For me I don't really mind the ads themselves, I mind when the ads impact my viewing of a website. I have been on a number of websites where the content doesn't show up until the ads show up and if the ad distributor is slow, the site is slow. On other sites the ads crash the browser so I need to disable the ads in order to even view the site. And ads with sound that play by default? Please make them go away. I have no problem with sites earning money through ads and, where the ads are unobtrusive (don't crash my browser, don't force me to watch before content, etc.) I willingly whitelist them. But forcing me to do something? Well, I guess someone else deserves my eyeballs and not them.
The reason I'm wondering about the cost is that I wanted to start a GoFundMe page or something to purchase one. Because if there is "nothing unreasonable about the police using the same information that Andrews was sharing with the rest of the world to apprehend him," then there really shouldn't be an issue with me buying one and sitting outside a police station with the cell simulator on and capturing all of the data. I won't listen to the phone calls, just record the metadata. After all if you've got nothing to hide I should be able to do this, right?
OK, I may be a little out of touch with reality, but don't the "bad guys" have access to compilers and IDEs? Can't they just write their own encryption and use that? Sure, the U.S. may mandate backdoors, but if they do, won't the "bad guys" just use someone else's encryption or write their own?
Isn't video just a constant stream of "photographs"? Thirty photographs per second? So does this mean that any security camera catching public areas also needs to obtain permission from everyone it captures? Traffic cameras? Is this a new way to fight traffic tickets? After all, you did not provide consent. I pity news papers as they will no longer be able to print photographs. Imagine taking a picture of a crowd at a demonstration and try to get everyone's name.
OK, we have to talk about the NSA. So, if you take a picture of someone talking on a cell phone, and the NSA intercepted that cell phone call, but did it illegally, then your taking a picture now makes you an accessory to a crime and you have now committed a felony. Since we know the NSA does collect metadata this means that every picture of cell phone usage is now related to a felony and the NSA can now claim that all of those users are now potential terrorists (just one tiny step from felon to terrorist) so they can now legally spy on everyone who takes pictures.
So, this is really an NSA supporter bill. I am impressed by the convoluted nature of their schemes.
If I remember correctly, you cannot sue a member of Congress for slander based upon what they say in the House. Can you sue the participants in the senate hearing for slander? As you stated, Mike, Snowden doesn't fall under the category of "traitor" so is he able to sue the members of the senate hearing who did call him a traitor? I must admit that if I were a lawyer I'm not sure I would take up that challenge but it would be interesting to understand the legal aspects of such a lawsuit.
Welcome to the Pokemon generation. The analysts grew up with the mentality that they needed to catch all of the pokemon in order to "win". Now they want to catch all of the data in order to "win". Anxiously looking forward to seeing what happens when the Grand Theft Auto generation is in charge.
Speaking of leaks I hear that Depends has a new ad campaign with General Keith B. Alexander, the Director of the National Security Agency. It's his picture with the slogan: "If only we had used Depends you wouldn't be seeing us now."
Where I work everything goes through a proxy server. Almost 20,000 of us using the same IP address. When I go from WiFi hotspot to WiFi hotspot I change my IP address. If I leave a WiFi address and go to 3G my IP address changes.
I can understand a more localized ruling, such that if you change your IP address to avoid a C&D order, but generic IP address changing is so common place that the judge himself is probably guilty of it every day and he doesn't know it.
Since Ms. Harrop has no problems with having information stored but not looked at then she should have no problem with me getting copies of her bank statements, tax returns, University records and sex tapes. I won't look, I'll just keep them safe. Trust me.
So, how did the U.S. go from "Leader of the Free World" to the "Lance Armstrong of the Free World". I have seen pariahs with better press than the U.S. at the moment. By the way, does a candidate for U.S. President (or any other political office) need to be inside the country on election day or can they be in, say, Russia?
I am terribly sorry, Mr. Masnick, but by informing us, the public, of the misdeeds of the current administration you have just now "aided the enemy". Please be advised that the Secret Service, the NSA and the MPAA, will be arriving at your place of work (or wherever your cell phone may be currently located) within moments to perform a discrete yet thorough examination of all body parts and orifices. Do not attempt to use your phone as you will just receive busy signals and, as per usual, your WiFi access will be compromised. Thank you for being a resident of Penal Colony 26.
Isn't one of the big selling points about gun control the fact that many people want to be "armed" in case they need to protect themselves from the government? With Homeland Security they ""... focus a little more on that, domestic terrorism and certain groups that are anti-government". Shouldn't this mean that Homeland Security should be monitoring members of the NRA?
Tim said that with regard to an angry customer base "For companies like EA, the customer base is large enough that it can usually be shrugged off". But can it? An angry customer based can be ignored if it is quiet, but what about when it is vocal?
The SOPA protests last year became very vocal and very visible. They made an impact on society because they were so vocal in their disagreement. Is the problem with EA not the fact that they ignore their customer base, but the fact that their customer base expects this of EA and, as a result, does not do anything about it? What if a "Don't Buy EA" movement were started that was vocal, visible and large? I think that at that point EA would have to deal with their customer base. With the recent unexpected departure of their CEO changes are on the horizon and it may be the most opportune time to speak out.
To be honest, from the piece that I read it really looks like they are talking about iTunes and not necessarily podcasting in general. For example, Apparatus for disseminating a series of episodes represented by media files via the Internet as said episodes become available seems more like iTunes than anything else. So, when is he suing Apple?