The interesting thing is this is about a laser printer. The laser printer segment has typically not actually run using the razor blade model. That's why a laser printer with the same features as an inkjet costs several hundred more dollars.
Thing is, these printers are typically bought by businesses or prosumers. While some businesses might stick to buying only brand name, everyone else who hears about this might re-evaluate if Lexmark is someone they want to continue doing business with. Brother makes some pretty good and inexpensive lasers after all.
Well yeah, but you run into the same issue that self encrypting drives have. The data in flash memory is encrypted with a huge key which is kept on the encryption chip. There's no way to read the key without de-encapsulating the chip, and that carries with it significant risk. Those things are meant to be tamper proof after all.
If apple did this correctly, the encryption chip is a separate component, that can not have its firmware changed. It can even still be in the same package as the CPU. By tightly defining the security element's inputs and outputs you can create an extremely hard to crack system, even if it can't receive firmware updates.
My fear is that the checks, including the counter for number of retries is handled by upgradable firmware. That would mean not only could apple crack any phone, but the next time a bootloader jailbreak is found everyone else could too.
It really makes me wonder just how much power the supreme court has. I mean if the CAFC keeps doing so badly, does SCOTUS have any options aside from continually smacking them down?
To be fair, SCOTUS is powerful enough that they could wipe out entire categories of patents or copyrights with a pen stroke. The question is if CAFC keeps it up can they just explicitly say that they don't consider anything that court does as binding?
Thing is, these leagues are by definition monopolies. The US Government allows them to exist because in some situations having a monopoly is advantageous to many competitors. In theory, the government heavily regulates these monopolies. In practice, lobbying dollars tend to speak louder than voters.
The thing is, that breaks down when a large issue causes the population to band together. In this case, either the Federal Trade Commission, or the Federal Communication Commission could change their rules to disallow blackouts.
They have a pretty big case for deceptive trade practices if someone paid for something, and are then being threatened if they attempt to obtain what they paid for.
Looks like the NHL is about to lose quite a bit of money. Either through lost subscriptions, or from lawsuits and regulation. Heck, it will probably face all three.
The big question is if this is even legal. Sure it might be for a private institution, but it's been found by multiple courts that public schools have the same restrictions as the government does. I mean, these universities get there own sanctioned police force for crying out loud. That' means they're bound by the U.S. Constitution.
It'll be interesting to see if there is a lawsuit. I can just see campus lawyers cringing. Especially given the likelihood that FERPA was violated.
Yeah, pick a fight with the EFF. That's how good publicity is made.
I'd be surprised if the mod that suspended the account doesn't at least have a reprimand quietly put in his/her file. The stupidity isn't quite to the level of suspending Trump's account, but in terms of possible backlash it's pretty close.
See, for example, T-Mobile's CEO bashing the EFF for what could happen.
Remember the EU policy on cookies. That's the kind of craziness we're talking about.
For those who don't remember. That's where the first time you visit a site it says it's going to set a cookie. The idea was for people to be able to say "no thanks". What instead happened is anyone with browsers set to not remember cookies couldn't visit those sites anymore. The exact opposite of what the EU was trying to accomplish.
This is the NSA stealing data from foreign data centers because it's not on US soil. The EU reaction is to make sure that data stays off US soil.
It's doubly funny because the EU doesn't like geo-blocking, but the only way to make sure data stays inside the EU is to use geo-blocking and geo-redirecting.
The interesting thing is this bill is using almost word for word the same language used in many concealed carry permit laws.* The part about registering, background checks, and competency is pretty boilerplate.
*There are so many of these I'm not going to track down which one he's probably copying.
Deus Ex is produced by Eidos Montréal. They're either partners with, or owned by Square Enix. Regardless, it's probable that they have a bit of power, and are shielding this mod pack. Try this on a different Square Enix game and you might not be so lucky.
Interestingly, I can't access that GAO link in a secure manner. My browser automatically tries to connect to HTTPS first, but I get show a page which tries to direct me to the HTTP home page and says this:
No Secure Connection (https://) Required
You have reached the website for the Government Accountability Office. However, your browser is trying a secure connection (https). GAO's public website can be reached by following the link to http://www.gao.gov
Annoyingly it directs me to the home page, so I have to find the link again, after I decide to not browse securely.
I wonder what will happen if these end up on the news site's home page.
Imagine if a site wide sidebar said, "Stories the EU doesn't want you to know about" with a list of article names/keywords. The only option would be to remove the entire website. If that happened to a large national newspaper there would be a huge backlash.
The Streisand Effect isn't new. Authors used to use "Banned in Boston" as a selling point after all.
The worst thing is the photographer wasted a perfectly good opportunity. Instead of companies seeing that his work was good enough to be used commercially, they'll now see him as someone who is willing to frivolously attack anyone who does more than look at his work.
I'm saddened that these people can threaten businesses like this. The same thing happened with Wiki Leaks. The government knows it doesn't have a chance of winning in court, but still gets away with it because the companies know they'll be harassed otherwise.
The thing is, that when the supreme court says you can not make that law, they mean it. Different court might rule differently, but they tend to not like it when you try to sneak through things that they've already rejected.
The end result is that, once again, the US will just not follow through with their part of treaty obligations.