off the area and attempting to negotiate for hours, they made a judgment call to end his life. He may or may not have been a threat to the general population or to the officers on scene. Regardless, the power to end another life is precisely what is at issue in the mind of the shooter, the mind of the police and the mind of every US citizen that is aware of the increase in police violence. Civilian police forces should not be in the business of killing people and that's what the constitution is talking about with the phrase "due process". It's the military's job to kill people and the military are not peace officers, they are war officers. The distinction is important and bound by law, but increasingly ignored by police forces with the aid of the federal government. The militarization (not just a FUD word, but literally, the conversion of peace officers to war officers) of police forces is the issue and the reason why there was a protest in Dallas and the reason why Johnson went mental and decided to kill cops there. Assassinating him (look up the definition) only reinforces the feeling among Americans that the police are out of control. Did he deserve to die? Most likely, but it isn't the job of police forces to determine that. That is what a judge and jury are for and one of the reasons thirteen colonies because thirteen states after a long and bloody war. If there is not a strong legal reaction to DPD's use of force in this way, the situation will get worse, not better. If there is not a show of restraint by those who are sworn to "serve and protect" there will be escalation that leads to civil war. The USA has already had one and we should do everything we can to avoid another because it was the single great cause of American deaths, ever. If you say you care about people, then you should care about upholding the law, especially for those who are given guns by the government chosen "by the people".
TBH, I was surprised this was a windows box at all. It's been a while since I admined for a station, but the weather graphics were designed/rendered on an SGI box. Like the AVIDs, they had their own support contract. We did have a station IT administered Optiplex for the weather producer to put the segment together, but it was just an interface to the SGI's software. I'm sure that winsoft has caught up to SGI for this application and wouldn't be surprised if SGI was almost out of the market by now.
Having worked IT for a TV station, i can tell you that the weather graphics workstations are often NOT on the local AD domain. This is deliberate and the local IT guy usually doesn't "own" that particular workstation. It's usually up to the weather guy and weather software vendor to provide support. Likely, this little insightful nugget was lost on that pair or they simply didn't care. Either way, it might not be the IT guy's fault at all.
It's a PowerShell command: New-NetFirewallRule -DisplayName "Block Regsrvr32" -Program "%SystemRoot%\System32\regsvr32.exe" -Direction Outbound -Action Block
There is an active and vocal thread (one of many) that lead me to believe that there are a lot of people affected. Personally, I re-installed Win10 from ISO and the problem went away.
Edward Snowden on the other hand is a US Citizen who is wanted for breaking US laws (albeit, he did so while in the country). Outside of terrorist sympathizers who defected to Middle Eastern countries to participate in terrorist plotting, I can't think of very many US citizens who committed crimes outside the US and were extradited back to the US for trial.
For Windows machines, I use WSUS Offline. It also comes in handy when I'm at a customer site and their internet is so slow that I can't patch a single machine in a day. Yes, there are still areas of the world where DSL is sold less than a Mbps download.
Point being that the government should get out of defining marriage, to do so it needs to adjust all those laws that make assumptions about marriage.
This. The Government has no business telling the citizens what contracts they can or cannot make with each other. Legally, marriage has a host of baggage (inheritance, visitation, taxation, etc) that legitimizes the Supreme Court's actions. The 14th Amendment applies to the legal aspects of marriage, not to marriage itself, but because of those connections, it affects much more than who gets the house when one spouse dies. Married or not married doesn't define classes (the sexual revolution shot that to hell), but when there's money on the line, people get all kinds of upset if a piece of paper (marriage contract) keeps them from it.
Instead of "legalizing gay marriage" or "outlawing gay marriage", the people (who hold all the rights not specifically identified in the constitution) should remove the legality from marriage and return it to what it was intended for: to build strong family relationships and teach children how to be productive, balanced citizens. Essentially, marriage should stop being a contract requiring courts to begin and end and return to being the building block of society.
birds hear better and dodge better
Who cares? A C-130 (or similar) hitting anything but a military-style drone would barely get scratched. Seriously, these things weigh less than 10 kilos, much smaller than said birds. Why is this an issue?
Personally, I have three external hard drives encrypted with TrueCrypt that I rotate and keep in a fire safe at an offsite building. I rotate them monthly. Cost is a little high, but it fast, easy and convenient for me. Your circumstances are likely different enough that you will need a different approach. But generally, my archive set is large (3+TB) and sensitive (taxes, bank statements, account numbers, passwords, etc) so this solution works best for me.
According to one article you can call them to complain and get a free upgrade to the version you need or send a scan of your receipt to H&R Block and get a free version of Tax Cut that has all the forms. Personally, I prefer the former so Intuit knows they have an unhappy customer serious enough to call them on these shenanigans.
That was exactly my thought. My wife is a "tenured" high school science teacher with a master's degree. The school district publishes their salary chart and there are salary adjustments for years of service, education and nothing else. You can get side jobs like coaching or sponsoring an organization, but gender just isn't on there. Seems like most salary analysis is flawed in fundamental ways.
According to this, it appears that women earn 91.3% of men's salaries among elementary and middle school teachers and make up 81% of the workforce.
So how in the world did a diverse field like IT get lumped together with Mathematics of all professions? And does it seem to me that calling the IT industry "Computers" is a backslide to the early 80's?
http://www.cnn.com/video/data/... Sounds like there is some hope for recovery. Good luck, man! Love that baby!
Okay... so it's not particularly good art, but it is art nonetheless. If they invent e-balls as well, I totally want to see one of these in action!
This is the answer to almost every Internet-inspired drama. The internet wants to be free. Information wants to be free. The bottom line instead is, everything has a price including the internet and your information. Pay for it, own it and no one else can.
This is a panel to determine if the US "employs its technical collection capabilities in a manner that optimally protects our national security and advances our foreign policy while appropriately accounting for other policy considerations, such as the risk of unauthorized disclosure and our need to maintain the public trust."
This isn't supposed to be oversignt. It's entirely for the NSA's benefit.
Well, that's the problem, isn't it? Whoever determined the purpose of this panel (ostensibly, Mr. Obama) missed the point of why Americans are upset. Furthermore, it indicates that the Administration has no intention of changing the status quo. This is why it is newsworthy and why it's to our benefit to know and understand what a "privacy reform panel" looks like. There are other threads discussing how to go about realizing real change (in the broken American political system), so I will refer you to those if you want to talk about changing how and why this panel is the wrong answer to a large problem.