Jackn, you have no clue what you're talking about. Reading this comment and the ones before makes it quite clear that you don't know anything about security or computers.
You can password protect individual files and have the editing software support the encryption. Adobe Acrobat does that, Microsoft Office does that, good database software can do that. Hell, Windows (pro and up) itself supports that.
Audio and video quality don't have to be perfection for the vast majority of things. Why would you need to watch Futurama in HD? And even the things that are better viewed in HD, most people won't even notice the compression artifacts.
In all honesty, if you're that concerned about quality, you probably shouldn't be downloading the compressed BluRay rips ether.
"Yeah, they can't do much while on the purse, but what if they detach?"
Assuming you have fingers small enough to fit in those tiny ass things, they'd do more damage if you left them on the purse. Take them off and they're rings. Similar to rings that millions of people wear every single day.
Why are you fighting so vehemently for something that if done by anyone else would involve fines and possible jail time? IF this is a voluntary survey, why are they blocking traffic and intimidating motorists?
Why isn't there a big giant sign that says "Voluntary Survey, up to $165, turn here" outside of a parking lot? Police aren't required, traffic isn't blocked, and people aren't looking for a conspiracy.
That's a vary understandable part of the search algorithm. Google has no idea what you're actually looking for so it has to take the vary limited data you gave it and compare it against the same vary limited data that everyone else gave it. Then it sees what everyone else clicked on and assumes you're looking for the same. Since you didn't give it any more information (until the second more specific search) that's all it can do.
Not wanting to defend this "H" person, but Google probably should look at their algorithm. Quite often I'm looking threw Google news and see pictures that seem to be associated with the article, but actually have nothing to do with it. I click on the article to see what that picture's about, but the picture isn't anywhere in the article. I click on the picture directly and get the same exact, unrelated article.
It's quite annoying. Not enough for Google to get sued or anything, but enough that they probably should fix it.
"Proxies are easy to circumvent, but they requires an action to be circumvent. And such actions can be targeted by law. That's the point."
I'm not sure that's really as easy as you think it is. Traffic can travel all over the world threw the Internet. Who's to say that the IP address you connected to isn't a legitimate website giving you a lot of data. Proxies act as web servers downloading the data to their own internal storage and forwarding it off as if the data came from them.
Besides, a proxy block would be bypassed with only minor difficulty. Tor is encrypted, can't inspect a packet if it's just gibberish. There's VPN software that activates with a click of the mouse and is also encrypted.
Well, I think the real terrorists got their wish. The cops are so afraid, their mind instantly goes to "bio-terrorism" instead of "the flamboyant banner". Not only that but the people who chose to make the flamboyant banner are now being charged with willful simulation of a terrorist attack.
If this is how those in power are starting to think, then it's only a matter of time before we, the people, have to force ourselves to think different. Will what I'm about to do look like a terrorist attack to some cop who got up on the wrong side of the bed this morning? Should I go outside in this outfit, will it be misunderstood as covert? Will this collection of plumbing parts I just got from Home Depot look like bomb parts?