In all honesty, it is one of the memories of that school that will stick with me. It did actually teach us not to panic in a fire situation and obviously was effective because I remember it well over 20 years later!
When I was at school (at around age 11), our science teacher would randomly drop a lit paper towel or set fire to a gas tap - to see what we would do.. More than once this resulted in one of the kids setting off the fire alarm instead of just stamping on the towel or turning off the gas tap.
I'm not actually all that bothered about encryption on my phone - I don't keep much on it anyway and I can remotely wipe / disable / back up / track it anyway.
On my computer however, things are a little different. I use bitlocker to ensure it is all encrypted (Using both a TPM and a USB key which I carry around with me) - not to stop law enforcement (although they would have to have a very convincing warrant for me to give up the keys), but because I use it to run an offsite backup of works servers - which, as we are a scanning bureau, contain over 400GB of data, most of which consists of legal files for criminal cases, personal data, accountancy data etc. It would probably be criminal for me to NOT keep this kind of information encrypted!
It's pretty simple really - Spotlight offers a unified search by default - just like the Windows 8/8.1 search screen.
This unified search sends your query over to Apple who then pass it to Bing to return web results alongside your local search.
It is a feature that can easily be disabled.
I'm not a fan of Apple, but this is really no different to what Microsoft are doing with Windows 8, Ubuntu is doing with unity etc. I have no doubt Microsoft use IP geolocation if they don't tap into your location directly.
The main issue is that it also sends Apple your location and other identifying information - which the Apple statement addresses.
Testing by The Washington Post found that the locations revealed in Spotlight searches can be strikingly precise, placing a user within a particular building in Washington, D.C., even though the disclosure box on Spotlight refers to collecting “your approximate location."
Is this the same Washington Post that thinks there is a difference between a 'Golden Key' and a backdoor?
According to an Apple statement published on Ars Technica:
For Spotlight Suggestions we minimize the amount of information sent to Apple. Apple doesn't retain IP addresses from users’ devices. Spotlight blurs the location on the device so it never sends an exact location to Apple. Spotlight doesn't use a persistent identifier, so a user's search history can't be created by Apple or anyone else. Apple devices only use a temporary anonymous session ID for a 15-minute period before the ID is discarded.
We also worked closely with Microsoft to protect our users' privacy. Apple forwards only commonly searched terms and only city-level location information to Bing. Microsoft does not store search queries or receive users' IP addresses.
If it is all voluntary then it is doomed from the start.. What mugger / rapist / vandal (and dare I say terrorist / paedophile) would volunteer to be tracked 24/7 and commit a crime whilst carrying all the stuff that tracks them?
The problem with these tests is that they are misleading.
In the Consumer Reports test, they apply pressure evenly across the middle of the back of the device - not stressing the weakest area of the device, but most likely putting stress on the battery and the stronger side structures. Numerous videos have shown that the phone is much more easily bent if applying pressure to a localised area on the back of the device near the volume buttons.
How that affects the way the phone reacts in a pocket is still unclear - however I would think in a pocket the phone could be subject to uneven pressure and twisting which could have an effect.
Also unclear is how the phones react to repeated bending under much smaller pressure - since the iPhone does not have any springiness, over a period of months a much smaller pressure could lead to the same effect and result in a bent phone.
Speaking of the limit, can Torrentfreak file the same request, with the additional clause that once the work required hits the 18 hour mark, whatever's gathered so far at that point is sent over? Seems like that would be at least a passable workaround to the strict time limit imposed.
No - TF can't do that. However, they can break down the request into lots of smaller more specific ones - the plan as far as I can tell is to ask for 'just' the electronic documents first of all and then expand upon the search from there.