They kind of bring this upon themselves. I'm trying to remember what I was looking for, but a while back I tried looking something up and found what looked like a useful paper on the subject. I then found it had a $31 price tag for the one paper.
I can remember when the Echo first came out. Clearly remember hearing about the features and all it could do. For a second I was excited by the possibilities. Then reading on I get to the part talking about being able to pick up anything above a whisper from across the room even while music is playing, and all this is analyzed by your friendly Amazon.....
My mind shifted gears so fast it hurt. From "Dude this sounds awesome" to "NOPE NOPE NOPE".
"This fee helps defray costs associated with building and maintaining CenturyLink's High-Speed Internet broadband network, as well as the costs of expanding network capacity to support the continued increase in customers' average broadband consumption."
What I would then love to see is an independent audit of their books showing that every cent of that fee was used to pay for that and nothing else.
"The FBI is very good at keeping secrets, and the people we bought this from, I know a fair amount about them, and I have a high degree of confidence that they are very good at protecting them," he said.
Well yes.... I bet they are "good at protecting them", in the same way a gun store is good at protecting their products. That says NOTHING about how willing they are to SELL IT again. We already know that who ever it was didn't do this out of some "civic duty" or something like that because he says the exploit was bought. So I'm supposed to believe this mystery individual won't pad his pocket some more by selling to other interested parties?
The one thing that I keep seeing mentioned is that using the built in random function is not really random. This is indeed very true. The thing is, who is saying they actually wrote anything better? You assuming that almost $50k was used to make a more truly random system.
I for one would not be shocked is that app just uses the built in random number generator everyone is complaining about. I would love to see a study showing how well they did at really making this random.
This really makes me wonder about how companies would handle android phones, because someone could easily buy the phone and install a different ROM and lock the phone so the manufacture is not able to get in.
How would this be handled under this law? Would they be ok so long as they could bypass their official ROM? Or would they have to promise to be able to get into others too?
I at times have thought it would be nice to run an exit relay, not to hide any illegal activity but to generate "noise" on my line. It would make it harder for companies to build a profile of me if my IP was putting out lot of random activity.
Of course, this story is the exact reason I have not gone through with setting up an exit relay. I am not comfortable putting those I live with in danger of being shot.
Doesn't really matter if it is being done to the device or not if suddenly the device does not work. If I paid $300 for a device and suddenly it does not do what it is supposed to do I really don't care HOW you turned it into a paper weight, all that really matters is that now it is a paper weight.
Also, You can say they have done something to the device. They have locked it down so it uses their servers that they are now turning off. I'm not seeing anything saying they are offering people the source code to work around this. So it is likely the act of making a workaround so you still can use your device is illegal due to laws like DMCA.
The point is that the gun is not really the issue. You want to take away everyone's guns because someone might use it to shoot themselves? That is just stupid. If you start down that road then where will you stop? They also use pills, rope, household cleaners, buildings, cars, bridges, knives, and any number of other things.
To help the suicide numbers we need to actually treat the cause. There is a HUGE problem with our lacking any real help for mental illnesses. Knowing several people including family members who have depression I get rather frustrated seeing our society shunning them, all while doctors use them like lab rats tossing drugs around like candy to see what "works". So how about instead of wasting energy trying to take guns, why don't we use that energy to study mental illness and learn how we can really help these people.
Re: Re: Fun fact: those who own knives are more likely to be stabbed than those who don’t.
I don't know where your located, but here in the US almost the exact same can be said of guns. There are guns all over in the US. They are not quite as common as a knife but they are pretty dang common, yet how common are shootings?
Something people often forget. If it is in the news then it ISN'T common. Someone dies in a car wreck and your lucky if it makes local news, unless they were famous you can forget about it making anything beyond a short blurb in local news. Shootings on the other hand often get picked up by news reports, because they don't happen that much.
Fun fact: those who own knives are more likely to be stabbed than those who don’t.
Fun facts taken totally out of context don't really mean anything. Sure a gun owner is more likely to be shot. I bet that fact includes all the self inflicted gunshots. Suicide attempt account for a very large portion of all gunshots, and lets be realistic, most people attempting suicide are going to regardless of access to a gun. So if suddenly there were no guns, they would just do something else.
Re: People Who Insist On Carrying Guns Don’t Care About Others, Do They?
There are a lot of people who carry guns who do care about others. Unless your willing to say all cops, guards, and members of the military are evil.
Also, a lot of concealed carry is people doing so for their own protection. That doesn't mean they don't care for others, it means they realize we live in a screwed up world.
I really hate how many people can't seem to remove their rose colored glasses. This world has evil people in it. These people don't care about the laws, so banning guns doesn't effect them. Pretending you can wave a wand by passing laws and make bad things vanish is just stupid.
"Not because it is real socialism but because you suggest helping people who didn't work for it and therefore don't deserve help, in the current system."
I think that is really a huge issue we have here as well. Most seem to think that helping the poor must equal handing out free stuff and giving away money. I actually am strongly against that in most cases. If you have the ability to work, then you should work for what you get. The only people who should get free handouts are those unable to get things for themselves.
We are not helping people by giving them things. We are hurting them, taking away their independence. Government assistance should help people get on their feet and shove them in the right direction. It shouldn't be a system for making people useless and dependent on their monthly checks.
I have long ago come to the conclusion that we are going about this all the wrong way. For one thing it makes me sick that the USA has forgotten some of the things that are supposed to be core values for the country. "Land of the free, home of the brave", Well WTF happened there? We have turned into a bunch of cowering sissies giving up our freedom because we are afraid.
One very interesting idea to me has always been for us to drop all this stupid fighting the terrorists junk. I say that for a bunch of reasons, one of the big ones being that we are the freaking terrorists. We have innocent people terrified of blue skies because that is when our drones are in the air. Now you just try and tell me that doesn't bread more terrorists.
The other point is this, what happens if we pull back and toss all that money into good projects? Fix our infrastructure, develop new technologies, and fighting sickness and poverty. We could do a hell of a lot with the amount of money and manpower we are wasting "fighting".
Well, here is what I would expect to happen. There will be a few attacks against us. It will not be pretty at first. The thing is though, very quickly they will start to loose power and here is why. Very few people are so sick in the head that they will attack innocent people. Right now terrorist are able to frame us as bad guys, it is easy to do with all our guns, tanks and bombs. If on the other hand we are out helping people...... Suddenly it is hard to frame us as "evil" and they will quickly loose manpower.
They also tend to prey on the poor. Offering to take care of their families if they join to do terror attacks against us. If we are in these places helping the poor... well then terrorists loose a powerful recruiting tool and once again, we come out looking like the good guys instead of evil assholes raining death from our drones.
Over all, I think we would come out much better by manning up and really being the home of the brave. Stand up to the terrorist by proudly saying "Fuck you, I'm not afraid of you" and letting them destroy themselves.
"It's tough enough to find and close vulnerabilities. Deliberately opening one can be catastrophic."
That is so very true, especially considering that once you deliberately open one it eliminates a lot of the difficulty in the finding it part. Normally hackers are searching for holes that may or may not exist. You put a backdoor in and suddenly they know there is a gaping hole, they just have to kick the door in.
"He's likely going to end up without a license to practice law -- which appears to be his only marketable skill."
Considering all that we have seen from him do you really think it is fitting to call this a marketable skill? If I needed a lawyer I am more likely to go hire a random homeless guy off the street than I am to hire this guy.
As much as I would love to say "Drop the links, no need to send them traffic." I have to agree that linking to the source is important. That really is very important for this site. It gives your stories credibility that you loose otherwise.
Without letting people view the original material you risk being labeled as a group just spouting your opinions while hiding the facts. With links to the source content you give others a chance to verify what you say.
Of course this does not help my opinion of Microsoft. Whats worse is that it makes me even more suspicious of Windows "backing up" your full disk encryption key to Microsoft servers. Where I'm betting NSA is demanding a copy for their records...... After all, you shared it with a "third party" and it is "just a business record"