Someone correct me if I am wrong, but it's not up to the DOJ. If the court says the gag order is no longer in force, then the guy can talk, regardless of the legal pressure the DOJ might want to apply.
> The (FCC's) position is that versions of this open source software can be used as long as they do not add the functionality to modify the underlying operating characteristics of the RF parameters.
The problem with *this* wording is that the capability *does* exist in the hardware. Software defined radios are about all that exist any more, and what's legal in one jurisdiction is illegal in another. Japan's "channel 14" for WiFi is a great example.
So at best it still seems like overbroad, sloppy thinking. Another case of trying to ban a tool that has legitimate uses, instead of addressing the instances of bad behavior.
I think Machin Shin is trying to say that since weed is illegal, presumably honest cops won't have ingested any, and the cops at the raid ate some brownies, and presumably those brownies had pot in them.... ergo the cops that pop positive are the ones involved in the raid.
I don't agree with the assertion that those were pot brownies tho.
"We have determined that he really likes autoerotic asphyxiation, and tentacle hentai. He has a collection of animatronic tentacles. If we replace one of his tentacles with a killer robot that doesn't let up when ..."
"Stop. Seriously? I think you need to take a break."
I vaguely remember having an on online discussion with someone who does freelance programming work. They used the length of the contract they created as a measure of how much they distrusted the other party. Once the contract grew past a certain length, they felt there was no point in pursuing the business opportunity.
In the words of Edward Snowden: Twitter doesn't put warheads on foreheads. In the words of Michael Hayden: We kill people based on metadata.
It's monumentally stupid, disingenuous, or both, to compare or contrast corporate surveillance and government surveillance without acknowledging this very important point.
Once you acknowledge it, you have to contend with the fact that the government has the power (even if it doesn't have the right) to bridge the Snowden-Hayden Gap, coopting corporate surveillance for its own ends.
The only reason no one really knows the backdoor sauce for the NSA NIST EC curves is that the standard was never widely used. (My theory is that there really isn't a backdoor, but they created the algorithm and points to look like there could be (or they destroyed the secrets after creation) so they could refine their techniques at slipping shit past the standards body...)
If it had actually come into widespread use, more people would be looking at it. It's not an easy problem (like FEAL was), so there would have to be more incentive into finding the backdoor. I imagine some of the experts would have pooled their money and offered a prize to add even more incentive.
Actually, I think it is literally impossible, not just NP hard. As in "DRM" impossible. As in "P = !P" impossible. In fact, I think this reduces down to DRM - how do you share a piece of information (e.g.: the magic golden key, or knowledge of a backdoor) with a party in such a way that it will never be used for a purpose that was not intended?