So, since the vibrator contains a WiFi access point, the TV could connect to it, and stream pictures from the vibrator. So you could be using the vibrator, and have it streaming the video from its built-in camera onto the TV.
So since the TV and the vibrator are both hackable, you could control the vibrator from the TV with the right hacked firmware, and vice-versa.
Brings a twist (and thrust) to invasion of privacy!
And if the TV is connected to your LAN (for say streaming from other devices) it would also have to be on a separate VLAN (or entirely physically separate, but that'd make it hard to stream from other devices like a computer!), and the entire VLAN would have to be blocked from internet access.
Because if you just use a plain old source IP block, the TV's IP, this attack could, in addition to activating any WiFi on the TV, change its IP address so an IP address block wouldn't work.
what they should be proposing is a bill that states something along the lines of:
1) The US constitution, including, but not limited to, all clauses, articles and amendments, apply in full force to: i) Any place that is part of US Territory; ii) Any place that is administered as part of US Territory; iii) Any place that is under the control of US civil or military personnel iv) Any place US civil or Military personnel claim or exercise jurisdiction, or appear to claim or exercise jurisdiction, in full or in part. v) Any personnel acting in the capacity of or under the authority of US civil or military authority or direction.
2) There is no border exception to the constitution.
3) there is no place that US civil or military personnel can exercise authority or jurisdiction in any civil or military matter that is not subject to the full constitution, including, but not limited to, all clauses, articles and amendments.
4) SCOTUS has full legal jurisdiction in any and all cases covered in this act, whether preceding, including or following this clause, and can make binding rulings on any such situation that apply to all US citizens, including, but not limited to, the US congress, executive, military and POTUS and to all locations covered in clause 1.
5) SCOTUS is the sole arbitor of whether any clauses in this act, whether preceding, including or following this clause, apply.
6) POTUS must not: i) make any Executive Order; or ii) issue an order as the Supreme Commander of US military forces; or iii)make any other direction; that is not compliant with any clause in this act, whether preceding, including or following this clause.
6) The Congress of the US can make no law abridging any clause in this act, whether preceding, including or following this clause.
Even better, Something like the above should be added as an amendment to the constitution.
Yes, merely posting or sharing something that turns out to be wrong or "deceptive" related to anyone or any issue related to an election could violate the law.
IANAL, but I don't think that is correct.
It is unlawful for a person to knowingly and willingly make, publish or circulate on an Internet Web site, or cause to be made, published, or circulated in any writing posted on an Internet Web site, a false or deceptive statement...
I read it as only applying if the poster/sharer/circulator knows it is false or deceptive.
If, for example, the NYT publishes a story, say "Trump caught in oval office, pants down, bent over desk with National Security Advisor's tongue in his ass", and you share it because it came from the NYT, and you have a good faith belief that the NYT is a reputable news source, and it later turns out to be false, then you wouldn't have knowingly shared a false story.
The long-term GDP increase for the EU is estimated to +0.76% and +0.29% for Japan under a symmetrical scenario.
It's important to emphasize that this is "long-term": what this means is that the GDP could be higher by the percentages quoted after ten or more years. The average extra GDP growth per year is therefore an even smaller 0.08% and 0.03% for the EU and Japan respectively. That is, like TTIP and TPP, the predicted benefits that will accrue from JEFTA are likely to be very small, while the risks and possible losses in terms of ISDS fines, say, have been ignored completely.
With respect to the benefits, they might be small on a total % basis, but in absolute terms a tiny % of a really big number is still a big number.
And for Japan, it's 0.29% of a more modest $4.41trillion, ~$12billion.
Therefore if, for example, the EU manages to enter into 5 such treaties a decade, each only doing similar sub-1% increases, that could still be heading towards a cumulative trillion dollar extra per year.
Fake commenting would be to come on here and claim to have evidence that the President of the United States had illegally ordered electronic surveillance his potential successor, when, in fact, that evidence doesn't exist.
Of course the evidence doesn't exist of illegal spying. That's because I'm sure the President got some legal adviser to provide written, classified, legal advice that it is entirely within the President's power to spy on anyone, anywhere, anytime, thus making it legal spying.
(And just in case it's not obvious, this is an ironic reference to the John Yoo torture memo)
I think this ranking of results should be introduced as another filter, like they have a porn filter, so that the searcher can choose whether or not to see results affected by this.
I think they need to make 2 new filters.
1) Nanny State Filter - this would incorporate the existing porn filter and this new 'offensive' results filter.
2) Big Brother filter - this would do 2 things: a) filter out anything the local national government doesn't want you to see, pirate sites, electoral opposition, topics they don't want covered, i.e. a per-nation-tuned version of the Great Firewall. b) send every search query, and any resultant links clicked on, to the government, with identifying information, so the government can keep an eye on you.
3) this isn't really a filter, it's an easy way to disable all the other filters, it's called the Freedom Button. Pressing this will disable all the filters.
Then as a user you can choose, Freedom, Nanny Stage or Big Brother (or Nanny + Brother).
Custom firmware. Therefore it's not based on hardware detection.
However, there are things in the firmware that could give them away - e.g. the ISP could monitor for communications with the reporting servers if the firmware directly accesses these rather than using some obfuscation method (such as randomized proxies/VPNs etc.) or even DPI if the reporting doesn't use SSL (which I would hope it would).