Cloak it how they will; use what language they will; civil asset forfeiture is neither more nor less than legalized theft.
I prefer the term "armed robbery". Call it what it really is.
It's just incredible that anyone can justify confiscating less than $200 cash from somebody on the pretext of drug crime. Who keeps voting in these "tough on crime", "war on drugs" politicians? Don't these politicians give one hoot what their stupid laws result in?
I was personally surprised to learn that GCHQ invented encryption.
Next up in the dock, all those bastards from Bletchly Park! Those a-holes are the ones who really started this avalanche!
Fairly stunning performance this, even for Britain. This sort of performance used to get you laughed out of town. If Monty Python were still in business, they'd have been bunged into jail long ago with nitwits like this in charge.
Also, naming Hotmail and Google is wrong as well, as neither Hotmail nor Gmail currently offer end-to-end encryption in a manner that anyone really uses.
Besides, has she never heard of email attachments? Just wait'll she hears that I can use gpg/pgp to encrypt any text file, then attach it to an email sent via *any* email provider. We'd better lock up Stallman, Torvalds, and de Raadt now, and all of Microsoft and Apple.
Do people who write newspaper articles these days no longer read newspapers? Are they only watching Twitter and Facebook instead now? You'd think someone writing newspaper articles might have heard about the OPM hack along with the hundreds of other stories (eg. Ashley Madison!) about bad guys getting into places they shouldn't have. I agree, this is about the dumbest, most content-less, most air-headed article on encryption I've ever heard of, and that's saying a lot considering the garbage Comey and Cameron have puked out lately.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Do you want to be shot in the left leg, or the right leg? 'Not being shot' is not an option
We basically broke ties with Britain, the French Beheaded Folks!!
In the first case, we wind up with The Empire of the USA teaching its people geography by invading other countries willy nilly. In the latter case, they wound up with an Emperor, Napoleon, who tried to invade Russia. Kinda, sorta the same result.
It seems both of those are losing (or pointless) strategies. However, at least Mr. Guillotine was entertaining (and the French "upper classes" certainly deserved their comeuppance). It also kept the French out of the British' hair for a bit, which I suppose was good.
Little known fact: women are infinitely more capable of twistedness than men are. This is not a sexist complaint, just an observation of their superior skills/powers. Be thankful they don't always want to use their powers. We'd be toast if so.
Who appointed you in charge of deciding how much money Elsevier should forego based on your morals?
Who appointed Elsevier in charge of deciding what scientists' published results would cost other researchers to keep up on on and continue their research?
The Jews have a great word for this. It's chutzpah.
You sicken me moocher, hanger on, know nothing person. I don't want to share a planet with the likes of you. You're a predatory a-hole which none of the rest of us wants to be here. Die screaming in a fire. Consider it an act of humanity. Or, just go away. You won't be missed.
Re: Characterizing a billion dollar industry as fap-media
"fap-media"? Er, wut? I'm an old fogy, so have no idea what you're really trying to say.
However, you strike a vein. Think math. Isn't that easy? There's no heavy lifting. There's no "things trying to kill you." It's just thinking, and learning concepts and stuff that's been figgered (okay, figured) out (long ago) then using it. So, why isn't the planet drowning in math geniuses? It should be, if what I said above is correct.
Aside, I would never think to go to Google to find pr0n. Does that actually work?
The Accuser has filed a false DMCA notice. Please support me as I move to have his intentionally false DMCA claim prosecuted to it's fullest.
Get in line, loser. Why should we care about yours when we've never cared about any others'?
Hoser. Whiner. Self-entitled idiot moron. What turnip truck did you just fall off of? Sheesh. You're not Hollywierd. You expect us to listen to you?!? Or anybody? Obviously, you're just ignorant of how the law works, fool.
Worse, we're making idiots (or ignorant nobodies) judges now. You'd think if he didn't actually know anything about the Internet or tech. (as in, ever use it or see any point in learning about what it is beyond it interrupting his kid doing his homework), he should recuse himself. He thinks the EFF and ACLU are just babbling about tangentials? Really? Shouldn't something be done about that? I think so.
Don't care, I doubt I ever will, and never heard of her. What's she get out of it? Ten bucks, or is she still trying to pay off her marketing, promotion, and recording expenses debts to her label? Poor Adele, a sucker born every minute.
The record biz isn't going away, dumbass.
It's already dead for me. You'll never see a penny of mine, and every day there'll be more people thinking like me. There's plenty of artists out there doing great stuff who aren't signing their lives away to legacy gatekeepers who're trying to corrupt democracy in their death throes. Artists don't need to sell their souls to labels anymore thanks to the net. Of course, that's why the MafiAA wants to kill the Internet. You don't have a clue how to compete against them.
"The time for honoring yourself will soon be at an end, highness." -- Gladiator.
Just a typo alert, assuming TD cares to want to fix it:
Focusing on censorship rather than tracking simply drives those conversations and efforts underground where they can still be used to influence people, but where it's much harder for government and law enforcement ot keep track of what's being said.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Elsevier supports content mining, contra your salacious headline
As long as they have legally obtained this, it should not matter from a legal perspective ...
I'm not one to much care about legal perspectives. There are other, far more important, perspectives besides the legal one, such as morality and ethics. Legality should be the last resort tool you reach for. No, I don't expect corporations to care about morality and ethics (they're ill equipped to do so, and by law constrained from doing so), but we do, and we should. I understand Elsevier wants to enrich its shareholders. That doesn't at all mean it would be smart or correct for us to let them get away with what to me looks like outright theft stirred with slavery.
Come back to me when you see these noble scientists foregoing nicer homes, cars, etc. if an opportunity arises
Wow. Think of where Elsevier gets the content it publishes. Yes, those same "noble scientists" whose face you just spit on. They spent years, or decades, learning their chosen field and the tools they need to understand to practice in their field, competing against all those thousands of others who also want in, yet you can dismiss all of that with "they're greedy wanting nice homes and cars." What an asshole!
I look forward to the day Elsevier enters chapter eleven bankruptcy.
ISPs have the ability to remove the offending content from the net, and as such, the DMCA should clearly apply to them.
You're lazy twits, always blaming others for not fixing your problem. It's like you're blaming whoever built the roadways for letting bank robbers get to your vault! Go after the infringer who's putting it on the net, not the ISPs that are just doing their job.
You're a whining crybaby. Quit your whining and fix your problem. We shouldn't have to care about your problem, and *our* elected representatives shouldn't be mangling whole countries' judicial systems just to satisfy your witch hunting perversions!
Boycott MafiAA! Starve the bastards into oblivion!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Elsevier supports content mining, contra your salacious headline
More like insisting that access to a publisher's copy be unfettered,
You mean insisting that access to research done by scientists and paid for by tuition and grants from taxpayers and philanthropists should be unfettered? I fail to see why anyone needs to suffer the likes of Elsevier sticking their rapaciously greedy, self-entitled noses in there. They've long overstayed their welcome.