that's easy! we've already solved that problem!
It's a bit slower than some other distribution platforms I could name, but it works! (in theory anyway....)
I vaguely remember having an on online discussion with someone who does freelance programming work. They used the length of the contract they created as a measure of how much they distrusted the other party. Once the contract grew past a certain length, they felt there was no point in pursuing the business opportunity.
noob mistake right there. he should have jumped straight to the triple dog dare.
Technically, the CIO is in IT, yes? I fully suggest they be first on the chopping block.
In the words of Edward Snowden: Twitter doesn't put warheads on foreheads. In the words of Michael Hayden: We kill people based on metadata.
It's monumentally stupid, disingenuous, or both, to compare or contrast corporate surveillance and government surveillance without acknowledging this very important point.
Once you acknowledge it, you have to contend with the fact that the government has the power (even if it doesn't have the right) to bridge the Snowden-Hayden Gap, coopting corporate surveillance for its own ends.
spying data is currently not admissible in court, that's the whole reason for parallel construction. and it is almost impossible for the defense to prove.
Agreed. Encrypt all the things. So what's your public key?
Almost no one has any, because that's a pain in the ass. Usability is important too.
if you relax the definitions a bit, you end up with this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B7MIJP90biM
The only reason no one really knows the backdoor sauce for the NSA NIST EC curves is that the standard was never widely used. (My theory is that there really isn't a backdoor, but they created the algorithm and points to look like there could be (or they destroyed the secrets after creation) so they could refine their techniques at slipping shit past the standards body...)
If it had actually come into widespread use, more people would be looking at it. It's not an easy problem (like FEAL was), so there would have to be more incentive into finding the backdoor. I imagine some of the experts would have pooled their money and offered a prize to add even more incentive.
Actually, I think it is literally impossible, not just NP hard. As in "DRM" impossible. As in "P = !P" impossible. In fact, I think this reduces down to DRM - how do you share a piece of information (e.g.: the magic golden key, or knowledge of a backdoor) with a party in such a way that it will never be used for a purpose that was not intended?
Hey now, the only thing "inopportune" about logjam and heartbleed is that the NSA is embarrassed about not finding them before we did.
Unless of course they did find them, in which case it's the revelation that's inopportune.
I don't know if I'd consider Trent to be on our side here, given the problems we have with CAs and whatnot.
I'm not familiar with Walter, Sybil, or Wendey; it's been a long while since I looked at the literature.
Don't worry sir. Whether or not the building has plumbing, we'll find the leaky pipe that destroyed the tapes.
how much does anyone want to bet that the moment the DOJ has no choice but to hand over the tapes, it will have been discovered that they were "stored improperly" and "damaged beyond usefulness"? how many leaky basements does the executive branch have?
... as long as you didn't ... you were probably safe ignoring ...
Seems to me this is exactly how we get into selective enforcement problems....
wait. did they just make it illegal to report illegal activity to the authorities?
i... i swear i ... is it... did....
wut??!?
Quoted chapter and verse from the dictionary; the epitome of "being schooled".
Maybe I'm too optimistic, but relying on Snowden's leaks in the official ruling may mean that Snowden will eventually be able to come home to something other than a straight up lynching, right?
SysEx seems to be part of MIDI:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIDI#System_Exclusive_messages
Maybe some entrerprising midi enthusiast will enlighten us?
You would think so, and you would be completely reasonable in doing so; but they've already redefined "imminent" to mean "not imminent". I don't know why anyone trusts them anymore, since it's clear that when they say something they usually mean something else, if not the exact opposite.
the condition that an operational leader present an "imminent" threat of violent attack against the United States does not require the United States to have clear evidence that a specific attack on U.S. persons will take place in the immediate future.
If the government uses the same definition chicanery for "emergency" that it does for "imminent threat", then there's plenty to worry about.
Re: President To Prison
that would be hilarious if he won by popular vote.
unfortunately he cannot hold that office this cycle.