The Obi-Wan Doctrine clearly indicates that in the event only one entity can solve the problem of the horrible business model the plaintiff chose upon itself, then that entity -- despite not being involved, and miles away -- must involve themselves to their own eventual death.
The FUD in this "article" is unlike what I've come to expect from Techdirt.
If the Italian guy wants to have a weak password THAT IS HIS RIGHT. Sorry Mr. Moody that you don't like it that other people have rights.
If his computer is used to host a botnet or attack a hospital (REALLY??? SERIOUSLY???) then that will be funny as hell because only an idiot would suggest that THAT is the reason for having a password or a secure one.
Computers are taken over all the time because Windows, not because insecure-password.
Get over yourself.
Ehud oh yeah, don't follow me on twitter. I am now going to check the byline on Techdirt articles. Masnick yes. Moody no.
I will be out of the country on vacation until Saturday, February 1. I will have limited access to email during this time. If this is an urgent matter, please contact my assistant, Vickie Huntley at (310) 788-1016 or email@example.com.
I'm writing to you in reference to your filed lawsuit representing Prince Rogers Nelson v Dan Chodera et al.
I write to inform you that I too have personally done many of the things you allege in your lawsuit are in violation of the law, and should be equally named alongside the named and John Doe plaintiffs.
Naming me should be easy. I provide full contact details below.
To be specific: 1. I use google. 2. I use facebook. 3. I use blogger. 4. I use song links. 5. I write to other people about song links and I read when other people write about song links. 6. I've acted in concerts many times. 7. I've entered into joint ventures and have been employed and employed others. 8. I've been to California many times, as recently as December 2013. During that time I did items 1-5 repeatedly. 9. I have bootlegged many items. Some repeatedly. Once a bottle broke and ran down my leg.
I couldn't stand idly by and allow other guilty people to be named while I stood idly by.
Ehud Gavron [ADDRESS REDACTED] (This is where I live, and tell the process server not to scare the neighors.)
[PHONE# REDACTED] (this is not where I live, but you can reach me at this number to send me threatening telefacsimile messages or threatening voice messages. Please don't mind the Prince background music... that's just to keep people from staying awake.)
He said "a quarter of the temperature" not "a quarter of the thermal energy." Either would be irrelevant to this discussion, but since he said "temperature" and not "energy" it's fair to use any common scale.
You do get that the whole "four times" or "divided by four" means nothing and shouldn't have even entered this discussion, right?
There's no positive liquid coffee temperature reading (which C, F, and K use, but feel free to invent your own) which when divided by any positive integer (e.g. 4) yields a negative number.
Secondly for the person who came up with -170 degrees after dividing by four, time to go back to the 4th grade. That IS where you didn't learn division, right? No positive number divided by four gives you any negative number. Since using the little calculator icon seems difficult this morning for you allow me to help out. 180F/4=45F. Note that there's no reference in the article to a quarter the temp... it's just inane bickering amongst commentators on this thread.
Finally one commentator said this lawsuit was probably in retaliation for the deputy still being under investigation. Perhaps someone could point out where in the article it says that the 8 month investigation is as a RESULT OF or CAUSED BY or its length is LONGER DUE TO any such effort on the part of the family. (Of course if it were so that would make the deputy's position EVEN weaker.)
Sure, if you're defining "Criminals" as individuals convicted of a criminal violation. Otherwise, however, this is a sample of convenience, and its conclusion lacks sufficient evidence.
Specifically, taking as a class not only the convicted but "anyone who commits an act violating criminal law" then there is no way to know if even a majority are stupid. That's quantitative analysis of numbers of crime-doers.
If you take the sheer size of various large heists and qualitatively up those numbers to dollar figures, the criminals who get caught (three strikes you bum, you shouldn't have stolen $2 from the church kitty!) are far far less significant than the jewel heists and art thieves and members of congress.
Just to keep it techdirtian:
We'll never know for sure until we have Total Information Awareness™.
...and once again, people are lining up to give up their rights, explaining (as if they know anything) that the police MUST know something, otherwise why would they disable cellular communication AND begging the question and IMPLICITLY giving police that authority.
Boston PD does not have the authority to shut down cell towers. All they can do is "ask" the carriers to do so. All you who are sheepling in support of this are giving the police these draconian powers THEY DON'T RIGHTLY HAVE.
Let's just add this: "But think of the children!" "If this only saves one life... it's worth it." It doesn't, it won't, and it isn't.
The reason to give up your rights isn't "because security" nor "because police" nor "because terrorism." And for those who say "Too soon... let's let them take away our rights in the name of security and we'll review later..." there is no later. When you open Pandora's box of giving LEP powers they don't otherwise have, they _never_ give them back.
NO there is NO software out there to brick your phone if they try to break in.
Police State powers should not extend beyond a cursory inspection of the person's possessions. That means "item - one cellphone" and put it back down, not attempt to get data from it.
As for the question "why the XXXX does a phone need to retain..." it's really begging too many questions. The fact is that in retaining WiFi associations and cell-tower locations a phone is able to connect quicker. As for the 659 geolocation points, some of those were likely in the EXIF data on the stored pictures.
"This is a problem in the software developing side." No, this is not a problem at all, and tangential to the topic.
Seems to me if you "don't really care" about the topic, don't understand the technology, and just want to whine about "the software developing side[sic]" you should go back to what you were doing before your rant.